$400 millions et quelques babioles pour une retraite vertueuse

Bloc-Notes

   Forum

Il n'y a pas de commentaires associés a cet article. Vous pouvez réagir.

   Imprimer

 798

Les activistes environnementalistes l’ont surnommé “the darth Vader of global warming”. Lee Raymond nous quitte pour une retraite que nous lui souhaitons heureuse. PDG de Exxon depuis 1993, Raymond emporte avec lui une somme de $400 millions (officiellement : “pay and retirement deal”), plus $1 million par an comme consultant, l’usage à discrétion d’un jet de Exxon, un garde du corps, une automobile et son chauffeur, tout cela jusqu’à ce que mort s’ensuive. Sous sa direction, Exxon a atteint le plus haut niveau de bénéfice jamais atteint par une société privée, et par nombre d’États d’ailleurs : $36,1 milliards en 2005.

Raymond a vigoureusement organisé le rétablissement de la vérité concernant les fariboles sur les émissions de carbone (« Since becoming chief executive in 1993, Mr Raymond had become infamous for his dismissive response to environmental lobbyists at previous annual meetings. He has funnelled $19m of Exxon's money to groups that question the science of global warming. [...] His first action as a senior executive was to cut solar and other alternative energy programmes because they did not seem likely to make money for decades. »)

Autre performance de Raymond, selon The Independent qui se frotte les yeux : « The total amount of carbon released into the atmosphere by the production and use of Exxon's oil and gas output is calculated at 500 million tons a year, or six billion tons during Mr Raymond's tenure. »

Ces chiffres coupant le souffle ou bien déclenchant un fou-rire nerveux c’est selon, l’affaire fait tout de même grand bruit. Lorsqu’un système en arrive à ces extrémités si étranges, il mérite effectivement une sorte de psychanalyse ; en attendant, il est contesté. C’est la première fois qu’une mise à la retraite vertueusement capitaliste est accompagnée de tant de manifestations de mécontentement

« Protesters descended on the annual shareholder meeting of the world's largest oil company's in Dallas, Texas, amid fury over the lavish lifestyle that it plans to fund for Lee Raymond, who retired after 12 years as chairman and chief executive.

» Exxon has been condemned by green groups for fuelling the world's addiction to oil by opposing the Kyoto treaty on reducing emissions and refusing to invest a penny in alternative energy sources. [...] Up to 100 protesters gathered outside the Morton H Meyerson Symphony Centre in downtown Dallas to bang drums and chant slogans, including “Pumping global warming lies” and “No planet, no dividends”.

» Shawnee Hoover, the director of the Exxpose Exxon coalition of environmental groups, said the size of Mr Raymond's retirement package had crystallised anger against the company, the squeeze on oil prices and the company's increasingly isolated stance on alternative energy. [...] Exxpose Exxon is encouraging consumers to boycott Exxon Mobil's service stations, which include the Esso brand. The coalition includes Friends of the Earth, the Union of Concerned Scientists and Greenpeace, which has disrupted Exxon board meetings and speeches by Mr Raymond over several years.

» Ben Stewart, of Greenpeace UK, said: “Exxon bosses are the Darth Vaders of global warming. They have run a 50-year-long campaign of dirty tricks designed to block action on the greatest threat to humanity. In years to come, the campaign by this company will be regarded as nothing less than a crime. There are striking parallels with the propaganda campaigns run by tobacco companies in the Sixties, but the damage done by this company could be much greater.”

(...)

» Investors lambasted Exxon's board for Mr Raymond's retirement package, and several said they would withhold their support for the re-election of directors on the remuneration committee. Others argued refusing to invest in renewable energy would condemn the company to extinction. Resolutions proposed by green groups attracted more support than in previous years but were still defeated. »


Mis en ligne le 1er juin 2006 à 15H17