Salaries

TNCs pay salaries to the locals; and if we are dealing with a manufacturing company, salaries can account for as much as 20 - 30% of total costs. If we are dealing with a service company, the salary costs can account for as much as 70% of total costs. Do the arithmetic and assume, for the sake of argument, a £10 million a year cost profile and we have an injection of salaries into the economy of between £2 million and £7 million.

If expatriates are employed, in situ, they carry with them higher employment costs that will often include housing and other allowances that will be paid and spent in country. I know that the salaries of the expats are more than likely to be paid offshore but they still have to spend some of it: the proportion spent in the host country will vary from case to case.

Technology transfer

One of the prime reasons that TNCs move into a country is because that country is under developed in terms of education and training, resource provision and so on. In the case of electricity generation in the Post Soviet Republics, massive investment has been undertaken by TNCs to replace obsolete and dangerous equipment. Whatever we think about TNCs, they will invest in capital equipment to ensure that their job can be done. In the case of electricity generation, that can mean major overhauls of entire power stations together with the complete rewiring of the supply infrastructure within towns and cities.

In addition to upgrading the infrastructure, of course, TNCs take with them efficiency and productivity levels that were unheard of before they arrived.

In answer to the question/accusation that host governments are often asked to provide some of the basic infrastructure in order for the TNC even to consider investing in that country, I might reply: why not? After all, why should an organisation that is purely in business to create wealth have to provide the infrastructure that the country should have provided in the normal course of events?

The counter arguments here will include such aspects as

A good discussion point here would be Zambia: I drove through Zambia in 1990 from its border with Malawi all the way to Lusaka and then from Lusaka to the Zimbabwe border. This journey was a nightmare: there were countless potholes the size of which I have not encountered anywhere else. Given the fact that Kenneth Kaunda was just completing his extensive term of office, I couldn't help thinking as I bounced around in my little Mazda 323 that he had been grossly negligent in that he had allowed his major arterial roadways to fall into such gross disrepair as to make traffic within Zambia, let alone into it and through it, a needlessly fraught and expensive experience.

Moreover, I estimated the cost of repair to equate to the amount of money that Kaunda had been accused of embezzling for himself and his family.

TNCs do invest in infrastructure. My example of AES in Tbilisi is a case in point: from their own resources they dug up all of the main streets in the capital city and laid miles and miles of new cabling. In every house and flat in the city there now sits a brand new electricity meter. AES has paid for all of this out of its own revenues.

As a matter of interest, the reward that AES received was the temporary closure of its bank accounts as the government sought to call in the taxes it owed. AES did owe taxes but in return the majority of ministries within the government owed money on their electricity accounts and were refusing to pay. AES entered into a standoff: offsetting tax owing against electricity account overdue. The government didn't like it and AES went through a tortuous period during which it did pay its taxes and during which ministries had their electricity supply terminated.

Here we have the case of massive infrastructural investment that was clearly beneficial to the government and the people of Georgia as well as AES in the longer term, yet a cynic would say that the whole of this charade had the aim of allowing AES to make the investment and then finding that they weren't welcome in reality and were then thrown out. This is pretty much what happened in Kazakhstan, by the way, after the Belgian equivalent of AES had to leave after a similar set of circumstances to those that pertained in Georgia.

Expertise transfer: training and education

Following on from the investment in technology comes the investment in training and education. In order for employees to work in their new environment, they need to be trained and educated to do so. TNCs will often set up their own training operations to cope with the changes. Alternatively, they will buy in training and education services from their home country and/or local providers if the country has been sufficiently well developed to this point to have their own experts in the relevant areas.

Consequently, a TNC will bring the technology and the expertise. Entire departments in local universities can thrive purely on the needs of TNCs. Business Schools seem to be flourishing more than any other educational initiative in the Post Soviet Republics that I know.

Given the shift in technology and skills, it is almost inevitable that foreigners will begin the work needed to upgrade systems and procedures and so on: it has been this way for centuries. However, I detect shifts in practice now and you will find in some countries that not only must all companies have at least a 50.1% local shareholding; but there has to be a phasing in of local management.

India has had the >50% ownership rule for a long time and many other countries, including those of the Former Soviet Union (FSU) have a similar rule.

