El corto Siglo XX, una lectura desde la Seguridad y Defensa

The UK experienced an oil crisis in July 2000. A combination of self-employed lorry drivers, owners of small haulage companies and farmers took objection to the high price of petrol (the bulk of the price of which in the UK is deter- mined by the excise duty). In a Poujadist protest they used their mobile phones to create a network of supporters who blockaded the country’s oil stor- age depots and led slow-moving convoys up and down motorways causing traffic queues. Any modern country depends on the internal combustion engine and the shortage of fuel caused by the action soon threatened chaos. The National Health Service was put on Red alert and businesses could not carry out their normal business. There were fears that food would not be deliv- ered to the supermarkets.

The government was caught unawares. The prime minister declared that the situation would be back to normal within 24 hours; but it was not. It looked for scapegoats and blamed the international oil companies for selfish- ness. The government argued that the oil companies should take strong action to break the blockades and ensure that oil was delivered to the nation’s petrol station forecourts. The oil companies argued that it was not their responsibil- ity to take risks with the safety of their employees. They would not order their drivers to drive through the pickets if there was a danger that they might be hurt. They were suspected by some politicians of secretly agreeing with the protestors. It was reported that there was a ‘chummy camaraderie’ between the protestors blockading a refinery and the management within in it; even to the extent that the protestors were served tea and bacon sandwiches from the canteen within the refinery (Weaver, 2000). The oil companies claimed to make only small profits of a penny a litre on retailing petrol, and if the protest led to a reduction in excise duties it could only be of benefit to the industry. Oil transport was outsourced to small independent companies and self- employed drivers (some of whom had been sacked by the companies only to be re-employed as independents for less pay) who did have real complaints about the cost of the diesel that fuelled their lorries. The oil companies had little leverage to force these drivers to break the blockade. The view of the

Observer (2000) leader writer was that the oil companies were too concerned

with maximising their shareholders’ returns by carrying low contingency stocks of oil and using a just-in-time logistics system that meant there was no buffer in the case of a crisis. There was a view that the companies owed an obligation to the wider community when they traded in a material that was so vital to the functioning of society.

Fairness

Fairness concerns the proportions in which resources are distributed between people or causes. The resources can be money, respect or any possession that a community can allocate among its members. Aristotle expressed the central con- cern, about the appropriateness of the proportions, in a system of distributive justice. He saw it as a matter of algebra in which there are at least four terms: two persons and two shares. A just distribution is one in which the ratio between the first person and the first share is equal to the ratio between the second person and the second share. If Fred is twice as worthy as Jane then Jane’s portion should be half of Fred’s. In this case the two ratios will be the same. The arith- metic is fine but the question is how the two people involved are to be assessed. Aristotle said it should be done by assessing their merit. But he admitted that people define merit in different ways.

People of democratic sympathies measure degrees of merit by degrees of free- dom, oligarchs by degrees of wealth, others judge by good birth, those who believe in the rule of the ‘best’ go by moral and intellectual qualifications.

(Aristotle, 1976: 146) This does not exhaust the possibilities. Marx measured it according to need, ‘From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs’ (in Marx and Engels, 1962: 24). Others might measure merit by personhood and insist that, since all are equal in this particular aspect, then everyone should receive equal shares.

The blockade melted away as quickly as it had formed as people began panic buying at the supermarkets. The Prime Minister said he would not be forced into cutting the duty on fuel.

Poujadism is a set of political beliefs named after Pierre Poujade, a small-town shopkeeper in France in the 1950s. It objects to state interference such as taxa- tion, the investigation of tax evasion and any regulation of small businesses. It also opposes big corporations and large-scale labour organisation.

DEFINITION

Do the oil companies have a moral obligation to maintain fuel supplies in a country?

Discussion activity 2.8

Fairness

Morality Ethics

The debates under the ethical heading of fairness concern the appropriate measure of a person’s merit and the fairness of the ratios between one person’s merit and share and those of others. The case studies in this section give exam- ples of these debates. Case study 2.9 focuses on need, 2.10 on personhood and 2.11 contrasts the property rights of shareholders with the needs of customers.

Case study 2.9