Guest fountainhall Posted January 8, 2012 Posted January 8, 2012 An article in yesterday’s Guardian in the UK sheds some light on Tony Blair’s sudden rise to the ranks of Britain’s wealthy individuals. The former champion of greater eguality in British society controls, it seems, “a complex network of firms and partnerships”, and makes use a spider’s web of UK laws allowing him to limit what these must disclose – notably where the money came from. Blair’s total income from one company rose last year by more than 40% to more than £12 million. Of this, about £10 million came as a result of “management services”. Exactly what sort of management services are provided, and how the company derives its income, are impossible to determine as the accounts do not go into detail. Blair is legitimately taking advantage of laws allowing him to limit what his companies and partnerships must disclose. "It is baffling; these accounts make remarkably little sense," said accountancy expert Richard Murphy of Tax Research UK, a firm that scrutinises company finances. "This limited disclosure is not within the spirit of the law." http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/jan/07/blair-inc-rise-earnings And what do we know of Mr. Blair’s activities? In the past year Blair has advised Nursultan Nazarbayev, Kazakhstan's president, who is reportedly keen to win the Nobel Peace Prize. It also emerged that in 2008 Blair wrote to the then Libyan leader, Colonel Gaddafi, discussing potential African infrastructure investments he should consider. In both cases, his spokesman denied Blair was personally profiting from the discussions. Blair has been criticised for the way his private and philanthropic activities have appeared to merge. In his role as the Quartet's representative to the Middle East he helped persuade Israel to open up radio frequencies so a telecoms company, Wataniya Mobile, could operate in the West Bank. He also championed the development of a gas field off the coast of Gaza, operated by British Gas. Both Wataniya Mobile and British Gas are major clients of JP Morgan, the US investment bank that pays Blair £2m a year for his role as a senior adviser. Blair said he had been unaware that both companies were clients of the bank and his spokesman stressed the deals were vital in bringing prosperity to the region. Windrush Ventures Ltd spent almost £3m on staff, rent and other services but had total administration costs of almost £11m. "Just what is this company doing?" Murphy asked. "You would expect total costs to be around double the costs of employing staff. But in this case total administrative costs are £10.9m. That's a very high ratio indeed." He added: "We have no idea where this money is coming from or how it's being spent. The structure seems designed to impose a veil of secrecy over its accounts." Nursultan Nazarbayev is of course the virtual dictator of oil-rich Kazakhstan. As for the Israel ventures, what is a diplomat doing arranging business ventures in that region in the first place? In the second, "Unaware" anad "Vital to the region" sound more and more like a put up Haliburton stunt to me. No doubt Blair picks up nice six-figure fees for his speaking engagements in the US. Former Prime Ministers can earn more or less what they like, as far as I am concerned. But, given their former influence around the world, on leaving office they should surely be held to the same degree of probity and accountability as when they were in office. Blair needs to come clean. Quote
Guest Posted January 8, 2012 Posted January 8, 2012 I would be more concerned if a complete turkey like Gordon Brown managed to amass a fortune through exploiting contacts. Quote
Bob Posted January 8, 2012 Posted January 8, 2012 Blair's probably made millions annually in speaking fees and, of course, various companies have paid handsomely for what they think is the prestige of having him on their boards or whatever. While his getting rich rather quickly is, I suppose, a bit puzzling, I can't understand at all the criticism of it (he's supposed to be dumb enough to turn down getting a couple of hundred thousand for a speech in New York or Singapore?). He, like anybody else, is entitled to make whatever business deals he wants and I personally don't see how his previously being a politician adds up to any loss of privacy about such matters that all the rest of us enjoy. Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted January 8, 2012 Posted January 8, 2012 I have no problem with Blair earning as much as he can. Like American Presidents, Prime Ministers don Quote
Rogie Posted January 25, 2012 Posted January 25, 2012 And then there is the way the financial disclosures of his companies are “not within the spirit of the law." If he is a private individual, then he can do what he likes, as far as I am concerned. However, he is a high-powered diplomat and therefore should not be skirting with the law; he should be firmly adhering to it. In my view, of course! Seems Blair's sleight of hand, financial wizardry or what you want to call it is getting a lot of publicity. Maybe that'll encourage him to be more transparent in future. The tone of the article cited below is kind of "phew, how does he do it, maybe we can all learn something from this guy". Rather than what could be construed as a sneaky admiration for his methods I think the author probably detests Blair, see for example the phrase "levy-restricting methods. . ." Pay as little tax as Tony Blair Tony Blair pays just £315,000 tax on an income of £12 million. Robert Powell explains how he does it and looks at ways you can reduce your tax bill by following the former PM’s levy-restricting methods... For most people, getting the sack is the trigger for a raft of financial worries. Not for Tony Blair. No, the former Prime Minister’s ejection from Downing Street was just the start of a lucrative, money-spinning career. But despite logging an income of over £12 million across the last financial year, Mr Blair only paid £315,000 in tax. http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/pay-as-little-tax-as-tony-blair.html Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted January 25, 2012 Posted January 25, 2012 Since he spends so much on travel for himself and his staff, no doubt he uses all those air miles for his family holidays He certainly makes Mitt Romney seem rather like a saint when it comes to disclosures. Quote