A friend of mine is currently negotiating a contract with a company in the Oil Industry in the West of Kazakhstan and it is true that this company has had to set up a company with at least 51% of shares held by Kazakhstani citizens and all management positions (not Board of Directors) have to be localized.

Consequently, in many situations, TNCs have no choice but to localize many functions. However, there is then the problem of the capacity of locals to undertake the duties and responsibilities they then have. This is not intended as a slur in the slightest: let's look at my recent work in Georgia as an example.

In Georgia I was carrying out training and consultancy work: in the area of product cost accounting. Whilst the FSU did have cost accountants, we found with very few exceptions that they had all been dismissed very quickly after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991! Moreover, the standard costs (normatives) that factories and offices had used in the past had been developed and kept up to date in Moscow or St Petersburg and the methodology behind these standards had not been widely shared. We frequently came across people who told us that it was impossible to do what we then went on to do!

My brief, then, was to train as many accountants as possible in the arts of cost accounting and to carry out as many product cost development consultancies in factories, shops and offices as possible: the idea being that we leave behind trained cost accountants and systems that they could work with.

I trained my trainers and consultants and between us we further trained around 200 accountants within a one year period.

As for TNCs, they cannot work effectively with untrained staff unless they are prepared to have to employee many more people than necessary; and/or they would have to accept that productivity levels would need to be very low.

As a matter of interest, I hope, we did a job with Coca Cola in Georgia and found errors in their product costing systems!

In the FSU, we find people have had a marvellous literary, musical and sporting education; but their university and technical education is inadequate for the kinds of technologies that we take with us. If this were not true, then we wouldn't be needed, by definition.

In terms of culture, we also find in the FSU that there is still a different work ethic evident. We find that whilst I might produce one unit of output in a day, a local member of staff might produce one quarter of that. Moreover, the culture of the FSU means that decision making is something that was always left to the most senior member of staff (usually the CEO in modern parlance) and anyone below that level cannot take decisions and will not take decisions.

Source equipment and materials locally

I know there is information around that will tell us that the majority of the money needed to run a subsidiary of a TNC is actually spent in the UK or Europe or the USA and so on; but it's still true that a lot of money is spent in situ.

This means that we see the multiplier effect working quite nicely in the host countries as a TNC will buy equipment, materials and expertise from local providers if possible. In fact, my job in all three Post Soviet republics that I have worked in has been to ensure that local people and organizations have the capability to carry on my work once I've left. I am not alone in transferring my knowledge and skills, either, since I am part of a huge industry whose job it is to do just that.

There is sometimes the argument put forward that a TNC will move production from 'A' to 'B' at the drop of a hat: in some cases this may be possible, in others where major investment is needed to build factories and infrastructure, that is much less likely.

Profits

The most emotive aspect of TNCs and their behaviour, I would imagine, is profit. Taking a simplistic approach, we can say that profits arise only as a result of accounting manipulation, so whether are large or small, fictitious or not might not matter.

However, take a look at the return on capital employed of an average TNC and assess whether profit manipulation is the over riding issue anyway. In our example, with total costs of £10 million, let's assume that pre tax profits amount to £1 million and capital employed is £5 million. ROCE is 20% … is this the biggest issue facing a TNC and its hosts?

Finbarr Carter gave us the following link: ethicalcorp. I took a quick tour of this site and can see that there is a lot of information there for ethical activitsts. However, I went to have a look at the Business & Human rights link and found that Georgia is not even on the very long list of countries to be featured on this "Resource": go to http://www.business-humanrights.org/ … see the next paragraph, however.deliberately haven't looked at this yet. Once I've written and posted my initial reactions I'll take a look there and see where I agree and disagree … you can do the same too!!

Similarly, follow through the link to the Council of Europe (see below for discussion of attempted correspondence with Lord Russell Johnston of the CoE) and you will see that there are far more links to follow through on environmental issues than there are on Human rights. The journalist links page on human rights is more detailed but the resources there are very limited in their scope: Georgia does get a mention here, I have to say.

Nevertheless, still accentuating the positive, ethicalcorp and the links from it do provide a vast array of links and information: getting the balance right is important, though. It is free to subscribe to the magazine Ethical Corporation, too, and the two issues to date are available for downloading in PDF format.

Tax holidays

Let's face the facts of life: developing countries often need to provide major incentives to get TNCs to invest, so tax holidays are vital for TNCs and host country alike. Moreover, the UK has tax holidays; and the Regions of the UK have them, so does the rest of the EU.

I take the point about the Sheraton in Tanzania at face value; but if their occupancy rate is only 20%, it would take a major tax holiday to keep the Sheraton there. Hotel chains like the Sheraton, though, are not averse to charging European and US rates for their rooms even in the remotest parts of the planet: after all, who stays there and what allowances do they have?

Business organizations will finance the likes of the Sheraton for their own reasons, too.

We also have to accept that hotel chains like the Sheraton will go the extra mile for their guests in terms of security and protection from such things as the ladies of the night! Personal risk is a major factor for TNCs and their expat staff: they are subject to all sorts of pressures, violence and threats of violence and kidnappings.

Take the UN and kindred organizations and they often do not stint themselves on travel and living expenses: this is one the reasons that Mary Robinson had a stamping fit a couple of years ago … they wanted her to stay in "ordinary" UN guest houses and she wanted to stay in the most luxurious place possible wherever she was.

President Bush Senior launched an attack on the UN whilst he was in power. The USA withheld its contributions to the UN for a long time: Bush believed that far too much money was being wasted on the travelling and living costs of the UN staff rather than in the areas where most benefit could be felt. My anecdotal viewpoint is that Bush Senior had very little impact here if the number of 4x4 off road vehicles dressed in the UN livery that still abound in the cities of developing countries is anything to go by.

Health and safety

Until the TNC arrives, health and safety at work may be a non issue. I have walked around so many factories and workshops in developing countries that have worried me to death. Machinery is unguarded, power cables are often bare and hanging from walls and out of junction boxes, lifting of heavy weights is done by dangerous equipment and by people who are simply unfit. Ecological control is often non existent and we have all seen massive exposure to radiation following neglect and bad practice following the Chernobyl disaster (I know the US had its own disaster at five mile Island we have our own Sellafield) and Semipalatinsk.

Health and safety at work does generally improve with a responsible TNC. I can cite cases of building sites in, eg, Tbilisi where everyone entering the site wears boots with toe protectors; and the site is declared a "hard hat" area … look at a locally controlled building site and you can find builders wearing trainers and hard hats have never been heard of let alone required to be worn.

Foreign exchange

Following on from our discussion of sales, costs and profit, TNCs will often bring with them the need to deal in foreign exchange: bringing much needed hard currency to their host country.

Impact on GDP and GDP per capita

All of the above has a direct and positive impact on the GDP of the host and the GDP per capita of the host. Of course, the GDP of the TNC's own country will receive a boost, too; but there is nothing wrong with that.

Scholarships help support eg UK further and higher education

In addition to the on the job training that is often required and provided, TNCs often lead to the need for scholarships that either help finance further and higher education in the UK, for example, or help to finance the educational equivalent in the host country.

I have been part of this process and have worked with students, local academic staff, TNCs (and local businesses) and UK based colleges and universities. TNCs have a major role to play here.

In my own experience, TNCs have been at the forefront of educational development. We can take a cynical view and say that they do this to satisfy their own needs and if there is windfall that benefits others, so much the better. In reality, TNCs often have budgets that allow them both to reap the benefits of the educational world and to put something back by, eg, sponsoring other students, departments, equipment and rooms, teachers' salaries, books/libraries …

In many cities now we can find evidence of the positive role of the TNCs in education. Since 1993, I have worked in Almaty Kazakhstan, Yerevan Armenia and Tbilisi Georgia and all three of them are benefiting from the involvement of TNCs and local businesses and people.

In Almaty, I worked at an organisation called KIMEP that had been set up by the government of Kazakhstan. I worked there under the auspices of a European Union (TACIS) project and we were joined there by US and UK Aid Projects plus several more initiatives from other countries. Along with the Aid Agencies, we worked hand in hand with some of the world's largest Oil companies (BP and Chevron, for example), the largest accounting firms in the world were our partners, too, as well as other, less popular companies, such as Philip Morris: these companies helped to provide scholarships for our students and our graduates went to work for them. Local businesses also sponsored our students and our graduates went to work for them, too.

The assistance we received from TNCs and local businesses ran to hundreds of thousands of Pounds a year.

