Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Raytheon in breach of agreement with council?
US arms manufacturer Raytheon in Derry has a small factory on the Buncrana Road employing 60 people. It was made famous recently by Eamon McCann and eight other protesters when they occupied and trashed the buildings. The following is a statement by Sinn F�in Councillor Gerry MacLochlainn has said that following a meeting between Derry City Council and Raytheon yesterday, after official disclosure that the company has been in breach of an agreement with the council:
From Gerry MacLochlainn
�Following the recent disclosure in the Belfast Telegraph gained under the Freedom of Information Act that Raytheon were producing the JETTS SYSTEM in their Derry plant I requested that Derry City Council investigate the veracity of this revelation.
�Derry City Council arranged a meeting with Raytheon which took place yesterday (09.10.2006) in which Raytheon confirmed that the Derry plant is involved in producing military applications e.g. the JETTS programme.
�This use of the Derry plant in the production of military applications is in breach of assurances given by Raytheon to Derry City Council. Predicated on those assurances of non military applications Derry City Council welcomed Raytheon.
�However, in light of the revelations that Raytheon has been involved in manufacturing military applications in Derry then Sinn F�in will be calling at the next meeting of Derry city Council for Council to reaffirm and implement its adopted position - that Raytheon confine itself to �civil� development work.
Hmmm… It doesn’t say much for the perceived authority of the council. Also there is a secondary issue of underlying unemployment rates in Derry. Foyle, for instance, has the second highest level of unemployment (8.6%) after West Belfast (11%) in Northern Ireland. The NI average is 4.1%.
Mick Fealty @ 10:30 AM
It was notable that the Sinner didn’t threaten to terminate the contract if the company didn’t comply with the non-military clause (which the company wilfully broke).
The party will not take on multinationals. They are enslaved to both the US and the empoverished social position that jobs, any shitty jobs, must be maintained particularly where they are located in areas designated socially deprived.
Sad. But at least we have Eamonn McCann, thank God.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 12:08 PMWas this just some committment given to the Council by the company but with absolutely no legal status or is there actually anything which the Council can do about it?
Surely unless they’re breaking a planning condition or are breaking a contract with DCC then their protests aren’t going to cut much ice.
Also, if this was just some informal agreement you’d have to wonder why the Council put so much stock in it in the first place.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 12:11 PMSo the council welcomed them with open arms, with only one proviso. They break it and now…...well nothing really. It just shows that in the current climate if your in business and american you can tell everyone, anywhere: ‘Screw your rules, we do what we want’.
Didn’t they get public money as well???
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 12:15 PMEamon McCann and several other protestors occupied and thrashed this companies offices. Is this the same incident that the IMC, in their latest report blamed dissident Republicans. Is Eamon now a dissident Republican ? Maybe Im moving away from the original post, sorry.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 12:32 PMThe Derry Anti War Coalition welcomes the announcement that Sinn Fein is to raise the Raytheon question at the next meeting of Derry City Council. This should open the way for other questions which need asked.
Raytheon confirmed to Sinn Fein on Monday that the Springtown plant has helped produce the JETTS system for the MoD. As the Belfast Telegraph and the DAWC have pointed out, this fact was publicly revealed by NIO Minister Angela Smith on February 27th last. But there is reason to believe it was known to some council representatives much earlier.
The Springtown plant is also involved in ASTOR, the bomb guidance system currently being used in Afghanistan to guide bombs to their targets. The Foyle Ethical Investment Campaign and the DAWC have been raising this for the past two years.
The DAWC wrote last week to the council asking to be allowed to speak to the next council meeting on a series of questions which arise from these facts and which can no longer be avoided by any party on the council.
We believe that the council should forthwith declare Raytheon unwelcome in Derry.
We point out that: Seven months after the council resolution of January 2004 to which Cllr. MacLochlainn refers, on August 23rd that year, local Raytheon boss Stephen Lewis met with Jim McConnell of Invest Northern Ireland to discuss the MoD contract for the software component of JETTS.
McConnell’s minute of the August 2004 meeting told: “Key issue for NISSC (the Derry plant) on this contract will the attitude of the council. Both the MOD and RSLD (Raytheon) will be looking for acceptance in principle that the council have no objections regarding this work. NISSC to write to the council and Alan McCormick will be planning to meet Tony McGurk [CEO, Derry City Council]to update him and see how best to move forward. Company will not issue a press release…
“If the council is reluctant to back the project then the future of NISSC is uncertain.”
