BP's Tony Hayward Savaged by US Congressmen Over Oil Spill
THE TELEGRAPH: BP’s chief executive Tony Hayward has been subjected to a blistering attack by US Congressmen over the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, who accused the company of “astonishing complacency”.

BP Chief Executive Tony Hayward was singled out for failing to ignore warnings signs before the fatal rig explosion. Photograph: The Telegraph
The boss of the oil giant was appearing before an influential committee a day after pledging a £13.5bn compensation fund to make amends for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Britain’s largest firm was condemned for increasing the risk of a “catastrophic blowout” by cutting “corner after corner”. It was accused of having a “cavalier attitude towards risk”.

Mr Hayward was singled out for failing to ignore warnings signs before the fatal rig explosion, which left 11 people dead and hundreds of thousands of barrels of oils spewing into the Gulf. BP has failed to contain the leak despite numerous attempts.

Henry Waxman, a California Democrat known as one of the toughest investigators in Congress, told Mr Hayward: “There is not a single email or document that shows that you paid even the slightest attention to the dangers at this well.

“There is a complete contradiction between BP’s words and deeds. You were brought in to make safety the top priority of BP, but under your leadership, BP has taken the most extreme risks.”

In a pointedly nationalist remark, Bart Stupak, from Michigan, said that while Mr Hayward could take “a golden parachute back to England, we in America are left to recover for years from the disaster”. >>> Alex Spillius, in Washington | Thursday, June 17, 2010

It really is difficult to see how Tony Hayward can remain in his position as BP’s chief executive. The buck stops with him. If the man had any honour, he’d resign; and without the golden parachute that these people have come to expect in recent years. The company, BP, has fouled up under his watch. The consequences should be faced. – © Mark

Facing Congressional Wrath, BP Chief Apologizes for Oil Disaster
BP CEO Tony Hayward arrives on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, June 17, 2010, to testify before the House Oversight and Investigations subcommittee hearing on "the role of BP in the Deepwater Horizon Explosion and oil spill. Photo:
FOX NEWS: In a congressional hearing Thursday that some have described as a public execution, BP chief executive Tony Hayward told Congress that he is "deeply sorry" for the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.

Hayward's testimony came after members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's oversight and investigations subcommittee took turns in a long-awaited public flogging intended to capture the outrage of the nation.

Hayward sat grim-faced before the panel, which is investigating the explosion that killed 11 workers and unleashed a flood of oil that has yet to be stemmed.

Lawmakers accused Hayward, who has come to represent charges of corporate arrogance and greed, of being oblivious to the risks of the company's deepwater operations.

Some of the sharpest criticism came from Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich.

"We are not small people. But we wish to get our lives back," he told Hayward. "I'm sure you'll get your life back, and with a golden parachute to England."

It was a reference to Hayward's much-criticized earlier remark that some day he hoped to get "my life back" and to comments on the White House driveway on Wednesday by BP Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg that "we care about the small people" of the Gulf Coast.

Hayward sipped a beverage and jotted notes as one lawmaker after another scorched him. Read on and comment >>> | Thursday, June 17, 2010

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

BP Agrees to $20 Billion Escrow Fund; Cancels Dividends
President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, right, meet with BP executives at the White House. BP has agreed to put $20 billion into an escrow account for reimbursing oil spill damages. Photograph: Los Angeles Times
LOS ANGELES TIMES: Reporting from Washington -- The Obama administration has reached a preliminary agreement with BP executives that would see the oil company pay $20 billion over several years into an independently controlled escrow account to be established to compensate Gulf of Mexico residents affected by the disastrous oil spill, and BP's board of directors has eliminated the company's stock dividend, at least temporarily.