In Yerevan and Tbilisi, US Universities were represented in their own initiatives that were similar to KIMEP and they in turn benefited from backing from TNCs and local businesses.

Many countries, let alone companies, have their own, often extensive, education and scholarship programmes in foreign countries: the British Council is very active in this area, providing both cultural and educational information and opportunities. On the british Council home page you will see that they list their services as:

You will even see that they have a Human rights link there too. Called Humanrights Network, this site takes a look at human rights in the UK as well as abroad; and it looks at the rights of women and children as well as political rights.

Educational reforms

TNCs' own needs, as just discussed, often lead to the host country accepting the need to move its own education system into a new era. My own work over the last 14 years or so has had a major component of educational reform. Host governments have a duty to protect their culture and heritage as well as their own academic communities; eventually, however, they realize that in order to survive and grow, major reform is often needed.

TNCs can and do work with aid agencies directly or indirectly and Ministries of Education to try to ensure that the educational system can support the developments taking place.

Curriculum development

Clearly, one key area of educational reform is curriculum development. Whilst I have a great deal of respect for the Soviet Education system, it is no longer wholly appropriate. In my own area of cost and management accounting, management in developing countries is often completely in the dark and their university staff equally so.

TNCs have a key role to play here as they help to transfer such knowledge and expertise: I know of senior ranking TNC employees who give some of their spare time to deliver lectures at local universities, to develop teaching and training materials and so on, for the benefit of their host country and its people.

In Georgia, I was part of a project whose job it was to assist the government to reform the accounting and tax professions. As our project ended, we had overseen the introduction and adoption of International Accounting Standards and the National Accounting Standards, we had overseen the development and introduction and adoption of a new Law on Accounting, we were working on a Law on Auditing and a sister project had worked on various aspects of taxation law. We also made a start on a law on Finance Leasing that could revolutionise the way businesses raise the finance they need to pay for new equipment and machinery.

The job I am about to start is part of a multi country initiative aimed at updating accounting curricula at the universities in five central Asian Republics. The same initiative is also aimed at upgrading the professional development of accountants in the same republics. This initiative has already won the support, and the requisite empowering legislation in four of the five republics and the major accounting firms (both local and multi national) have endorsed the initiatives. Indeed, I have already attended a multi lateral meeting involving senior representation from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Russia.

I have been party to educational reform in Armenia and Georgia, too, and have personally led training sessions with University staff in Tbilisi.

Foreign language development

The language of much of the business world is English and one of the major benefits of TNC involvement in developing countries is the development of language skills in those countries. At the same time as language schools flourishing, TNCs flourish and local people flourish.

Gets governments out of a pickle

In many developing countries, the government is often at a loss of what to do to build its economy or it doesn't have the wherewithal to do that. Moreover, developing countries are often short of cash and infrastructure to develop. This may not be a problem; but in many cases, even the basic infrastructure is so problematic that the government needs a hand to solve its problems. Utilities are a classic case in point here.

Post Soviet republics all seem to have energy crises; and again Georgia is a perfect example. The electricity supply in Georgia was failing until AES (a US based company) bought out part of the supply chain. Power cuts were the norm, leaving people all over Georgia in the cold and dark for some, if not all, of the winter months as demand for electricity far exceeded supply. Moreover, people knew that if they did not pay their bills, it was very difficult for the supply company to disconnect them: so consumers, companies and ministries ran up excessive debts … the electricity industry was bleeding to death.

The government did not have the resources to correct the power supply imbalance so AES's buyout was a Godsend. AES eventually stabilized the supply in many parts of Tbilisi, to the extent that they rewired the supply lines and installed meters that enabled them to disconnect the supply to people and organizations unable or unwilling to pay their bills.

Now, people know that to maintain their supply, they have to pay their bill; and non payment can be enforced by disconnection.

The government itself was a major debtor and tussles took place between AES and various ministries. The President of the Republic used power and gas supply cuts as arguments to try to get his people to behave, too!

In Georgia, as in other countries, when times get rough for energy consumers, the government can always blame companies like AES: they become the fall guy! It happens!

A lot of hot air is talked about the involvement of TNCs in various incidents from around the globe: the role of TNCs in setting the prices of utilities and basic necessities is always a case in point. We need to tease out, however, the role of the IMF in these matters since often they are behind much of what happens.

