The hypocrisy of the Guardian.


In 2009 The Guardian ran a
series of stories surrounding Corporate Tax Avoidance and its worse
adherents. One of the Guardian’s chief reporters on the situation
is Richard Brooks. Brooks, in 2009 wrote this:

The Guardian’s investigation aims to shine some light into this
dark corner and challenge an ultimately anti-democratic tax
avoidance industry. The practices exposed merit comparison with the
excesses of the financial sector (many of which also include a fair
measure of tax avoidance). Moves towards more responsible,
better-regulated business in the wake of the financial crisis
should cover tax avoidance too

They exposed
companies like Diageo PLC who, through complex methods and
exploited loopholes, avoid great swathes of tax whilst the wages of
the average worker remain stagnant. As noted in previous blogs,
whilst benefit cheating costs the UK £900mn a year according the
Government’s own figures, Corporate tax avoidance costs the UK
£25bn. It is quite obviously time to close every loop hole that the
treasury can find. The Guardian is correct. So it might come as a
bit of a surprise that whilst the Guardian is on an apparently
righteous mission to rid the World of tax avoidance, the Guardian
Media Group (the parent company of the Guardian) is one half of a
partnership which is incorporated in the Cayman Islands. The GMG is
tax avoiding. GMG and private equity firm Apax, set up Eden Bidco
in the Cayman Islands in order to purchase a company called Emap.
Apax at the time of the acquisition had a man named Adrian Beecroft
as its Chief Investment Officer. Beecroft is now on George
Osborne’s “Independent Challenge Group”, which states as its
mission:

The group will have a remit to think
innovatively about the options for reducing public expenditure and
balancing priorities to minimise the impact on public services.

Perhaps not setting up vehicle companies for
tax purposes by a multimillionaire, would be a good start in
achieving their aims. Perhaps not appointing other members like
John Nash, the Chairman of Private Health Care provider Care UK
would be a good start in achieving their aims. Coincidentally, John
Nash’s wife, Caroline Nash, gave £21,000 in a personal donation to
Health Secretary Andrew Lansley’s election campaign, and have
together given more than £200,000 in donations to the Tory Party.
Care UK has recently been awarded a £53mn prison healthcare
contract. Suddenly the word “independent” in “Independent Challenge
Group” is looking rather tedious. The Guardian tried to absolve
itself of all wrongdoing by stating that it was Apax who insisted
on the creation of Eden Bidco and its tax structure, in order for
the deal to buy out Emap to go through. It would appear that Apax
have been rather naughty for some time, and that the
multimillionaire Beecroft who is now advising the Government on
spending has a bit of explaining to do, because one search of the
Cayman Islands Company Register shows the following companies set
up in the Cayman Islands:

APAX CAYMAN SIX
LIMITED 110745 APAX CAYMAN TEN LIMITED 110850 APAX CAYMAN THREE
LIMITED 110724 APAX CAYMAN TWELVE LIMITED 110852 APAX CAYMAN TWO
LIMITED 110717 APAX CSG HOLDINGS LIMITED 34379 APAX EUROPE VI NXP
FOUNDER GP LTD 174622 APAX EUROPE VI NXP FOUNDER L.P. 18092 APAX
EUROPE VI NXP FOUNDER MLP CO LTD 174678 APAX FINANCIAL CORP 221135
-SO 22113 APAX GLOBIS PARTNERS & CO., LTD. 88778 APAX NXP
US VII, L.P. 18065 APAX PARTNERS & CO (GERMANY) II LTD.
72401 APAX PARTNERS & CO (GERMANY) LIMITED 36877 APAX
QUARTZ (CAYMAN) GP LTD. 195012 APAX QUARTZ (CAYMAN) L.P. 21487 APAX
US VII GP, L.P. 17341 APAX US VII GP, LTD. 163273 APAX US VII
INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS, L.P. 18392 APAX US VII, L.P.

For the Guardian to take a righteous stand
against Corporate tax avoidance, whilst firstly doing business with
a prolific Corporate tax avoiding company, and secondly actually
setting up a tax avoiding company themselves, is mightily
shameful.

Advertisements

One Response to The hypocrisy of the Guardian.

  1. Only by observing what kind of texts gets moderated away in certain media and gazettes, it is very visible, what kind of purposes and lobby s gets supported.
    Serving the expectation of some who still like to consider themselves as progressive when in reality they are supporting the establishment is not social convincing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: