• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AWB lawsuit filed on behalf of US HRW producers

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    AWB lawsuit filed on behalf of US HRW producers

    USW Statement on AWB Lawsuit

    "Statement of Leonard Schock, Chairman, U.S. Wheat Associates, regarding the class action lawsuit filed against AWB today:

    “A class action lawsuit against the Australian corporation AWB Limited and its U.S. subsidiary AWB (USA) Limited was filed Monday, April 16, on behalf of U.S. hard red winter wheat producers. The suit claims that AWB conspired to maintain and exploit its monopoly on wheat sold in Iraq under the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program. The suit alleges this action resulted in decreased prices at which producers were able to sell their wheat in the United States.

    “Last November, a judicial panel commissioned by the Australian government to investigate AWB’s actions in Iraq found sufficient evidence of wrongdoing to warrant criminal investigations of AWB Limited, and 11 of its former executives. In December, the U.S. Department of Agriculture suspended and proposed debarment of AWB Limited, and its affiliates from participating in U.S. government programs and contracts ‘because sufficient evidence exists to suspect that they engaged in bribery, kickbacks and similar behavior resulting in payments to the Saddam Hussein regime.’

    “The U.S. wheat industry has long been opposed to export state trading enterprises like AWB, and will continue to work to end their distorting influence on world wheat trade. The class action suit just filed focuses on the actions of corporate AWB, not any individual Australian wheat producers who, by trusting AWB, are themselves victims of its heavy-handed tactics. In fact, we welcome competition with our Australian counterparts in an open, fair and transparent market place.

    “While U.S. Wheat Associates has been monitoring this situation for more than a year, no organization representing U.S. wheat producers is a party to this class action suit, nor did U.S. Wheat Associates initiate this action. We will continue to follow this issue and inform our members as well as protect and promote the best interests of U.S. wheat producers.”

    Wheat producers who want to learn more about or participate in the class action suit should contact Ben Brown with Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C., 1100 New York Avenue, N.W., West Tower, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 408-4600, bbrown@cmht.com. A copy of the complaint is posted at www.cmht.com.

    # # #"

    Isn't it about time Canadian growers filed their own?

    #2
    why dont we file a suit against our own govt. for embargoing Iraq .
    esp. when they were our second biggest wheat customer at the time.

    that was a nice stunt haveing wheat farmers pay for foriegn policy.

    Comment


      #3
      T4..can Canadians intervene??

      Comment


        #4
        Sawfly & Cropduster,

        Here is the record according to Australian news report "Dropping the bundle" March 4th 2006:

        In late January 2000, Canberra was moving in a leisurely way to deal with allegations coming from deep within the United Nations that the national wheat trader AWB was sanctions busting.

        Disbelief greeted the charge when it reached Bob Bowker, head of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's Middle East branch, in the middle of the month. He reassured Australian diplomats in New York: "We think it unlikely that AWB would be involved knowingly in any form of payment in breach of the sanctions regime."

        Why was he so certain? Because the month before, AWB had assured him it was "fully aware of, and respected, Australian Government obligations and UN Security Council sensitivities and would act accordingly".



        We know now - and AWB executives knew then - that this was a lie.

        At this time, AWB was paying its first corrupt "trucking fees" to Iraq. The system that would eventually yield
        Saddam Hussein's regime a fortune in bribes and kickbacks was in its very early days.



        What follows is the story of Australia's failure to nip the whole system in the bud.

        What Canberra had learnt by cable from its UN mission was that Iraq was pressuring a


        "third country"

        - easily identified as Canada -

        to make payments "outside the oil-for-food program". Iraq was claiming these payments were already being made by AWB.

        It was absolutely true.

        Bowker's response was highly curious. This senior Foreign Affairs official sent his reassuring cable to Australia's diplomats at the UN before putting the allegation to anyone at AWB. Sometime in the following week, Bowker rang the wheat trader's chief of
        "government relations", Andrew McConville, who assured him it was all "bullshit" and emphatically denied the allegations.

        It's not clear Bowker even bothered to pass AWB's denials to Australia's UN mission. It seems over in New York the denials had already been made. But what is known is that neither Felicity Johnston, chief customs expert at the UN's Office of the Iraq Program,

        nor the Canadians were satisfied with Australia's response.

        Canada was threatening to make
        its complaint official and public.

        After letting the matter lie for a month, Johnston had another go - this time bypassing Australia's diplomats at the UN and raising the matter with the trade commissioner, Alistair Nicholas. His was an entirely different response. Within about 10 days he was

        They were furious at this intrusion into their affairs. The executives played down the issue. This perturbed Nicholas even more. He reported back to Canberra: "Trade Commissioner is concerned that AWB do not understand the seriousness nor the urgency of the matter. It may be necessary to advise the minister of the situation." He
        meant the Trade Minister, Mark Vaile.

