It's a disgrace. They're just lining up to give Hayward a kicking, they don't care about facts or investigation. Outrageous. And they seem to be sticking in anti-British/anti-foreigner remarks here and there.

I'm sure I heard this morning that over 40% of BP or its shares are held in the USA?
Anyone know if this is true and who owns the rest?

I am really surprised what Obama has gotten away with. Seems to me BP could have told him to get ****ed.

Yes they could have, apparently oil companies by American law only obliged to pay out $75 million, funny how Obama seems to ignore what's going on in the Niger Delta though.

This isn't Obama, it's congress.

There's nothing more self-righteous than the posturing that goes on at congressional hearings.

Well, if you create a mess in the backyard of world most powerful nation … eerrmm … they are going to kick you hard. Fact!

But if they create a mess in your backyard then they buy their way out because you are maggots. Fact!

You can challenge them or tell them to F Off but they will kick you even harder. Fact!

Moral of the story. You drill at your own risk and if you don't get it right … they will drill your backside.

BP deserve everything they are getting simple, more profit more risk.

It's not about money any more it's about the damage to the environment big time.

End of the day, the US are paying for it anyway, irrelevent – they buy more oil than anyone else.

But its still a witch-hunt in the home of pork-belly politics.

I don't think it is right that BP are getting totally vilified especially as they are such an important company with regards to the UK economy.

However I read somewhere that the amount of oil being spilled is the equivalent of an exon valdez spill every five days! Shocking especially in an area that is so reliant on the sea for fishing/tourism.

More should have been done by BP to make sure this never happened in the first place.

A lot of this p1ss & wind is to distract from his (BA) own problems. Its going to get interesting when the $40 million odd of dividends that is due to US shareholders isnt paid out..

More should have been done by BP to make sure this never happened in the first place.

has it been established that bp were liable? There are usually several companies involved in operating an oil rig. Bp are takig the flack as a or exercise, but others will be involved.

The hearing is not meant to be a bollocking though. It's ridiculous. It's no better than putting someone in the stocks without a trial. It's not even clear that it was BP's fault, and yet they are asking him to prostrate himself just to make them look good.

It's the behaviour of the hearing that I am upset about (in this thread anyway).

watched it for about an hour earlier – long drawn out confused questions (from people who clearly didn't understand either the question or the answer) haywood answered the questions well, if concisely.

they kept saying that he wasn't givin out enough information – however he seemed to answer every question!!

It is irrelevant whether it is BP's fault: They were responsible for the drilling operation and something went horribly wrong.

IMO BP get everything they deserve: I couldn't care less if they are a "massive company". The oil industry has held this world to ransom, both financially and environmentally, for far too long, and it is about time they were made to pay for the mess that they have created.

For what it's worth: I think Obama would have come down hard regardless of the nationality of the company. He is keen to demonstrate that he is not beholden to the oil industry, as Bush was, and will demand his pound of flesh if they mess up.

For all those thinking that this is nationalistic stance against Britain: Surely the fact that the company has so many shareholders in America proves that this belief has no foundation.

It's not about nationality for me; but it seems that the congressmen are just trying to garner support from their people by being agressive and trying to look hard.

At one point, referring to Haywards comment weeks ago about getting his life back, one guy said 'I'm sure you will get your life back, along with a golden parachute back to England'. Why did he add that bit about England if not to keep it in people's minds next to the negative remark?

According to Hayward, he focused on safety and they have been working hard to improve their safety record. Something went wrong, maybe it was as a result of their management practices, maybe not; but it is absolutely out of order to drag Hayward over the coals publicly when we don't know if he's been the bad guy or not.

I do not agree with people who say that just because he's the boss of the company he is automatically the punchbag. It could have been some other middle manager cutting corners without Haywards knowledge for instance.

The oil industry has held this world to ransom, both financially and environmentally, for far too long, and it is about time they were made to pay for the mess that they have created.

What, they MADE us buy oil products? Get real. We are the ones ultimately responsible.

What, they MADE us buy oil products? Get real. We are the ones ultimately responsible.

True, but they are certainly maintaining the status quo and are probably the most powerful lobbyists around, when it comes to getting what they want from governments. BP and Shell made £4m/hour last year: I think they can afford to pay to clean up their mess.

They've said about a million times they are going to pay whatever it takes to clean it all up. They have been compensating people without any argument or question, and really quickly too. They showed people on the news who'd been affected, and they were pretty complimentary about BP. Of course, that's not necessarily representative, but it might be – depends on how much you trust the BBC.

Funny how the honorable senators from fvck-knows-where are now pretending to be experts on drilling technology and practice. Funny how they can't understand that being in the oil industry 28 years does not mean that you necessarily have the first clue about drilling. Funny how they imagine that the CEO of BP would have any involvement at all in the decisions in drilling one of the hundred wells they drill each year.

Oh yes – they're just posturing politicians looking for votes, so not funny at all.

BP and Shell made £4m/hour last year

Looks like a lot, but when you consider how much they have to invest, and risk, to make that money, it turns out to be a lot more modest return. Drilling a well costs upwards of 100 million dollars, with no guarantee that it will be worth a single cent. That's a big risk to take, so if you remove the reward, it just isn't going to happen.

Looks like a lot, but when you consider how much they have to invest, and risk, to make that money, it turns out to be a lot more modest return. Drilling a well costs upwards of 100 million dollars, with no guarantee that it will be worth a single cent. That's a big risk to take, so if you remove the reward, it just isn't going to happen.

Those figures are profit, which should take into account all the drilling and exploration costs.

>I do not agree with people who say that just because he's the boss of the company he is automatically the punchbag. It could have been some other middle manager cutting corners without Haywards knowledge for instance.

To a degree I agree – but that's why the further up the tree they are, the higher the pay, the greater the responsibility, and ensuring the processes are there(or the correct people installed to ensure the processes are there) so that everything further down the tree happens correctly.

>Something went wrong, maybe it was as a result of their management practices, maybe not
There was an interesting article in the Grauniad either tuesday or last thursday detailing a handful of points where BP (managers) had appeared to override or ignore industry/expert recommendations, presumably as a time/cost-saving exercise. Plus their spill contingency plan appeared to be written by the YTS lad – referenced an expert at a university that he'd left a decade or two previously, not to mention he'd been dead for 4 years. Oh, and the assertion that at 48 miles out there was no likelihood of any oil reaching land, which sounds rather like wishful thinking.

Re the article the main points are listed here at the bottom, in case anyone's tempted to trot out the usual 'lefty-yoghurt-knitting-Guardian-reader' rubbish:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/us_and_canada/10337146.stm

From my perspective here in the US, I think that bring the BP CEO to the hearing was mostly about posturing, pontificating and getting votes. They were really over-the-top in some of their questions and comments–for the great majority of them, the only thing they know about oil & gas is filling their gas-tank every week. There wasn't anything the CEO could have done or said that would have satisfied the lot of them. Unfortunately, our present congress are a bunch of windbags–not all, but way too many—their concern is getting re-elected and looking tough and "standing up" for their constituents is a way to do it. It also takes the focus off the massive debt they are piling up and so many other things that need attention.
I don't know how much of it hits the press there, but the public's perception of the president's handling of it has been on a downward spiral-even a lot of his own party aren't very pleased.
Our mid-term elections have the potential to be a blood-bath for both parties. Wouldn't make me feel badly.

i'm frustrated by the lack of introspection by the americans.

'yes, i drive a 12mpg V8 pickup, and? – bring me more oil, but don't spill any'

i thought whats-his-face Hayward did a very good job today, i even found myself taking notes on how to give a diplomatic response to an unfair loaded question.

i'd love to know what people think Obama should be doing…?

My little bro works in the industry, sent this.