The agreement on the escrow was negotiated in a meeting at the White House on Wednesday morning, the first face-to-face gathering between President Obama and senior BP leadership. A White House official said that, under the terms of the deal, the fund would be administered by attorney Kenneth Feinberg, currently serving as the special master for executive pay under the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Feinberg ran a fund that compensated victims of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Immediately after the meeting, BP Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg said that the oil company's board of directors has decided not to pay any more dividends this year. >>> Mike Memoli and Peter Nicholas | Wednesday, June 16, 2010

BP to Set Aside $20 Billion for Oil Spill Claims


BP Promises to Repair Damages to Gulf Region

Barack Obama Vows to Make BP Pay for Oil Spill 'Recklessness'
THE TELEGRAPH: President Barack Obama has vowed to "make BP pay" for not only the multi-billion dollar clean-up of the Gulf of Mexico but also the restoration of the region's economy, undertaking to force the British oil giant to set aside the money he believes it owes as "a result of [its] recklessness."



The US President, in his fiercest rebuke against the company in the 58 days since the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion 40 miles off the coast of Louisiana causing the catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf, promised to get tough with BP and to ensure that it meets all costs he believes it should pay.

In a direct attack on the company's dividend policy, Mr Obama said that BP must place the money needed to cover the as-yet unquantifiable costs in an independent "escrow" account to be run by a third party.

The staunch words – which came in Mr Obama's first national address from the historic Oval Office in the 18 months since he took office – came ahead of his crucial meeting with Carl-Henric Svanberg, BP's chairman, and Tony Hayward, its chief executive, at the White House later today.

"We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused", he promised the millions of Americans who were expected to watch the televised prime-time address.

"I will meet with the chairman of BP and inform him that he is to set aside whatever resources are required to compensate the workers and business owners who have been harmed as a result of his company's recklessness," he continued.

"This fund will not be controlled by BP. In order to ensure that all legitimate claims are paid out in a fair and timely manner, the account must and will be administered by an independent, third party." >>> James Quinn, US Business Editor | Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Obama Pledges Clean Energy Policy to Cut America’s Dependency on Oil
President Obama said that the Deepwater Horizon disaster would change how people think about the environment, in the same way that 9/11 changed US foreign policy. Photo: The Times
THE TIMES: President Obama likened the impact of the oil spill disaster on the nation’s psyche to the September 11 terrorist attacks as he made his first multi-state tour yesterday of the Gulf of Mexico.

Facing questions about his leadership amid rising public anger 56 days after the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig exploded, he sought to reassert his authority by visiting Mississippi, Alabama and Florida, the states left out of three previous trips to the region.

Keen to dispel accusations that he has allowed BP to slacken in its efforts to stem the leak, Mr Obama noted that the company is now expecting to increase its containment capacity to 50,000 barrels a day two weeks sooner than planned. “We went back to them and said they needed to move faster and more aggressively and they have now come back with a plan,” he said.

The White House said it expected BP to place up to $20 billion in an escrow account to pay for the spill.

“One of the biggest leadership challenges for me going forward is going to be to make sure that we draw the right lessons from this disaster,” Mr Obama said in an interview with The Politico news website before he set off.

Vowing to move forward “in a bold way” with a clean energy policy that would help America to reduce its oil dependency, he added: “In the same way that our view of our vulnerabilities and our foreign policy was shaped profoundly by 9/11, I think this disaster is going to shape how we think about the environment and energy for many years to come.”

Mr Obama will address the nation from the Oval Office tonight, when he will announce new measures to help to restore the Gulf’s ecosystem. Tomorrow he meets BP executives for what the White House was keen to portray as showdown talks. Read on and comment >>> Jacqui Goddard, Orange Beach, Alabama | Monday, June 14, 2010

Gulf of Mexico BP Oil Spill: Nick Clegg Warns Barack Obama Over 'Megaphone Diplomacy'
THE TELEGRAPH: Nick Clegg today warned that the BP disaster threatened to descend into “megaphone diplomacy” following Barack Obama’s fierce criticism of the British company.

Nick Clegg made the comments when asked for his response to President Obama's call for the sacking of BP chief executive Tony Hayward. Photo: The Telegraph
In a thinly veiled attack on the US President – who earlier this week said he was looking for “some ass to kick over the disaster” – the Deputy Prime Minister argued that a “tit for tat” attitude was not helpful.