The minute records that, “McCormick thanked Invest NI for its support during this period, including our input to the Derry Council situation. It appears that the current mayor (Sinn Fein)is very supportive.”
So, the JETTES issue is by no means new.
Among the questions which arise are: Did Raytheon seek, and did it obtain, “acceptance in principle that the council have no objections regarding this work”? Did the envisaged meeting between Alan McCormick of Raytheon and Tony McGurk of the council take place? When? Was anyone else present? Was the meeting minuted? What was the outcome and to whom was the outcome reported? Which elected representatives, if any, were informed that these exchanges were taking place? Were any council officials or councillors aware of or collude in Raytheon’s strategy of secrecy? (“Company will not issue a press release.”)
It is now beyond question that Raytheon’s Derry plant is dependent on war production for Western armies. It is also clear that the readiness of the council to approve Raytheon’s presence is critical to the continuation of war production in the city.
The council should now put its words of January 2004 into practice and declare that the company is not welcome here
We call on the council and on Invest Northern Ireland to publish all documents and minutes of meetings relating to Raytheon’s Derry operation, so as to facilitate an informed public debate on all the issues.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 12:59 PMHmmm. I’m not pro arms companies, but why exactly should Raytheon have to justify to anyone at DCC what it does at its own facility?
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 01:19 PMProvided an enterprise is not breaking the law it should be free to set up where it likes (within planning boundaries). It should then be up to the moral judgement of individuals to decide where they choose to work.
While individual counsils and development bodies can provide incentives to attract certain types of business they should not be able to dictate what type of work goes on within legitimate enterprises.
While it may have been right for the anti-war coalition to bring the activities of the company to peoples attention Derry City Council should not get involved.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 01:34 PMIts the old jumped-up Council mentality. Yes DCC are perfectly entitled to raise whatever concerns they like - but to think that the company has to listen to them is utter rubbish.
If DCC had obtained some kind of agreement as to whaat would or wouldnt go on at the factory then they should have looked into what legal basis this agreement had.
Its a cheap publicity stunt - maybe the next statent from DCC will be telling which town they would prefer the jobs to be re-located in.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 01:46 PMDerry City Council and the parties on the council have a duty to respond to issues brought to their attention by rate payers. Derry City Council cannot and are not telling Raytheon to leave Derry but they have a right and a duty to state how they feel about any company manufacturing arms in their city. Sinn Fein are right to use their position on the council to highlight this issue.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 01:50 PMheres hoping
No-one’s saying that DCC cant express an opinion - its the validity or otherwise of this alleged ‘agreement’ that DCC has with the company which most comment is about.However, if DCC tells Raytheon that they think they should halt their current production and Raytheon says no, then what do you propose DCC says to Raytheon?
As for SF well - no need to point out the obvious hypocrisy.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 02:01 PMDerry City Council should on moral grounds tell Raytheon that they are not welcome in Derry. It may not do anything meaningful in terms of production in Derry but it sends a broader message that Derry is opposed to the manufacturing of weapons of mass destruction… those that do exist.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 02:07 PMDCC has no right to assume the position of moral spokesperson for the people of the city.
They need to stay out of this. It’s potentially putting 60 peoples jobs at risk and harming future inward investment. There are plenty of options open to DCC in future to prevent undesirable companies setting up locally without being so obvious about it.
Fact is this company is here and is not breaking any laws.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 02:12 PMa little pointer on laws governing journalism, “Eamon McCann and eight other protesters when they ALLEGEDLY occupied and trashed the buildings
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 02:18 PMGram who should act as spokespeople for the people of the city and by the way in all of this debate Raytheon have two strings to thier bow, military targetting systems or civil aviation. All that SF are saying is stick to the latter as you said you would.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 02:18 PMSo what are you saying Carson’s cat and Gram?? Are you seriously telling me that ethics of an entire city should take a back seat for 60 jobs? If jobs are so difficult to come by, and ethical considerations so worthless, why don’t we legalise brothels and drug dealing??? Maybe privitise punishment beatings? Why we could have almost full employment in a matter of months. Thats bound to create a lot of jobs. If, on the other hand, you consider jobs only to be ‘valuble’ if they have some, however slight, ethical underpinning, we would not be selling out the moral soul of a town for 60 measly jobs, most of which are occupied by people from OUTSIDE of derry anyway, who are constantly telling us how their jobs are more important than being implicated in two colonial wars, one, at least, illegal. And as to doing what ‘they’ want at ‘their’ factory, well for one, they made an agreement specifically about this issue, whether legally binding or not, i would say is largely irrelevant. Is Raythons word worth nothing? If so, do we want this type of employer here? And two: Do you think they set up here for the good of Derry? Maybe you think they felt obiliged to create 60 jobs because they were so concerned about Derry’s plight, sitting in their head office in Seatle or Georgia or whereever, and felt they had to do SOMETHING about the towns plight? “Gee Randy we just GOTTA help these NI guys and their unemployment problem, i don’t care if we can make it cheaper in puerto rico, these guys deserve a chance” Or do you think, as i would imagine it, they were given government investment sweetners to set up here, on the conditions listed above and now that they have OUR money, to create OUR jobs, they feel free to thumb their noses at the agreement?
