Making profit from misery

A recent early day motion by John McDonnell and other MPs demanded an independent investigation into the treatment of hunger striking women imprisoned in Yarl's Wood detention centre, following "reports of violence, mistreatment and racist abuse from guards, being kettled for over five hours in a hallway, denied access to toilets and water and locked out in the freezing cold."

The alleged abuse was committed by a private company, called Serco which run the detention centre. If these allegations were made against a government-run prison, we would be hearing statements from the minister, a public figure whose politics, attitudes, past successes and mistakes would all be part of the public debate. But because a private company are the protagonists, the newspapers never get past the word "Serco." So who are the shadowy organisation with the futuristic name?

Serco's turnover went up by a quarter this year - to just under £4 billion - thanks to increasing privatisation. Serco specialises in contracting out government services.

A 2007 profile of Serco's chief executive Chris Hyman in Management Today described a pretty unusual human being. The "resolutely fit, abstemious, religious" Hyman has been shaped by some striking events. He grew up an Asian Christian in apartheid South Africa, but made his way to study accountancy at university despite official prejudice. He was supported by his strong Christian faith.

Hyman was in the World Trade Centre when terrorists ploughed planes into the buildings, killing thousands, which Hyman said strengthened his personal morality.

According to Management Today: "Surviving September 11 reinforced his belief in 'people first, profits second'." His religious beliefs are obviously still strong. He fasts every Tuesday and pays 10 per cent of his income to his Pentecostal church - although that still leaves him with half a million pounds worth of salary to play with.

None of this money seems to have tempted him down the path of sin, and he has an evangelical belief that his firm does well. Hyman doesn't drink, doesn't swear, says he believes in a "public service ethos," declaring: "We want to improve schools, reduce offender recidivism, get the trains running on time." He did admit in Management Today that profits were important, but only in tandem with service.

Hyman said Serco only took contracts if it believed that "we can make a difference and make money."

Two leading Labour Party members working for Serco help Hyman. Influential Labour member of the Lords Baroness Margaret Ford is a Serco director. Douglas Trainer, formerly the Labour students head of the National Union of Students and after that special adviser to Labour's Scottish leader Jack McConnell is one of Serco's spin-doctors.

Trainer is in charge of Serco's media presence in "health care, home affairs and welfare to work" so is presumably quite involved in the buffing the firm's image around Yarl's Wood.

So what is happening here? How do the devoutly Christian man who wants to provide a service and his two Labour Party aides get caught up in accusations of abusing the most vulnerable people, harassing, hitting and intimidating people who have fled rape and other attacks? And doing it for the money?

It may be the charges are mistaken. This is certainly Serco's position, which said its guards did not attack protesting inmates. Serco claimed that its "staff intervened to prevent four women from continuing to bully other residents into missing meals."

However, we have to weigh Serco's claims against the fact it has form in treating inmates badly. In 2004 14-year-old Adam Rickwood killed himself after suffering painful physical restraint at Serco's Hassockfield secure training centre in county Durham. Official reports condemned "system failures" in Rickwood's treatment.

Other reports have found Serco's prisons and immigration centres wanting.

So we are left with the question of how the apparently well-meaning directors and executives of Serco can make millions out of treating vulnerable detainees badly. Either they are simply hypocrites, making dirty money while proclaiming clean values. Or the economic system, where profit drives harder than human values, is to blame, distorting their supposed principles out of shape. Or possibly both.

Blair's words of advice

The advisory committee on Business Appointments recently revealed Tony Blair's commitment to democracy. I'm sorry, that should read "Tony Blair's commitment to money." According to the committee, Blair worked as a "governance adviser" to the Kuwaiti government in June 2008, for a reported £1 million.

The committee, which polices former ministers' jobs, cleared Blair's work for the Kuwaitis in December 2007, but delayed publication until now "at the request of the Kuwaiti government."

Kuwait does have universal suffrage for its own citizens, including women voters. But according to the Foreign Office: "Political parties are not permitted."

When Blair was advising the Kuwaiti government, the country was forced to hold a series of elections due to protests about the power of the royal family, claims of electoral fraud and protests over election law.

Proud to be British

In Conservativeland it seems that patriotism is mandatory for the masses, but an optional extra for the masters.

While the Tories want to bind us all to them through calls to country, flag and national tradition, they can barely bother with the stuff themselves.

This is most obvious in the case of Michael Ashcroft. He funds and runs the Tory Party, but can't be bothered to be "domiciled" here. Patriotism and taxes are for the little people.

But Ashcroft isn't the only Tory whose patriotism suddenly goes pale when presented with the bill.

Howard Shore has given the Tories about £58,000 in the last few years and has been a vocal supporter of the party. He has put his mouth where his money is.

Shore donated the cash through his firm Shore Capital, an investment bank.

But now he wants to become off-Shore capital - the firm has moved its headquarters to Guernsey.

It told its investors the Channel Islands offered "a more stable tax environment and a regulatory environment better suited to an internationally expanding business."

Which is to say, Howard Shore felt proud to be British, but on balance his fear of British taxes and rules were stronger.