Take electricity prices in Georgia to start with. AES Telasi is the DISTRIBUTOR of electricity: the generation of electricity is still in the hands of the government. However, the price of electricity has for a long time been dictated to the Georgian government by the IMF as part of its ongoing assistance … of course, since AES is the one that has to implement and collect the prices set by the IMF, they get it in the neck! My last piece of information here was that the IMF was insisting on a virtual doubling of electricity prices at the consumer level, I think, but both government and AES refused to implement such a monstrous increase. Remember, Georgia is a country where half the population lives below the poverty line and around 80% of economic activity is now informal.

Kazakhstan provides other good examples of business helping out the government. In 1994, following several years of shortages and poor quality, the government liberalized the supply of petrol. Doomsters foresaw disaster as petrol prices spiralled out of control and supply became more erratic. In fact what happened was that prices stabilized, supply became so certain that there have been no shortages since then and the quality of petrol is now beyond reproach: the market, in good old Thatcherite fashion, took care of what a government could not.

A similar scare story, also in 1994 came with a massive hike in bread prices. The government, following IMF policies, took subsidies off a wide range of goods and services, including bread. Death and disaster were predicted. However, the increases were absorbed and no one appeared any the worse for it. Maybe the subsidy simply wasn't justified on any grounds?

Work with and lobby governments

In order to look after themselves, their sources of supply, their employees and their markets, TNCs can lobby governments, ministers, ministries and so on and they do. They can be a country's most effective lobbying weapon. Outsiders, including people with significant business and international experience, are able to negotiate at senior levels on behalf of themselves and others for reforms that are often vital to continued development.

Anti corruption

I know of cases where TNCs are accused of being involved in corrupt activities, often in cahoots with governments and ministers. However, ethical companies will not take part in corrupt practices. Moreover, there are many international businessmen who lend their weight to anti corruption legislation and lobbying activities. This is a good thing!

Impact on local legislation:

This section follows on directly from the lobbying activities I mentioned above.

In many countries, I know that businessmen have succeeded in being party to the development of the legislative infrastructure of countries that benefit the country as a whole, let alone their own companies. Good examples include the ones I mentioned above

Reform of Banking laws and regulations is also a vital component of the development of a business culture and philosophy. …

The development of such laws and standards are often seen as the basic levels of development that a country needs to undergo before foreign direct investment can become a serious proposition.

Charity/humanitarian work and allowances

TNCs and their managers are usually keen to get involved in charity and humanitarian work. This can involve donations of food, clothing, transport and so on. It can also include sponsorship of students, underwriting the costs of buildings and equipment. It can also involve high profile activities such as sponsoring sporting events and so on.

Such work allows local and expatriate, local and local, to interact in meaningful ways that can be genuinely altruistic on the one hand and mutually beneficial on the other.

Such work also subsidises, or even replaces, the work of the government of the host country, too, in some cases.

Cultural exchanges

A result of much of what I have said so far is that people of differing cultural and spiritual backgrounds come together to work and/or to live. We learn a great deal about each other's traditions and so on. Cultural exchanges can take place in the factory or office or in the home. We can exchange philosophies of work and of living.

I accept the charge, in part, that when I go to a foreign country, I might be guilty of exporting my culture but not necessarily importing the culture of the country I've been to! The process of cultural exchange is commonly a personal affair and I have to say that so far I have a good personal record in this respect: my articles on my various travels should testify to that.

The countries I work in are happy to learn about Britain and its history and people. Countless numbers of people come to Britain each year from the countries I work in.

Nevertheless, I have travelled, visited museums and spent time with local people in their homes and their places of work. I have come up against power cuts, traffic policemen and their errant ways …

Human rights

Developing countries above all others are reportedly more racked with human rights abuses than developed countries. No doubt there are many exceptions to this apparent rule. Nevertheless, I have personally been involved in situations in which I have felt that human rights have been abused. My position has allowed me to take, or attempt to take, remedial action; and I have happily done so. I like to believe that my involvement in these scenarios has benefited all concerned; and has been a small element in the development of a more civilized framework for the society I have been working and living in.

Let me spell out some of my experience in the area of human rights over the last 14 years or so; and I would love for someone whom I am about to name to respond to what you are about to read.