Lets get a new DCC slogan: ‘We’re Derry and we’re bending over for you’. You people are unbelievable!
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 02:38 PMJohn Bull as I’ve said before what this company are doing is not illegal. As far as I’m aware Drug dealing and brothels still are and while it’s been a while since I’ve visited Derry I believe DCC don’t yet have the right to setup laws within the city.
If it was your job on the line perhaps you wouldn’t regard it as “measley”. I know Derry folk have always been a bit parochial but your use of the word “outsiders” is worrying.
As you imply DCC should lobby government to ensure sweetners or incentives are not given in future to companies who do not meet the ethical policies of DCC.
However is there really an ethical debate going on here or is it really anti-americanism? Will DCCs future ethical policies also exclude motor manufacturers, chemical companies and fiancial organisations with dubious records from setting up in the city? I doubt it.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 02:57 PMCarlosblancos
#Hmmm. I’m not pro arms companies, but why exactly should Raytheon have to justify to anyone at DCC what it does at its own facilit
Dont know about you carlo but if a company is up to some deviousness near where i live, i think i`d like to know about it.However seeing as i live in nationalist West Belfast and we dont have to many Multi-national arms manufacturers up this neck of the woods, my sympathy does go out to the Derry public who strongly believe that Raytheon are harbingers of death
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 03:10 PMWell, the secretary general of the UN (not considered overly parocial, even in Derry) has stated that the war WAS illegal. If this is so there are a number of legal precedents that point to the fact that suppliers to illegal wars can be prosecuted, and so, while i admire your belief that it is not illegal, I don’t feel you’re right. But we know that real-politik dictates that the protaginists will never be challenged over this, although that has nothing to do with the percieved(or otherwise) legality of their actions. In fact the only people who think it is legal, and said so publically have been both the UK and US governments, I.E. the protaginists, hardly an objective voice i think most people would agree. But again, largely irrelevant. You seem to be unwilling or unable to make a distinction between ‘illegal’ and ‘unethical’. I have been assured that in some nations in Africa it is legally permissable to marry your 12 year old cousin. Even with this legal safeguard most people would still regard it as unethical, despite its enshirned legality. Legality does not equate with morallity. A fairly obvious point i would have assumed, but apparently not to you. The other point is that, are jobs to be safeguarded at any cost??? To take an extreme analogy, what if a company set up in your hometown and were planning to make torture equipment to be used in say, Iran or Syria?(better not mention the home country of raytheon, the country mentioned in the original post, lest i am blamed for anti-americanism) Supposing it was only to ‘state’ agencies in those countries. Would that be ‘ok’, because it is ‘legal’ too? “Sure, we make electric chairs, testicle clamps and stun guns to be used on the populice of country X, but hey, we can’t risk losing Wesley and Seans job now can we? Yeah sure Nation X is commiting genocide/torture etc, but with the meat plant in the town closing down we can’t afford to have a moral compass in our possession’.
Sorry, but some of us (when given a choice) think that principles are more important than pound coins.Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 03:34 PMDo arms companies sell arms for specific military actions or do they just sell arms to anyone who can legally buy them? I think it’s the latter.
This debate is really about gesture politics, does anyone think it will matter one jot to the international arms trade if Raytheon are forced out of Derry? It would make the trendy lefties feel better, that is all.
Would Eamonn McCann feel better if Raytheon sold missiles to Hizbullah? Are their missiles more ethical?
Maybe Raytheon should relocate to North Korea, god knows they need the jobs.Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 04:11 PM“This debate is really about gesture politics, does anyone think it will matter one jot to the international arms trade if Raytheon are forced out of Derry?”
Maybe not Paul - but does that make it alright then to tolerat it?
