What Gandhi said.

In light of the present day – and world wide - investigations into corruption, fraud and, shall I say, a disinclination to tell the truth, in government, business, sport and finance, what Gandhi said may be of relevance. Gandhi (Mohandas  Gandhi, 1869 to 1948) said that one of the seven deadly “sins” (as he described them) of the modern world was “Commerce without Morality”. 

What did he mean by this and is it true? 

We need first to ask ourselves two questions; what is morality? Is it important?

The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) defines Morals inter alia, as “… of or pertaining to the distinction between right and wrong, or good and evil in relation to the actions, volitions, or character of responsible beings; ethical; …” ; and Ethics, inter alia, as “… the moral principles by which any particular person is guided; the rules of conduct recognized in a particular profession or area of human life”.

Ethics and morality then are the flip sides of the same coin. One cannot exist without the other.  Someone who is moral must, by definition, be also ethical and be what we would call a ‘good’ person. Such a person we would consider trustworthy, someone we would like to deal with, to call upon for help, advice and guidance. Someone who’s word is their bond.

In the Analects of Confucius (551 BC to 479 BC) translated by Simon Leys, there is a quote about the importance, in ancient China, of the notion of the word ‘gentleman’.

“Originally it meant an aristocrat, a member of the social elite: one did not become a gentleman, one could only be born a gentleman. For Confucius, on the contrary, a ‘gentleman’ is a member of the moral elite. It is an ethical quality, achieved by the practice of virtue, and secured through education. Every man should strive for it, even though few may reach it.” 

It is my contention that Morality is common to all peoples in all places and at all times. As human beings, we naturally, seldom continuously think about things we do not like, or try to do something we would not normally like doing. We generally try to do things that make us happy. We, through our actions, try to express ourselves, what we choose to be, in the eyes of our fellow beings, and at a deeper level, in our own eyes. We naturally try to do ‘good’ and to be true to ourselves. To do or be anything else is always stressful and will certainly reduce our chances of leading a fulfilling life with a good work-life balance. 

In many respects what has been forgotten in today’s frenetic world is that there has been an impoverishment of the concept of MAN (homo sapiens) as a human being. For instance people who look for measurable success live only a one dimensional existence (e.g. a CEO always expected to maintain or increase earnings per share year on year). There is a need to distinguish between succeeding for the sake of winning, and a desire for success that will enrich our lives and lead to fulfilment and a feeling of well being. We need a balance between success, as a human being and success in activities (not always the same thing).

Expectations of measurable success and the activities required to meet them, possibly even exploitative actions, diminish the perpetrators.  Such people are reduced to a one-eyed perception of Life. This is what I believe Gandhi was thinking about when he made the statement that leads this article. The aim of life is the unfolding of man’s creative powers; the potential of Life’s process is a transformation of Society into one governed by compassion, justice and truth.

Those with long memories may recall a businessman (the late Albert Dunlap) nicknamed “Chainsaw”, who, quite a few years ago now, was engaged to reinvigorate a large appliance manufacturing company in the USA. They may also recall his business fate. 

The need for moral and ethical conduct was well known in earlier times. People received instruction about the Natural Laws, by way of fables and myths. These highlighted, in often graphic detail, the consequences of irresponsible actions and the operation of the unwritten “Law” of cause and effect. 

This may be more directly stated as in the old saying, “You reap what you sow”.

For those interested, the 'Seven Sins' according to Gandhi were:- 1: Knowledge without character. 2: Science without humanity. 3: Wealth without work. 4: Commerce without morality. 5: Politics without principles. 6: Pleasure without conscience. 7: Worship without self-sacrifice.

No matter what – banks are still bastards!

It is not just me complaining about the lack of ethics and morals evidenced by banks in Australia. Australian politicians are now supporting what I have been saying for a long time, and it is unfortunately all too true. Banks, ALL banks, direct their activities at preserving and protecting shareholders, their “market position”, their liquidity and their profitability, with SERVICE and the poor old CUSTOMER way down the list of priorities.