But Mr Clegg stopped short of voicing support for the British company, which has seen billions of pounds wiped off its share value since the leak in the Gulf of Mexico.

“I’m not going to start intervening in a debate which clearly risks descending into megaphone diplomacy,” Mr Clegg told an audience at the Nueva Economic Forum in Madrid on Friday morning.

“I think everyone is united on both sides of Atlantic obviously, quite rightly, and understandably within US administration and I’m sure within BP itself, to deal with this problem. It is an ecological catastrophe – It does need to be dealt with."

Nick Clegg made the comments when asked for his response to President Obama's call for the sacking of BP chief executive Tony Hayward. >>> Fiona Govan in Madrid | Friday, June 11, 2010

Cameron Needs to Be Firmer with Obama
THE TELEGRAPH: Telegraph View: The long-term relationship between Britain and America should not be jeopardised by a presidential response that has been more petulant than statesmanlike.

At some point this weekend, David Cameron is due to talk to Barack Obama on the phone, ahead of his visit to Washington next month. Until a few weeks ago, such a conversation would have involved a businesslike exchange of pleasantries and reflected a strong desire on both sides to place their personal relationship on a sound footing. No doubt that remains their intention; but the controversy over the way the President has castigated BP for its handling of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico has added a potentially serious edge to these exchanges.

Mr Obama's aggressively jingoistic rhetoric might have been designed to shore up his own domestic position against criticism that he has failed to act decisively enough, but it is now sabotaging the fortunes of what was until recently Britain's biggest company. Its share price fell to a 13-year low after the American government threatened legal action to prevent the payment of dividends before compensation payments had been met, even though BP is sitting on enough cash to do both. Since the firm accounts for £1 in every £6 paid in dividends in the United Kingdom, this will have a deleterious impact on pension funds, which have £20 billion wrapped up in the company. Read on and comment >>> | Thursday, June 10, 2010

BP Oil Spill: The British Backlash Has Begun
THE TELEGRAPH: Could the US backlash against BP extend to other British companies, asks Tom Leonard

Protest outside of the Washington DC headquarters of BP. Photograph: The Telegraph
When the US Interior Secretary Ken Salazar promised to keep “the boot on the neck of British Petroleum” over its giant Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the Republican Rand Paul rounded on the White House for being “really un-American” in attacking business.

If so, almost everyone is guilty of un-American activities, as the US has declared open season on the British oil giant. Just 50 yards up the street from The Daily Telegraph’s Manhattan office, the local BP petrol station had its sign daubed in paint the colour of drilling mud last week when 200 protesters turned up. “BP – a bunch of ----ing murderers!” said the message on a protester’s T-shirt. The chant was better: “BP, your heart is black, you can have your oil back.”

There have been similar protests at BP outlets across America and a call for a boycott which appears to have been roundly ignored. The demonstrations may be primarily anti-corporate and anti-oil but occasionally nationality of the corporation slips out. In New Orleans, a demonstrator stood on a Union flag. “We are all at the mercy of BP, a British-owned company,” wailed a Louisiana seaplane company boss in a letter to her senator after she was barred from taking US journalists to a possibly oily beach.

Notwithstanding the irony of a situation in which Americans are accusing a European corporation of putting “profits before people”, it is difficult to recall a more vicious backlash against a company here. The question of whether BP would have received so much vitriol if the initials had stood for, say, Boston Petroleum, has concerned those who worry about the implications for US-UK relations.

Although there is no sign of such a backlash at present, British officials in the US are concerned that if BP continues to fail to plug the leak or if it faces criminal charges, then other British businesses could suffer. >>> Tom Leonard | Saturday, June 05, 2010

Barack Obama's Credibility Hits Rock Bottom After Oil Spill and Sestak Scandal
THE TELEGRAPH: The combination of Obama's passivity over the Gulf oil spill catastrophe and his cynical political manoeuvrings could spell disaster for him, argues Toby Harnden

The first thing Barack Obama probably should have done was to order the livestreaming Oil Spill Cam to be turned off. As the President insisted to Americans that he was "singularly focused" on staunching the flow, there was that mesmerising image on their television screens of plumes of hydrocarbons gushing relentlessly into the Gulf of Mexico.

