The handling of Greenpeace International’s (GPI) £58 million (US$98.8 million) budget has been in disarray for years, with its finance team beset by personnel problems and a lack of rigorous processes, leading to errors, substandard work and a souring of relationships between its Amsterdam headquarters and offices around the world, documents and e-mails leaked to the Guardian show.
The revelations, which come after it emerged that a staffer lost £3 million on the foreign exchange market betting mistakenly on a weak euro, reveal the group’s finance department has faced a series of problems, and that its board is troubled at the lack of controls and lapses that allowed one person to lose so much money.
Greenpeace, which prides itself on being largely funded by relatively small individual donations, apologized to supporters for the loss, claiming the “serious error of judgement” was a result of a single staff member “acting beyond the limits of their authority and without following proper procedures.”
Illustration: Constance Chou
However, the documents show that internally the group is worried about the organizational failings that allowed it to happen.
Minutes of a board meeting in the spring this year say: “The board takes this [the £3 million loss] very seriously and is deeply concerned that there should be such financial loss at a time of transition — when reserves are stretched and income is substantially lower than projected, and it is particularly troubled by how it happened, ie, the lack of strong, coherent processes and controls that prevent the possibility that contracts can be entered into without due authorization.”
Greenpeace is one of the biggest and most high-profile environmental campaigning groups, with more than 2,000 employees globally and thousands more volunteers. It is based in Amsterdam and has 28 offices around the world that campaign and fundraise independently, including Greenpeace UK, which earlier this year successfully sent six activists to climb to the top of central London’s Shard, Europe’s tallest building, to send a message opposing Shell’s plans for oil drilling in the Arctic.
The leaked material also reveals that:
‧ The group’s public face and top campaigner, executive director Kumi Naidoo, admits that internal communications are a “huge problem”;
‧ Naidoo, who was previously an apartheid campaigner, says staff have “good reason” to be upset at a range of problems;
‧ Staff are concerned at being shifted from Amsterdam on Dutch wages to national offices on lower local wages, as part of a major restructuring effort to decentralize the group;
‧ The group did not campaign to have one of its three ships, the Arctic Sunrise, released by Russia because the political circumstances would have made it a “wasted effort.”
It has also been revealed that one of the group’s most senior executives, Pascal Husting, Greenpeace International’s international program director, works in Amsterdam, but flies between the city’s offices and his home in Luxembourg several times a month.
Naidoo defended the arrangement, saying: “Pascal has a young family in Luxembourg. When he was offered the new role, he couldn’t move his family to Amsterdam straight away. He’d be the first to say he hates the commute, hates having to fly, but right now he hasn’t got much of an option until he can move. He wishes there was an express train between his home and his office, but it would currently be a 12 hour round trip by train.”
The loss of £3 million, paid out earlier this year, comes as the group is already dealing with lower-than-expected income, despite the Arctic 30 incident, when dozens of its activists and several journalists were imprisoned by Russia last year over a protest at oil drilling in the Arctic. Greenpeace International has said it will soon report a £5.4 million deficit — which includes the £3 million — for last year.
Mike Townsley, the group’s head of communications, told The Associated Press last week of the £3 million loss that “hindsight is 20/20, but we believe if he [the individual who made the transactions] had followed rules and procedures, this wouldn’t have happened.”
However, a strategy document dated November last year shows that problems appear to extend well beyond one individual, and that Greenpeace International’s senior executive team was aware of widespread problems in its finance department that date back years.
“International finance function at GPI has faced internal team and management problems for several years, and the situation did not improve during 2013 despite efforts and support. This has resulted in errors and sub-standards in the quality of financial systems, information and support provided to the teams, units in GPI and to NROs [national reporting offices] and have at occasions adversely affected relationship between GPI and NROs,” the document says.
As the losses story unfolded last week after it was broken by Der Spiegel and picked up by international media, Townsley e-mailed colleagues to say: “This is a bad story for us, and the best we can do is be honest and respectful to our audiences.”
The leaked material appears to show disquiet over an ongoing major restructuring, aimed at moving staff from Greenpeace International’s base in Amsterdam to national offices across the world to fulfil Naidoo’s goal of better tackling environmental problems in the global south.
“This [2014] will be a testing year for all of us,” the strategy document says.
Some of the group’s more than 2,000 staff globally are concerned at being moved from Dutch wages in Amsterdam to lower, local wages at regional operations.
An audio recording of a staff meeting earlier this year includes an employee telling Naidoo and other senior staff: “One of the biggest challenges is salaries... If I had to identify one problem, clearly it’s going to be salaries.”
The audio recording reveals Naidoo telling the same meeting: “On communications, let me just concede that we have a huge problem with the way we are doing communications, I want to own that and take responsibility for that. It’s not where it needs to be.”
“There’s good reason why people actually are upset about a range of things. But when I looked at what the problem was, it was actually a patent lack of communication, not just a lack of communication but not communicating at the right time, and things not clear,” he added.
He later sent an e-mail to staff saying: “Last Thursday’s staff [meeting] was tough; hardly surprising given what we are trying to achieve and the impact that it will have upon all of us.”
The documents and material also give an insight into internal debates over future actions in Russia following the Arctic 30, which eventually saw the release of all 30 activists and journalists and, earlier this month, the release of the group’s icebreaker, the Arctic Sunrise. The ship is currently still in Murmansk, Russia, while Greenpeace arranges for people to examine its condition.
“[Post-Arctic 30] one of the key debates we need to have is defining the ethical and appropriate levels of risk that we are willing to take,” minutes of a board meeting earlier this year say.
“It was queried why there has been no campaigning to bring attention to the AS [Arctic Sunrise] and gain public support for a successful return of the ship since the safe return of the activists. Pascal [Husting, international program director] said that under the current political circumstances launching a campaign to free the ship would probably be a wasted effort,” the minutes say.
Gerald Steinberg, president of NGO Monitor, which seeks to make non-governmental organizations more transparent and accountable, said he saw parallels with the financial problems Amnesty International has experienced in recent years.
“The extent of it [the financial problems] was not something I expected [at Greenpeace]. But it’s part of the fact that non-governmental organisations keep things very much within the organization, there’s no culture of accountability. They call on governments to be accountable, but they lack this in so many ways, so in that sense it’s not a surprise,” he said.
He said a shift in culture was required to address the problems.
“It requires a cultural change. NGOs tend to see themselves as insurgents. They have now become the establishment, but without the structures that are required for such large organizations — they can no longer think of themselves as insurgents, but as corporate organizations. That hurts their self image, but there is no other way to avoid the financial meltdowns that can take place [otherwise].”
Naidoo said that changes were already under way to address the handling of its budget.
“Greenpeace International’s annual accounts have always been given a clean bill of health by independent auditors, however, there have definitely been ongoing problem with some of the systems and high staff turnover in our international finance unit, no denying it. That’s why I hired a new head of finance who has over 20 years’ experience working with international NGOs. We have also strengthened his team. He’s already put checks in place to make sure the problems we have had are a thing of the past,” Naidoo said.
He also said the restructuring was not about reducing staff numbers, but redeploying people.
“This restructuring is not about reducing the number of people working fulltime on Greenpeace campaigns, it’s about making sure we have people where we need them, and increasingly that’s not in Amsterdam. The big environmental issues are increasingly in the southern hemisphere,” Naidoo said.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under