We have had, in the recent past, the terrible social effects of the blatant greed evidenced by Wall Street banks in 2007-2008; we have had the LIBOR scandal in London; we have seen many billions of dollars in penalties paid by banks world wide for aiding and abetting questionable  activities and money transfers - now it is the Australian banks falling foul of the regulators.

So far all four of Australia’s biggest banks, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA), the Australia and New Zealand Bank (ANZ), National Australia Bank (NAB) and Westpac (and some of the smaller ones) have allegedly been guilty of breaching laws and regulations set by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC). They have been variously accused of defrauding customers through questionable investment advice and dodgy insurance cover, rigging the Inter Bank Rate, lacking moral judgment and generally being unethical in their dealing with their customers money.

I will reiterate what I have said, many times before – without customers (people) there would be no money, no need for banks and therefore by default no need for shareholders.

Pursuing the logic of this it would appear to be a “no brainer” that customers – i.e. people, are the vital part of the banking system, not just in Australia but world wide. It should be a simple case of “look after the customer” first and foremost, legally, ethically and with moral undertaking. Do this and the money will look after itself. And what is of utmost importance, trust in the banking system would be restored and banks would no longer invite opprobrium and be considered “bastards”.

This will require a cultural shift  - their “fiduciary culture” - by all concerned, starting with the boards of directors, chief executive officers and managers. Until these people conduct banking with ethical and moral underpinnings nothing will change.

Unfortunately, for all concerned, until they do change and adopt customer best practice they will continue to be mistrusted.

Banks are still bastards!

Well! Well! Well! Here we go again. An Australian bank, again, accused of fraud, greed and extracting money, by any and all means possible, from unsuspecting customers. I am writing specifically about the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) – Australia’s biggest bank.

When will banks learn that their first duty (repeat first duty) is to provide the best service they can to their customers, not, (repeat not) to shareholders or other stakeholders.

Bank’s must remember at all times, and never forget, that money comes from people, their customers – individual, commercial and industrial. There is no other source of money. Money was developed by people for people to facilitate trade. Banks, as we recognise them today, did not appear until about six centuries ago, with the Venetians.

Without customers (people) there would be no money and, by default, no need for banks. It would seem very obvious to me that the primary concern of any bank should be its customers. This is called “service” – a term that has been all but forgotten.

For any bank and in particular Australia’s largest bank (the CBA), to so fail in its fiduciary duty to its customers as to stand guilty of fraud and general mismanagement of its financial investment division is almost beyond belief.

That the regulatory authorities in the guise of the Australian Investments and Securities Commission (ASIC) were so dilatory in their duty as to allow this to happen, is again, almost beyond belief.

For those who may not have followed the recent revelation about the CBA it is a fact that thousands of trusting customers have lost their life savings – hundreds of millions of dollars – through questionable advice offered by questionable bank staff  advising customers to invest in questionable financial schemes. And to top it all some records apparently have been altered, forged or lost so it is unclear as to exactly how many customers have been defrauded and  exactly how much money is involved.

That other banks are involved in similar schemes will become clearer in due course.

But the fault, in this instance, lies squarely with the bank (the CBA), its management and general culture of greed and seeking profit at all costs without any regard for the consequences. How apposite is the old saying in this case - “the biter bit”!

I reckon the old Australian term, “banks are bastards” is still very much alive and still very valid!

(Amended 24/07/2014)

Ethics, Big Banks, the Catholic Church and big Pharma – what ethics?

Oh boy! What a week this has been for the public exposure of unethical practice, fraud, total disregard for the welfare of human beings, pure unadulterated greed and moral bankruptcy.

Whistleblowers have done their good work again!! Greg Thorpe and Blair Hamrick – their names should be written in gold for exposing the unethical practices and fraud in the US division of the giant British based pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKiline (GSK). This big-Pharma is now $3 billion (repeat billion) poorer after being fined for healthcare fraud in the US.

It would appear, again, that “insider information” – in other words whistleblowers, alerted the authorities in the UK about the Barclays Bank fraud and corrupt practices (manipulating the benchmark London Interbank Offer Rate, known as LIBOR) which has resulted in the bank being charged with a $400 million fine.