When any political leader feels they have to declare that they are "fully engaged" in an issue, it is clear that they are in trouble. Talking about it undermines the very point you are trying to make - not to mention that pesky Oil Spill Cam showing that, 38 days into the Deepwater Horizon disaster, not a whole lot had been achieved.

Even judging Obama by his words, he has fallen woefully short over what has now eclipsed the 1989 Exxon Valdez wreck as biggest oil spill catastrophe in American history. He may have described it as an "unprecedented disaster" in last Thursday's press conference but a week into the crisis he was blithely stating that "this incident is of national significance" and rest assured he was receiving "frequent briefings" about it.

George W Bush's unpopularity and perceived incompetence was encapsulated by the way he dealt with the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Candidate Obama branded it "unconscionable incompetence".

Central to Obama's appeal was his promise to be truly different. His failure to achieve that is now at the core of the deep disappointment Americans feel about him. At the press conference - the first full-scale affair he had deigned to give for 309 days - he appeared uncomfortable and petulant.

His approach to the issue was that of the law student suddenly fascinated by a science project. He displayed none of the visceral indignation Americans feel about pretty much everything these days - two-thirds now say they are "angry" about the way things are going - resorting instead to Spock-like technocratic language and legalese. "I'm not contradicting my prior point," he stated at one juncture. During those 63 minutes of soporific verbosity, about 800 barrels of oil poured into the Gulf.

Obama engaged in the obligatory populist bashing of Big Oil and, of course, demonstrated the Obama administration's version of Tourette's Syndrome, blaming the previous administration for the situation when, by my reckoning, it's a full 16 months since Bush left office. Read on and comment >>> Toby Harnden in Washington | Saturday, May 29, 2010

HT: Pastorius

Related articles here

President Obama Attacks BP Over ‘Worst Oil Disaster’
TIMES ONLINE: President Obama launched a ferocious attack on BP and the oil industry yesterday as what is now officially the worst spill in US history threatened to derail his presidency.

Seizing the initiative on the first day of potentially good news from the Gulf of Mexico, Mr Obama cancelled or suspended dozens of offshore drilling projects and condemned a “scandalously close relationship” between oil companies and government regulators.

He said: “As far as I’m concerned, BP is responsible for this horrific disaster, and we will hold them fully accountable on behalf of the United States as well as the people and communities victimised by this tragedy. We will demand that they pay every dime they owe for the damage they’ve done and the painful losses that they’ve caused.”

While Coast Guard officials in the Gulf said that BP’s so-called top kill strategy to fill the gushing well with mud seemed to be working, the President warned that there was no guarantee of success yet.

In his first White House press conference in ten months, he said that he would leave it to others to judge whether this was “his Katrina” — a reference to the hurricane that destroyed President Bush’s reputation for competence — but said he was “confident that people will look back and say this Administration was on top of what was an unprecedented crisis”. >>> Giles Whittell, Washington | Friday, May 28, 2010

Gulf of Mexico Oil Slick: Sarah Palin Fuels Anti-British Sentiment
THE TELEGRAPH: Sarah Palin has fuelled growing anti-British sentiment over the Gulf of Mexico oil rig disaster by saying "foreign" oil companies like BP were not be trusted.

The former Alaska governor and potential 2012 presidential candidate attacked the British oil giant over the recent Deepwater Horizon spill and a previous one in her state in 2006.

Her comments came despite the fact her husband Todd Palin worked for BP for 18 years, as a production supervisor, and only left the company last year to spend more time with his family.