In the middle of 2001 I was working in a winery in a village in Georgia, about an hour's drive from Tbilisi and I came up against a situation that I felt was counter to equitable human rights (I can supply details on request, just e-mail me and I'll send you the story). This situation involved pensioners, unelected government representatives and the alleged theft of pensions and relief aid.

I wrote to a large number of organisations about what I'd come up against including Amnesty International, the United Nations, Mary Robinson (UNHCR), several people and departments in the British Government … organisations and people whom I thought would have cared about old people being robbed of their measly pensions. I was wrong. Not one organisation or person replied; not one of them even so much as acknowledged my e-mail (none of my messages were bounced back as undeliverable either, by the way) and not one of them took any action on behalf of these poor people.

Even worse, perhaps, was a letter that was published in part in a Georgian newspaper in November 2001: the letter was from Lord Russell Johnston, a very senior figure in the Assembly of the Council of Europe and a Liberal/Social Democrat. That letter, to President Shevardnadze, congratulated Georgia on democratic progress and Shevardnadze personally on his personal involvement in this process of such improvement. I was astonished by what I read and wrote to Russell Johnston. I managed to discuss this matter with his e-mail secretary who confirmed that this letter had been written and sent but which was private so I couldn't have a copy.

I then wrote to Russell Johnston to invite him to enter into a dialogue with me about democracy and human rights in Georgia but he has so far declined.

Coincidentally, at the time I was writing to Russell Johnston, the EU was threatening to withdraw from Georgia because of continued physical attacks on, and kidnappings of, foreigners in that country. The last I heard was that Chris Patten had written to the Government of Georgia asking for it to look after foreigners much better than it had been otherwise €15 millon that was earmarked for Georgia for 2002 would be withheld.

At the time of writing, I am awaiting a response to a letter to my MP, Dr Evan Harris (also a Lib Dem), on the issue of Russell Johnston's letter and the issues surrounding it.

I have to say that I believe that human rights are definitely worth only what we see on our television screens and what we read in the press. I maintain that if I had been working in China or Burma and I had come across there what I came across in Georgia, I would have been welcomed by Amnesty and the rest with open arms. I accuse these organisations of serious mis treatment of those people who are not part of their latest eye catching campaigns.

I also have serious concerns over organisations such as Oxfam who may deal in double standards from time to time (e-mail me for a reason why I haven't supported Oxfam with cash and other assistance since 1989).

TNCs are taking ethical stances more and more these days as the ethical investor and human rights activitists are making their voices heard in places of influence. Whether TNCs would have become involved in human rights campaigning without the work of organizations like Amnesty International and so on is largely irrelevant; but the TNCs owe them a debt of gratitude for putting them in the position of having to consider these issues and act on them.

The Nine UN Principles

At the World Economic Forum, Davos, on 31 January 1999, UN Secretary-General Kofi A. Annan challenged world business leaders to "embrace and enact" the Global Compact, both in their individual corporate practices and by supporting appropriate public policies. These principles cover topics in human rights, labour and environment:

The Secretary-General asked world business to:

Principle 1: support and respect the protection of international human rights within their sphere of influence;
Principle 2: make sure their own corporations are not complicit in human rights abuses.
Principle 3: freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining;
Principle 5: the effective abolition of child labour;
Principle 6: the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.
Principle 7: support a precautionary approach to environmental challenges;
Principle 8: undertake initiatives to promote greater environmental responsibility;
Principle 9: encourage the development and diffusion of environmentally friendly technologies.

I see these nine principles as being important for all of us and for all businesses both at home and abroad.

What alternatives are there? What would have happened if the TNC hadn't arrived?

At the end of it all, I know that TNCs have received a bad press in International Economics circles, and are probably still doing so. Development Economists are still somewhat critical too. Moreover, despite the positive thrust of what I have written, I know there are arguments that can be thrown back at me that will attempt to prove that I am living in cloud cuckoo land.

In know that I can be confronted by examples of cheap labour and its abuse, child labour being used to make Western goods that sell in the High Street at inflated prices; people being forced to work for TNCs in insanitary and over crowed conditions. I accept that any organization whether it be based in the UK or in a developing country can abuse the privilege it has of buying peoples' time, energy and skills.

Consequently, I will leave my presentation by asking the questions:

© Duncan Williamson
6 January 2002 revised and updated 13 January 2002