quote:

---

The World Bank came under fire yesterday after it was revealed that Indian civil servants were repeatedly overruled by bank officials in their choice of consultants for a multi-million dollar contract to plan the privatisation of Delhi's water supply.

Documents obtained under Delhi's freedom of information act show the bank intervened to the benefit of PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), which had failed to make the grade when the Delhi government put out the tender in 1998.

---

quote:

---

I wonder how many former PWC employees are now in the World Bank.

---

Suez Water in Paris was accused of using mafia-style tactics to secure municipal water contracts. A judge there said that "mafia" was an accurate description.

City council in Moncton, NB, got taken by a private water company that gave false estimates for transferring water distribution to their hands. Big mess and more costly than anyone knew.

The city of Atlanta has put the brakes on privatizing its water because of outrageous costs and price gouging.

In Africa, the world's poorest people have balked at meters on their water wells placed by corporations expecting them to pay a quarter of their days wages for drinking water. Another World Bank fiasco of which bears no resemblance to human nature or social justice or the basic needs of African's. It's called gouging the poor for the sake of ideology and appalling greed. The poor are rising up in protest as the last straws are placed on their backs.

The people of Bolivia have asked, "Who can own the rain ?."

[ 29 July 2005: Message edited by: Fidel ]

[edited to add:]

My mistake: 6.

[ 29 July 2005: Message edited by: Stephen Gordon ]

The stain resists the blot.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:
Wow. 5 points that have nothing to do with each other, or with the original post.

[edited to add:]

My mistake: 6.

[ 29 July 2005: Message edited by: Stephen Gordon ]

---

Unless you missed mention of privatizing Delhi's water supply in paragraph one of the Guardian article, Stephen, I think that failure of World Bank policies around the world are entirely relevant to its policy failure in Delhi, India.

quote:

---

Wow. 5 points that have nothing to do with each other, or with the original post.

---

PS: It seems the WB believes in socialism, Stephen. Make that socialism for the rich.

Viva la revolucion!

[ 30 July 2005: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by abnormal:
Probably about the same as the number of ex Deloittes, E&Y, and KPMG employees. Which explains why it was PwC, not one of the others?

---

So why did the WB specifically weight the dice in favor of PwC? There's only two immediately viable explanations:

1. Conflict of interest, or
2. Blatant bribery.

quote:

---

So why did the WB specifically weight the dice in favor of PwC? There's only two immediately viable explanations:

1. Conflict of interest, or
2. Blatant bribery.

PwC wouldn't be above stooping to bribing WB officials if it meant getting a multimillion-(whatever-unit-of-currency-you-desire) contract, but they wouldn't have to if former employees, or even current employees, working for the WB, felt beholden to the company they work/ed for, and loaded the dice accordingly - say, in exchange for an all-expenses-paid trip with the company condo available in Bermuda.

---

1. and the ex-Deloittes, KPMG, and E&Y employees don't have the same conflict?

2. maybe, but you'd have to prove it. An observation, anyone with enough clout to significantly impact this sort of decision wouldn't regard a trip to Bermuda as much of a bribe. At best, it would be a reminder of their roots, but I seriously doubt the monetary value of a trip to Bermuda would significantly register on the radar screen. And it doesn't explain why a week in PwC's condo is worth more than a week in KPMG's, E&Y,s or Deloittes.

[ 30 July 2005: Message edited by: abnormal ]

The whole point is the following:

1. I say this is the tip of the iceberg.
2. Cheap bribes work astonishingly well if you have a man or woman "on the inside" who wants a few extra perks in exchange for swinging a multimillion-dollar contract the right way.

quote:

---

Bribes are more expensive when you have to lay cash on the barrelhead to a stranger who never worked for your company.

---

Probably true, although in fairness I do have to point out that one of the reasons people are likely to steer things towards their ex employer is simply because they probably regard that entity as being "the best". Who knows, they may actually be right.