        What's clear from written accounts of that meeting is that they discussed trucking fees.


        Canada's original complaint was about "transportation costs" and the claim that AWB was already paying them. By this time, Canada had been officially informed by the UN not to pay "transport costs of wheat within Iraq". At the heart of this crisis for Australia and AWB were these bogus trucking fees."

        Clearly the CWB, the Canadian Government, and diplomats representing Canada knew about the AWB corruption.

        THe CWB did nothing.

        The CWB Minister Ralph Goodale did nothing.

        Canada's diplomats at the UN did nothing.


        We should be ashamed... as Canadians, that WE were responsible by the CWB/and the minister responsible... to have prevented this breach & corruption in the oil for food sanctions...

        That our inaction in Canada was one primary key to the overall breakdown in the sanctions... that pushed the US into the invasion of Iraq.

        Should we not find out who was responsible for this cowardice?

        Was the CWB/AWB"single desk" system/principal worth more to the CWB/AWB than international harmony and a peaceful resolution to the Iraqi problems?

        Obviously their "single desk" actions in the 1998-2002 time period speak volumes about what they were bound and determined to protect... and it was NOT the hungry people of Iraq!

        Comment


          #5
          Sawfly,

          Here is what the offical record reads:

          “From : Ms. Felicity Johnston[UN Auditor OFF contracts]…
          Subject: Irregularity in Iraqi Contracting

          … I confirmed to Mr. Berne Saunders at the Canadian permanent mission that money should not be paid to a Government of Iraq bank account in Jordan… I suggested that the supplier could perhaps appease the Grain Board of Iraq by offering to accept a lower value per metric ton for delivery of the goods to Umm Qasr and this lower value could equate to the $700,000 transportation cost quoted by the Grain Board of Iraq, The supplier followed this course of action and has not been awarded the contract.”

          The supplier (The CWB) followed this course of action (lowered the value by $700,000) and has not been awarded the contract.” ?

          So the CWB offered to do this at the expense of western Canadian "designated area" growers... instead of in the AWB case "at cost plus".

          HOW reasuring!

          Did it really matter if it came out of the Oil for Food fund... (cost plus as in the AWB case) and was kicked back... or offered from the CWB (Canadian growers pockets)... and kicked back...

          When is a kick-back not a kick-back...?

          Comment


            #6
            Sawfly and Cropduster,

            I think the biggest point here needs to be the "$700K" that the "supplier" without question was willing to give away.

            Algeria, how many other sales does the CWB just buckle under on... as the sales people have no personal responsibility or loss... and a secret market that prevents accountability.

            This can easily cost 100's of millions... as it sucks down the whole world market not just the "designated area" values.

            Comment


              #7
              Now,now, Tom,remember........it never was about marketing grain!!!The donkey living in the quonset thinks we should ALL live in the same squalor.He`s proud to live in a quonset because it`s better than what the socialists (as a whole) live in, in other countries!That`s the level we`ve all got to go to!!

              Comment


                #8
                Cropduster & Sawfly,

                What Canberra had learnt by cable from its UN mission was that Iraq was pressuring a


                "third country"

                - easily identified as Canada -

                to make payments "outside the oil-for-food program". Iraq was claiming these payments were already being made by AWB.

                It was absolutely true....

                But what is known is that neither Felicity Johnston, chief customs expert at the UN's Office of the Iraq Program,

                nor the Canadians were satisfied with Australia's response.

                Canada was threatening to make
                its complaint official and public..."


                My question is why didn't the CWB and CDN Government (Goodale was responsible), who knew what was going on,... why didn't they blow the whistle on the UN and the AWB?

                Sawfly... Charlie... Cropduster...

                Should Canadian "designated area" growers and citizens expect CWB management to partake in these indecent exposures of our Canadian character... and allow this to remain burried in the anials of "who did what to get whom to shut up?

                Isn't the "Liberal way" to bury these immoral acts so we can repeat this foolishness again?

                Are we saying as Canadians... we will turn a blind eye... and be irresponsible & take our share in future indiscretions without question?

                How can I teach my children...?

                Why do we refuse to be responsible for our own actions as Canadians... NAY... Why we won't even expose our own part as Canadians & be responsible for our proper share in this slaughter of humanity in Iraq?

                All for WHEAT...

                Not even Wheat...

                But for the vain ego & pride of the "single desk" & fellow responsible for wheat...

                And my dear better half says:

                ... What exactly did the AUSIES have on the Goodale & those responsible for the CWB...

                TO make us CDNs shut up?

                Comment

                • Reply to this Thread
                • Return to Topic List
                Working...
                X

                This website uses tracking tools, including cookies. We use these technologies for a variety of reasons, including to recognize new and past website users, to customize your experience, perform analytics and deliver personalized advertising on our sites, apps and newsletters and across the Internet based on your interests.
                You agree to our and by clicking I agree.