自考英语综合二上册课文 lesson 15
Lesson Fifteen Text
Bribery — An Inevitable Evil? David Cotton
Students taking business courses
are sometimes a little surprised to find that lectures on business ethics
have been included in their syllabuses of study.
They often do not realize that,later in their careers,
they may be tempted to bend their principles to get what they want;
perhaps also they are not fully aware that bribery in various forms
is on the increase in many countries,
and in some,this type of corruption has been a way of life for centuries.
In dealing with the topic of business ethics,
some lecturers ask students how they would act in the following situation:
suppose you were head of a major soft-drinks company
and you want to break into a certain overseas market
where the growth potential for your company is likely to be very great indeed.
During negotiations with government officials of this country,
the Minister of Trade makes it clear to you
that if you offer him a substantial bribe,
you will find it much easier to get an import licence for your goods,
and you are also likely to avoid "bureaucratic delays",as he puts it.
Now, the question is:do you pay up or stand by your principles?
It is easy to talk about having high moral standards
but in practice,what would one really do in such a situation?
Some time ago the British car manufacturer,
British Leyland,was accused of operating a "slush fund",
and of other questionable practices such as paying agents and purchasers
with padded commission,offering additional discounts
and making payments to numbered bank accounts in Switzerland.
The company rejected these allegations and they were later withdrawn.
Nevertheless,at this time,there were people in the motor industry in Britain
who were prepared to say in private:
"Look,we're in a wheeling-dealing business.
Every year we're selling more than a ￡1,000 million worth of cars abroad.
If we spend a few million greasing the palms of some of the buyers,who's hurt?
If we didn't do it,someone else would. "
It is difficult to resist the impression
that bribery and other questionable payments are on the increase.
Indeed,they seem to have become a fact of commercial life.
To take just one example,
the Chrysler Corporation,third largest of the U.S.motor manufacturers,
disclosed that it made questionable payments
of more than $2.5 million between 1971 and 1976.
By making this revelation,it joined more than 300 U.S.companies
that had admitted to the U.S.Securities and Exchange Commission
that they had made dubious payments of one kindor another
— bribes,facilitating payments,extra discounts,etc.
in recent years.
For discussion purposes,
we can divide these payments into three broad categories
The first category consists of substantial payments
made for political purposes or to secure major contracts.
For example, the U. S. conglomerate ITT
(International Telephoneand Telegraph Corporation)
offered a large sum of money in support of a U.S. presidential candidate
at a time when it was under investigation
for possible violations of the U. S.anti-trust law.
This same company, it was revealed ,
was ready to finance efforts to overthrow the Marxist government of Chilewhose
President was Salvadore Allende.
In this category,we may also include large payments made to ruling families
or their close advisers in order to secure arms sales
or major petrochemical and construction contracts.
In a court case involving an arms deal with Iran,
a witness claimed that $1 million
had been paid by a British company to a "go-between"
who helped clinch a deal for supply of tanks to that country.
Other countries have also been known to put pressure on foreign companies
to make donations to party funds.
The second category covers payments made
to obtain quicker official approval of some project,
to speed up the wheels of bureaucracy.
An interesting example of this kind of payment
is provided by the story of a sales manager
who had been trying for some months to sell road machinery
to the Minister of Works of a Caribbean country.
Finally,he hit upon the answer.
Discovering that the minister was a bibliophile,
he bought a rare edition of a book,
slipped $ 20,000 within its pages,
then presented it to the minister.
This man examined its contents, then said:
"I understand there is a two-volume edition of this work."
The sales manager,who was quick-witted,replied:
"My company cannot afford a two-volume edition, sir,
but we could offer you a copy with an appendix!"
A short time later,the deal was approved.
The third category involves payments made in countries where it is traditional
to pay people to facilitate the passage of a business deal.
Some Middle East countries would be included on this list,
as well as certain Far Eastern countries.
The payment may be made by a foreign company
to ensure that a tender is put on a selective contract list
or the company may pay
so that an import licence for essential equipment is approved.
Sometimes an expensive gift may be necessary
to soften up a government official.
A common type in this category is the "facilitating payment"
usually a smaller sum of money
— made to certain customs officials to clear cargoes.
One businessman has told the story of a delivery of 10,000 bottles
of sterile penicillin at the airport of a Far Eastern country.
It was apparently customary to pay customs officials about
$ 250 upon arrivalof each shipment to "get them out of the sun".
In this case,the company was not prepared to make such a payment,
so no money changed hands.
The Minister of Health of that nation
then ordered that each phial be opened for inspection,
thereby destroying the whole shipment.
Is it possible to formulate a code of rules for companies
which would outlaw bribery in all its forms?
The International Chambers of Commerce (ICC) favours a code of conduct
which would ban the giving and seeking of bribes.
This code would try to distinguish between commissions
paid for real services and padded fees.
A council has been proposed to administer the code.
Unfortunately, opinions differ among members of the ICC
concerning how to enforce the code.
The British members,led by Lord Shawcross,
would like the system to have enough legal teeth
to make companies behave themselves.
"It's no use having a dog without teeth," they argue.
However, the French delegates think
it is the business of governments to makeand impose law;
the job of a business community like the ICC
is to say what is right and wrong, but not to impose anything.
In a well-known British newspaper, a writer argued recently
that "industry is caught in a web of bribery"
and that everyone is "on the take".
This is probably an exaggeration.
However, today's businessman, selling in overseas markets,
will frequently meet situations where it is difficult
to square his business interests with his moral conscience.
