Surely it is a private matter between the owners of ARM and the purchasers? It would therefore be ultra vires and potentially commercially damaging for politicians to intervene.
Surely it is a private matter between the owners of ARM and the purchasers? It would therefore be ultra vires and potentially commercially damaging for politicians to intervene.
Pat494
Legendary member
- Messages
- 14,614
- Likes
- 1,588
Not at all. The national interest should come way before the personal interests of the City hyenas.
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,772
- Likes
- 3,972
Agree. Thought we had this before.
Selling ones shares is a private matter and there is the stock exchange for that.
International companies buying domestic companies, winding down operations and exporting production to another - especially if it is of national interest is a national matter.
Similarly, if there are no reciprocal laws allowing UK companies buying up their domestic industry and having same rights.
Pat494
Legendary member
- Messages
- 14,614
- Likes
- 1,588
It is high time the workers have a veto on being flogged off to the highest bidder imo.
But the national interest, which is doubtless embodied in English Law, is not best served by government interference in the ownership, creation and disposal of private assets. Including plc's. As that is the law, I am correct in saying it is currently a private matter and your 2 MP's were right not to be drawn in.
Funny how City "hyenas" turn out to be a bit more welcome when we're competing for foreign investment.
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,772
- Likes
- 3,972
This is worthless paranoid conspiracy theory. Naiivity masquerading as scepticism. In fact, "theory" is to over-dignify it. You can't go through life concluding that all people who make decisions you don't agree with have been bribed. Or maybe you do......
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,772
- Likes
- 3,972
Not at all.
Here are some characters for you! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:British_spies_for_the_Soviet_Union
There is likely to be more businessmen favourable to selling out with well rewarded smiles than spies.
Do you think Fred the Shred had any qualms about the interest of the company he was running?
Naive you say!
https://www.ft.com/content/350c4ce6-1f0f-11e3-b80b-00144feab7de
Happens everywhere and Japan after Germany are the biggest spenders. I think you'll find it under corporate hospitality or client entertainment. Ehem not 'bribery' how very rude of you to suggest such a thing!
One of the first things one does in large sales/tender processes is identify who the key decision makers are find out their backgrounds, likes and dislikes. You can subscribe to databases and companies who'll provide what ever information you would like to obtain on who you are dealing with.
The bigger the business, contract and monies greater the determination to get that deal at all costs. IBM in the good old days would go out of their way to ensure you were fired and unlikely to be hired if you didn't buy from them. They'd literally black list your career. Where do you think the motto "Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM" came from?
I'm a simple man and with big contracts always would start off with a large healthy dosage of scepticism.
So your route to safeguarding national interests is to introduce these same corrupted MP's into the decision-making process?
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,772
- Likes
- 3,972
You are running away with your self old boy.
My reply to your objection about who ever owns the shares can do what they like with them, is a yes and that's why the stock exchange is there.
Selling UK companies to other companies from other countries should be treated differently, where the government reviews the case on their merit and subject to reciprocal bilateral agreements being in place.
Similar threads