Some swearing- keep the sound down at work.

I guess an increasing number of us, including more and more who voted for him, want him to stop trying to create a socialist society in the country. He is being accused of the same things George W. was about Katrina, in regards to response—-pretty much seen as dithering about more than anything else. Anyway, this isn't a political rant site, no matter which side of the ocean we are on.

I think Hayward did an excellent job of responding to questions that were as hostile as well as mis-informed. Do the DC windbags really think that it isn't in BP's best interest to get the damn well plugged.
As I said in my original post, it's more about posturing than anything else—-God keep me sane until we can vote a whole bunch from both parties out of office.

Those figures are profit, which should take into account all the drilling and exploration costs.

Yes – but you need to consider the investment needed to generate that profit to see if their return is unusual.

the greater the responsibility, and ensuring the processes are there(or the correct people installed to ensure the processes are there) so that everything further down the tree happens correctly.

As a CEO all you can do is instigate the creation of procedures. You can't define those procedures, or really make sure that everyone else is following them.

And I don't see Obama as trying to create a socialist state either! I thought his first response was fairly measured and sensible – wait til the facts are in before sharpening the pitchforks – but that's not what the electorate demanded.. and you can't tell the American people not to be stupid, even when they are being stupid.

With all those experts in congress who can analyse drilling and safety processes just by reading emails, I'm surprised they haven't fixed the leak themselves yet.

They could sail out there in boats made out of photos of oil soaked birds – just to keep it real.

What a farce.

Every one of the Congressmen knew he would get a kicking from his state if he didn't do his bit of shouting.

I think BP should suspend it's dividend – but only to US investors.

It is exactly the same in this country: If there is a health and safety incident, that results in the injury, or death, of a person, then the buck stops with the CEO of the company. For example, if someone was killed on a building site, the directors of the company running the site would be liable to prosecution, potentially for manslaughter – it should be no different for heads of large, multi-national corporations.

Having seen the questioning now, I do actually agree that some of it was over-the-top, but then again Hayward hasn't exactly covered himself in glory since the incident.

If I had been in Haywards shoes I think I may have been tempted to reply slightly more actively. Along the lines of hey guys if you need to waggle your willys, I'll leave this wax doll that you can stick pins in. In the menatime I'm going to get back to actually trying to resolve this issue and find the actual facts. Give me a shout when you're ready to do likewise.

Anyone else see the guy from Texas (oil rich state) who actually had the balls to swim upstream and apologised to Hayward? The world needs more politicians like him.

>Anyone else see the guy from Texas (oil rich state) who actually had the balls to swim upstream and apologised to Hayward? The world needs more politicians like him.

The same ballsy guy who then apologised twice for apologising to Hayward ?

Hayward was under oath, answering questions that would potentially incriminate him. What was he supposed to say? He had to be super-careful and not say something off the cuff that would come back and bite him in a very bad way. He would have been within his rights to not appear, or to appear with a lawyer, or to just take the 5th. He didn't do any of those things, so the congresscritturs who made the showboating speeches must have known they would not get any substantive answers.

There's a macho theme running through American society, I think that was part of what we saw at the hearing.

But I agree with berm bandit. If I were Hayward I'd have made my point a lot more forcefully. I'd have said 'look, if we find out that this is all my fault then fine I'll resign and you can kick me all you like. But rather than bickering about finger pointing and posturing we're all concentrating on actually fixing the leak right now, so if you'd let us get on…'

Heard a bit of it on Today this morning. Hayward seemes OK to me – he clearly can't answer when investigations are incomplete.

Views such as Mikey74's are soooo naive.

This is the way to deal with Congress idiots

George Galloway vs Congress

Problem is America and now much of the west are societies based on instant gratification. Sound bites and news clips being more important than the truth or common sense.

Personally I don't think the American establishment has covered itself in glory for quite a while. Yesterday was merely anther sorry and pathetic episode.