Mrs Palin urged those in the Gulf of Mexico to "learn from Alaska's lesson with foreign oil companies." She added: "Don't naively trust – verify." As an oil slick the size of Luxembourg loomed off the US coast her intervention added to growing anger at BP among environmentalists and those who face losing their livelihoods. >>> Nick Allen in Louisiana | Thursday, May 06, 2010

Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Barack Obama Flies in Amid Mounting Criticism
THE GUARDIAN: Fishing fleet on standby for attempt to block slick as administration preempts 'slow to react' charge

Barack Obama stepped into the crisis over the oil spillage in the Gulf of Mexico yesterday, amid growing criticism that the US administration and BP were failing to get a grip on the potential catastrophe.

The president flew to New Orleans and travelled on by road to Venice, a small fishing town at the mouth of the Mississippi which has become the command post for the rapidly escalating rescue preparations.

As rain poured down upon him, Obama gave his assessment of what he called the "massive and potentially unprecedented environmental disaster" caused by three leaks still uncapped on a BP oilrig south of the Louisiana coast.

He warned that it could take days to stop the leaks, and said he recognised that "people are understandably frustrated and frightened, particularly as people in this region have already been through more disasters than anybody should have to bear."

And he issued a stern message to the British oil giant: "BP is responsible for this leak. BP will be paying the bill." >>> Ed Pilkington in Louisiana | Sunday, May 02, 2010

THE GLOBE AND MAIL: Oil spill threatens to sink Obama's energy plan: Political damage will be hard to contain, not least because the slick could shatter the President's shaky compromise on offshore drilling >>> Konrad Yakabuski, Washington | Sunday, May 02, 2010

WATCH AP VIDEO: BP's reaction to clean-up criticism: BP reacts as federal officials and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal say they're worried that the company isn't doing enough to get ready for a fast cleanup. | Saturday, May 01, 2010

Mission Destruction: Obama Opens Up East Coast for Oil Drilling
The President is due to announce his plans later today in scheduled remarks on "energy security". Photograph: Times Online
TIMES ONLINE: President Obama will today announce plans to open huge swaths of the US coastline to oil and natural gas drilling, much of it for the first time.

The affected areas include 167 million acres (259,000 square miles) of ocean along the vast Atlantic coastline as well as eastern parts of the Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska.

The proposals, which Mr Obama is due to announce later today at Andrews Air Force Base near Washington in scheduled remarks on "energy security", are designed to reduce America's dependence on imported oil.

But The New York Times said it was far from clear whether they would achieve their more immediate political aim: winning crucial Republican support for energy and climate change legislation due to go before the Senate in the next few weeks.

"While Mr Obama has staked out middle ground on other environmental matters — supporting nuclear power, for example — the sheer breadth of the offshore drilling decision will take some of his supporters aback," the newspaper reported.

"And it is no sure thing that it will win support for a climate bill from undecided senators close to the oil industry, like Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, or Mary L Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana."

The proposals would end a longstanding moratorium on East Coast exploration for natural resources, a move that would please oil companies but is likely to outrage environmental groups and residents of coastal areas. >>> Times Online | Wednesday, March 31, 2010

THE NEW YORK TIMES: Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time >>> John M. Broder | Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Dominic Lawson: Seventy Years On, We Are Still Appeasing Dictators
THE INDEPENDENT: In dealing with Libya the Foreign Office has been guilty of institutional cringe

In this, the week of the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of the Second World War, British newspapers have published entire supplements, setting out once again how the policy of appeasing dictators showed a complete failure to understand the gangster psychology of totalitarian regimes.

Yet the unravelling tale of our current government's negotiations with the regime of Col Gaddafi is a more enthrallingly contemporary illustration of the unchanging institutional cringe known as the British Foreign & Commonwealth Office. We have learned – chiefly through the medium of government memos leaked to the Sunday Times – how the Foreign Office saw the release from Scottish custody of the convicted Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, as a way of earning us good favour in the court of Megrahi's patron and distant relative, Muammar Gaddafi.