The international arms trade is a scandalous filthy business, with companies making billions by selling devices designed to kill or maim people. They should have ripped the place down and chased the bastards out of town. If this (http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=13) is how unemployment problems in western Europe are being solved, it really is no surprise that some people feel like doing us harm.Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 06:23 PMJohn Bull, please feel free to answer some of my points.
Fact is this company was making arms prior to 9/11 and the Iraq war. What they are doing is no different from what Shorts have been doing in Belfast for years.
Whether you like it you are currently using technology born out of the arms industry (the transistor for example). Maybe thats why Eamon (allegedly) was throwing the PCs out of the windows.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 06:57 PMSo its generally a good thing then Gram to produce arms, because of all the handy spin-offs, as well as those great jobs?
Not only that - but it must be fine because Shorts do it?“However is there really an ethical debate going on here or is it really anti-americanism?”
Well it depends on yoru definition of ethical. Is it ethical to make your money by manufacturing articles designed to kill? Is it fine to feed your kids with the money you earned making things to kill other people?
I fail to see how these argu,ents can be classed as anti-americanism - although I have a feeling that this accussation is hurled at anybody who dare suggest that “american” businesses can’t just do what they want where they want. If this was a chinese weapons manufacturer the argument would be exactly the same.Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 08:31 PMFact is this company was making arms prior to 9/11 and the Iraq war. What they are doing is no different from what Shorts have been doing in Belfast for years.
Whether you like it you are currently using technology born out of the arms industry (the transistor for example). Maybe thats why Eamon (allegedly) was throwing the PCs out of the windows.
My main objection to Raytheon, some years ago, was their involvment with landmine production.
Here’s what I googled today, in the context of Human Rights Watch appeal.Raytheon is best known for its air traffic control, fire control, communications, space and navigation systems. Raytheon has stated: “We understand well the importance of the cause you are forwarding….However, it is generally our practice not to broadly and formally renounce participation in businesses, despite the fact that this is not a business in which we participate and, when we did, it was as a minor supplier of transistors - a business we have since sold.” Thus, Raytheon acknowledged past involvement and declined when offered the opportunity to renounce future involvement.
Then I read this:-
Landmine arrows
The modern military is borrowing an idea from Robin Hood to deal with unexploded landmines. Patents filed by US defence contractor Raytheon concede that current landmine clearance is ineffective, especially if mines are in sand or under water.
But the company has developed a shell containing hundreds of steel “arrows” – 155 millimetres long and 15 mm in diameter – that can trigger landmines with a single shot.Each rod has a flared rear end, like the feathers of an arrow, and hundreds can be packed into a single cylindrical shell. This shell can be lobbed into a mined area and just before impact a charge behind the arrows will fire them downwards. The metal flights will keep the arrows on a straight course so that they pepper the area at high velocity and at regular spaces.
Tests show that a shell containing hundreds of arrows can wipe out every mine in an area several metres square, even when the mines are buried under sand or under nearly a metre of water. GPS can also be used to guide the shells into overlapping patches in order to safely clear a wide area.
I realise that this invention is primarily for clearing mine fields in a war situation as for example in the area between Israel and Lebanon, but if it can economically (and even if not) be used for land mine clearance elsewhere in a post war situation, I ‘d welcome it, except it may play hell with the plough afterwards. Better that than lost limbs and family livelihoods.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 08:41 PMJohn Bull
I actually think the Council has every right to voice whatever moral objections it has and I’d actually encourage them to do that. If they thereby persuade the company to relocate then I’m sure somewhere else will be happy to take the jobs and we can have more ‘Derry’ mopery about how terrible it is not to have a job there.
My issue was around this agreement we’re told that the Council has with the company. DCC has no right to make agreements with Raytheon telling them what they can or cannot produce and if they had half an ounce of wit they would know that. I would genuinely like to know what this ‘agreement’ we are told about in the headline of this thread actually is!
DCC can pass whatever resolutions it likes condemning the company in whatever terms it likes but its got no power to tell companies in its jurisidction what they can and cannot do (provided they are operating within the law - which Raytheon is).
The fact that it is SF complaining just makes it bloody farcical.
Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 09:57 PMPeople will always make arms/weapons and buy/sell weapons. North Korea managed it in-house. It is nothing more than gesture politics at their most inane or extreme naivity to think Wolfie McCann and Co will make any impact on this fact of life. It might save us money if everyone returned to bows and arrows, but don’t kid yourself that it would save lives. How many people were killed in Rwanda in the space of a few days with machetes? About 800,000 wasn’t it?
And I don’t think the militias in Dafur are using expensive missile systems.Posted by on Oct 10, 2006 @ 10:23 PM
