BP's Tony Hayward savaged by US Congressmen over oil spill

BP's Tony Hayward savaged by US Congressmen over oil spill

Alex Spillius
Telegraph.co.uk
17 Jun 2010

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”.

Like others, he taunted the 53-year-old geologist with his previous gaffes and comments, particularly his remark that he “wanted his life back” because dealing with the accident was all-consuming.

“Eleven families who lost people may not get their lives back, but I am sure will get your life back,” snapped Mr Stupak, chairman of the energy subcommittee on oversight and investigations in the House of Representatives that held the hearing.

Betty Sutton, a Democrat from Ohio, said: “Like many Americans, I feel physically sick when I see all this oil gushing into the gulf.”

Diane Wilson, a shrimper from Texas mounting a lone protest, began heckling when Mr Hayward began speaking, calling him a criminal. Her hands smeared with oil, it took Capitol Hill police several minutes to wrestle her to the ground and escort her from the committee room.

Sitting alone at a long table in the wood-panelled committee room, Mr Hayward apologised for the accident and said he was “personally devastated” by the loss of life on the Deepwater Horizon rig on April 20.

“I understand how serious the situation is, I am promising you that we will make this right,” he said, speaking so softly that he was repeatedly asked to move closer to the microphone.

On Wednesday BP announced that it had buckled to demands by President Barack Obama’s administration to set up a $20 billion escrow account to fund compensation claims from thousands of fishermen and businessmen whose livelihoods have been affected by up to 60,000 barrels of oil leaking into the sea every day.

It also agreed to suspend dividend payments to shareholders for the rest of the year, though they account for £1 in every £6 paid out in dividends to British pension holders.

Mr Obama had been criticised by MPs and pensioners for attacks on Mr Hayward that sharply drove down BP’s share price. A phone call between Mr Obama and the Prime Minister was required to calm tension.

Speaking under oath, with the strong possibility of criminal prosecutions further on, Mr Hayward repeatedly said that he had not been present when decisions were made about the construction of the well, prompting accusations of “stonewalling” and obstruction.

Mr Hayward remained impassive as committee members spent an hour and a half – about double the normal time – on mostly hostile opening statements, meeting forecasts that the high-profile hearing would be designed more to grab attention than unearth new facts.

Mr Hayward was extensively drilled for his testimony by the Washington office of the London public relations firm Brunswick, but was probably not expecting the sympathetic treatment received from Republican congressman Joe Barton.

The representative from the southern oil state of Texas apologised for the $20 billion escrow deal, calling it a “slush fund” and a “shake down”.

Unlike some White House officials, he corrected himself when he used the company’s old name British Petroleum. “I’m sorry, it’s BP,” he said.

Matt, what's the buzz over there on this inquisition? Imo, the congressmen were pretty hard on the guy... almost rude as a matter of fact. It was mostly the Dems who were being that way. They control the committee he appeared at.

It shouldn't surpise you Tex, that I disagree strongly. So far I would say he's gotten off quite easy. Yeah, he's finally taking some crap - but it's far too little (and too late) considering the enormity of what's happening - and been happening for 50+ days. The fact is, the guy is the head of BP, and as such he bares all responsibilty and blame. Period. The GOP can play all the politics they want to (and as usual, they are) but at the end of the day, this is BP's fook-up. It's time for Obama to tell BP what to do and make sure that it gets done.

I don't disagree that Heyward is responsible. Nor am i excusing anything that has happened. But the point i'm trying to make is that the committee could've been a bit less dramatic. There's plenty of ways to get the point across instead of looking like assholes.

To be fair on my part (surprise to you ), congressman Barton was being a total ditz with what he said (and retracted).

Just so you and everyone else who reads this thread know, i'm appalled at this whole thing and paying very close attention to it. I find the actions (a lack of) of our gov't horsehsit. It's for this very reason why i decry growing the gov't even larger with more bureaucracy. I'll be posting examples on this over the next few days till i get this point across to people.

Need an example?

They had barges vacuuming oil from the waters in Louisiana. So what happens? The Coast Guard (taking D.C. orders) shut them off. Why? They had to make sure fire extinguishers and life vests were on board the vessels. This is no joke! And this is from ABC News, fyi.

http://www.superiorpolitics.com/politics-f1/bp-oil-spill-crude-sucking-barges-stopped-by-coast-guard-t300.htm#1894

And to be fair back to you Tex (), I haven't been at all pleased with Obama's handling as of late (if at all). My problem with that is, he left it up to BP for far too long when it was obvious that BP didn't know (or care) how to handle things. No, I don't have a specific time I would have liked Obama to step in. But it should have been a hell of a lot sooner than this week. Also, I didn't like what he said at his speech - specifically saying "I'm responsible". By saying that he opened up a lot of potential political crap - from everyone (especially the right). He should have just come out and kicked BP's @ss (hey, what's with the editing? ) and held them accountable and left it at that.

And don't get me started on Barton. Wow.

i_luv_miley wrote:And to be fair back to you Tex (), I haven't been at all pleased with Obama's handling as of late (if at all). My problem with that is, he left it up to BP for far too long when it was obvious that BP didn't know (or care) how to handle things. No, I don't have a specific time I would have liked Obama to step in. But it should have been a hell of a lot sooner than this week. Also, I didn't like what he said at his speech - specifically saying "I'm responsible". By saying that he opened up a lot of potential political crap - from everyone (especially the right). He should have just come out and kicked BP's @ss (hey, what's with the editing? ) and held them accountable and left it at that.

And don't get me started on Barton. Wow.

I'm starting to see the left really going ballistic with Obama here lately. And it's the far left that is going batshit.

I have to agree with what Bill Clinton's former adviser said in his recent column. He believes Obama is really over his head and over it big time.

You should read it with an open mind. I was surprised at what he said. http://superiorpolitics.com/politics-f1/dems-turn-on-obama-t296.htm

I'll have to disagree with kicking BP to the side. What else was the gov't going to do? As other pundits have pointed out (and rightly so), what can the gov't do as far as capping the leak?

Editing... i remember putting in censors when i started this and have retracted a bunch of them. I think (now) that it looks stupid. So, here's to getting rid of @ss and making it ass.