Then  there is the Catholic Church and its outrageous conduct regarding the cover-up of priestly paedophilia (that is a real oxymoron if ever there was one!).

From a psychological point of view it is known that when many people gather together to share one common emotive experience (or organizational culture) the level of consciousness experienced will be well below what would be expected of individuals in a similar situation – just look at football crowds where “mob rule” seems to apply. Mixing with and being influenced by the wrong crowd or “bad company” is a well-known phenomenon. In other words take an individual out of that particular group situation and he or she will behave quite differently. Most parents will identify with this.

Many large organisations arrange group training, or bonding sessions for new staff to be indoctrinated into the “culture” of that particular organisation – boot camps are used for similar purposes.  In these sessions “conformity” is the rule – whatever you do must be the group way, must be the company way.  A person often yields to group pressure because they want to fit in with the group or they may conform because of fear of rejection by the group. This means adopting the culture – the “social” norms of the group (or organisation).

In group or organisational situations, by doing what everyone else is doing, an individual generally feels no responsibility and also no fear. There is anonymity and a safety in numbers.

The first casualty in these situations is ethics.

In the case of GSK (above) not only did the company commit fraud but they placed the lives of millions of people at risk by deliberately promoting the use of their drugs for unauthorised purposes – uses not approved by the Federal Drugs Administration (FDA) and they also committed fraud by over-charging. In this case greed (commissions) and profits took precedence over the lives and well-being of vulnerable people - the very people the drugs were designed to help. Another thing – aren’t these drugs called “ethical drugs” because they need a doctor’s prescription to be administered? In this case it is another oxymoron!

This appalling behaviour is not only immoral but is also unethical. By engaging in such behaviour GSK has not only damaged its “brand” but also, crucially, trust. Consumers of the GSK products (and those of other similar companies) will now have, justifiably, an element of doubt about the efficacy of the drugs they use.

Similarly greed (commissions), profits and maintaining shareholder dividends would all have featured in Barclays Bank’s extraordinary and outrageous conduct in colluding with other banks in manipulating the LIBOR. Barclays is guilty, with other banks, of collusion, of corruption, of veniality and grossly unethical conduct. Obviously “Group Think” took hold and like sheep those guilty of the manipulation complied with the attitudes of the group without an apparent care in the world.

No wonder I and others “bash” banks. They deserve everything that is thrown at them! Their “culture” of profits before service to their customers is a continual complaint of mine. Again, not only has Barclays activity damaged its “brand” but also weakened whatever trust people may have had in Barclays, in particular, and banks generally. The old Australian saying that ‘banks are bastards’ would seem to be holding up quite well!!

Then there is the Catholic Church – what a mess. It is rotten to its core and needs a clean out from the top down! Paedophilia is an abhorrent practice that damages the most vulnerable of all – children. Didn’t Jesus say “Suffer little children to come unto me”? Isn’t it a Christian Commandment that “Thou shalt not covert”? Isn’t it a Christian Commandment that “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself”? Isn’t it a Christian Commandment that “Thou shalt not bear false witness”?

The Catholic Church leadership has broken every rule in the Book (the Bible) and ignored secular law by allowing these awful people to remain in the Church and worst of all, allowing them to go unpunished. Paedophiles need to be tried and convicted by a court of law – not an in camera church organised “enquiry” set up to protect its “image”! By condoning paedophilia within the ranks of its priesthood the Catholic Church is breaking the Commandments of the very Man, the Son of God, whom it professes to follow. No wonder Church attendances are falling!

Large organisations without exception have Codes of Ethics so I am sure GSK and Barclays have theirs. The Catholic Church has the Bible which should be even better. But unless ethics comes from the heart it becomes a disposable item – “use it if you feel like it” sort of thing.

Ethics is very simple really. Always treat other people the way you would like to be treated AND if everyone did what you are doing or propose to do, would the World be a better place? If you cannot answer both in the affirmative then you are not being ethical.