In some of these memos you can hear the sound of Foreign Office ministers past and present patting themselves on the back for the results of their negotiations. There is much discussion of the alleged trade benefits, notably a deal between BP and Libya. But two days ago the Libyan Europe Minister, Abdulati al-Obeidi, admitted to that outstanding foreign correspondent Hala Jaber that even if the British Government had set its face against the release of Megrahi, it was "highly unlikely" that the deal with BP would have been cancelled: "Libya also looks out for its interests and to cease the BP deal is not in our interests." Indeed so: last week we learned of BP's astonishing discovery of a 3 billion-barrel oilfield 35,000ft below the Gulf of Mexico seabed, far and away the deepest well ever drilled. If you were the Libyan regime you would very much want the company with such technological leadership helping you to find oil on your territory.

There is a more particular sense in which the Foreign Office has played the hand of the appeaser in its negotiations. The Libyans had made dark noises about the likely reaction of their own population should Megrahi die in Scottish custody – something along the lines of "in such an eventuality we cannot guarantee the safety of British citizens in Libya". This unsubtle threat should have been greeted with the observation that it was the responsibility of the Libyan Government to ensure the safety of innocent British citizens on its territory. Instead we seem to have behaved like the weak tradesman confronted by an unscrupulous protection racketeer.

It is, of course, very embarrassing when craven behaviour comes to light via a leaked memo to the Sunday Times. Hence Gordon Brown's overnight conversion to the idea of asking the Foreign Office to assist with the claims for compensation of the victims of IRA bombs constructed from Semtex provided by Libya – having earlier told the victims' lawyers that the Government could have nothing to do with their campaign.

Yet this attempt to regain the high moral ground is even more contemptible than the decision to leave those victims of Libyan Semtex out of the original deal. When Britain and America did their separate deals over the reopening of normal relations with Gaddafi's regime, the Americans insisted that their own victims of Libyan-backed IRA atrocities be financially compensated; the British made no such demands, essentially declaring that bygones are bygones. >>> Dominic Lawson | Tuesday, September 08, 2009

BP Makes "Giant" Oil Find in Gulf of Mexico
REUTERS: LONDON - Oil major BP Plc said it has made an oil discovery in the Gulf of Mexico, which analysts believe could contain over 1 billion barrels of recoverable reserves, reaffirming the Gulf's strategic importance to the industry.

BP said in a statement on Wednesday that it had made the "giant" find at its Tiber Prospect in the Keathley Canyon block 102, by drilling one of the deepest wells ever sunk by the industry.

Further appraisal will be required to ascertain the size of volumes of oil present, but a spokesman said the find should be bigger than its Kaskida discovery which has over 3 billion barrels of oil in place.

Estimates of recoverable reserves range from around 20 percent of oil in place. >>> Tom Bergin | Wednesday, September 02, 2009

Saudis Get Jittery over Security of Oil Installations
FINANCIAL TIMES: Saudi Arabia has begun setting up a 35,000-strong security force to protect its oil infrastructure from potential attacks.

The move underlines the kingdom’s growing concern about its oil installations after threats from al-Qaeda to attack facilities in the Gulf, as well as rising tensions between Iran and the US.

The force already numbers about 5,000 personnel, a Saudi adviser said on Sunday. They are being trained in the use of new surveillance equipment, countermeasures and crisis management under a programme managed by US defence group Lockheed Martin, according to the Middle East Economic Survey in Nicosia.

The recruits are learning about laser security and satellite imaging from Lockheed on behalf of the Sandia National Laboratories’ Defense Systems and Assessments Unit – a US government run unit in New Mexico, said MEES.

Lockheed said it did not have information on the initiative.

The kingdom, which is the world’s biggest oil exporter and has 25 per cent of the world’s proven oil reserves, is investing an estimated $4bn-$5bn in the new equipment and the force.

The force is expected to reach 35,000 within two or three years.

Saudi Arabia has a 75,000-strong army, an air force of 18,000, a navy of 15,500 and an air defence force of 16,000. Its oil installations are protected from within by 5,000 agents employed by Aramco, the state oil company. It has more than 80 oil and gas fields and an estimated 11,000 miles of pipeline. Saudis set up force to guard oil plants (more) By Andrew England in Cairo

Mark Alexander