Contributors
Contributors & Mission Statement
Contributors
EDITOR: John Donovan (has been involved in the gasoline retailing industry for over 40 years devising promotional campaigns for many oil companies, including Conoco and Texaco. He has also acted as a marketing consultant to BP. He is however, best known for his long association with the Royal Dutch Shell Group firstly for devising marketing campaigns on an international basis and more recently as a long term Shell shareholder and critic of Shell senior management.
OCCASIONAL CONTRIBUTORS
Bill Campbell is the retired HSE Group Auditor of Shell International Petroleum Company. Bill is a well-known campaigner for safety on North Sea Production Platforms. His expert views have been cited in many news reports in the press and on TV.
Iain Percival is the retired Global Chief Petroleum Engineer of Shell International. Iain took the award for Outstanding Individual Achievement at the Energy Industry (EI) Annual Awards, for his work mentoring a number of young professionals, both in Shell and other organisations. Iain is currently spending time with students and staff at RGU and the University of Aberdeen and visits schools in his home area of the north of Scotland. Iain retired from Shell in 2006 after 33 years of service.
Professor Richard Steiner from July 1996 until Feb. 2010: Professor and Conservation Specialist – University of Alaska Marine Advisory Program (MAP), School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences, Anchorage, Alaska. Primary responsibility for University of Alaska’s Environmental Conservation Extension Mission. Feb. 2010: present: Conservation and Sustainability Consultant, Oasis Earth, Anchorage, Alaska – Conservation and sustainability consulting globally. Advise NGOs, governments, industry, and the public on environmental sustainability issues, including biodiversity and habitat protection, establishment of Citizens Advisory Councils to oversee resource development projects, extractive industry responsibility, energy and environment issues, Arctic issues, marine conservation, etc. Advised on Deepwater Horizon Gulf of Mexico disaster, Dalian oil spill in China, Bodo oil spill in Nigeria, extractive industry and environment issues in Africa, Central America, and South Pacific.
PAST CONTRIBUTORS
Dr John Huong former Royal Dutch Shell Production Geologist and Asset Manager. Worked for Shell in Malaysia for 27 years. Well known whistleblower buried by eight Royal Dutch Shell companies for several years in multiple High Court actions, including for alleged defamation. The various Shell companies unsuccessfully sought his imprisonment for alleged contempt of Court. Blew the whistle on Shell hydrocarbon reserves misrepresentation, which culminated in the Shell reserves scandal revealed in 2004. The securities fraud led to multimillion-dollar fines against Shell by the financial regulators and the forced resignations of the Royal Dutch Shell Group Chairman (Sir Philip Watts) and other executive directors.
Adam Groves has an MSc in Global Governance and Diplomacy from Oxford University and a BSc in International Relations from the University of Wales, Aberystwyth. He works for OneWorld UK, supporting their HIV/AIDs prevention work in Nigeria.
MISSION STATEMENT
royaldutchshellgroup.com is a free access website with no subscription charges
Our objectives are simple. We want Royal Dutch Shell executives to act at all times in accordance with Shell General Business Principles which include the claimed core principles of honesty, integrity, openness and respect for people in all of Shell’s dealings.
This is surely not an unreasonable ambition given that the principles were devised by Shell, are promoted by Shell and are supposedly current and binding on all Shell operations everywhere. In other words, we are only asking Shell executives to do what they already claim to be doing.
The plain fact is that if Shell executives had abided with the SGBP, scandals such as the reserves fraud involving blatant deceit and cover-up, the preventable Brent Bravo deaths which flowed from the Shell “Touch F*** All” safety culture on North Sea Platforms, and the more recent PR humiliations arising from outrageous examples of greenwash advertising, could not have occurred.
We do not believe that it is morally acceptable that Shell executives are indemnified so that even if they cheat, deceive and cover-up serious misdeeds, treating shareholders and the public as gullible fools, they are still able to walk away as winners. In the case of Sir Philip Watts, with a severance package/pension pot reportedly worth $18.5 million USD. We think that this is disgraceful situation at odds with all ethical norms including the SGBP and will continue to say so on this website.
The SGBP is being used as a PR tool to promote undeserved confidence in the scruples and honesty of Shell senior management. For example, the SGBP featured in the Form 20F Declarations filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission thereby generating confidence in the proven reserves volumes which had been inflated i.e. were false.
While Shell execs continue to make pledges of ethical trading which they flout, we will continue our humble efforts to expose their hypocrisy and we welcome the support of others who like us are not prepared to put up with such deception.
The gap between Shell rhetoric and reality is evidence from Shell’s appalling track record including a leadership role in price fixing cartels, numerous Clean Air Act violations, repeated environmental infringements, multimillion dollar fines for groundwater contamination, more fines for unauthorised venting and flaring of gas. We also have to add to this litany, Shell’s exploitation and reckless disregard of the safety of its employees and its global espionage operation against its own employees trying to prevent whistleblowers. Shell’s espionage activity in the USA and Nigeria have been exposed in 2010.
Shell employees in Africa protest against being sold by Shell
Examples from Wikipedia
Environmental Issues
Release of chemical pollutants at Shell Texas Deer Park complex
Emission violations at Shell Martinez refinery in California
Environmental infringements by Shell in Louisiana
Groundwater contamination by Shell in USA
Unauthorised venting and flaring of gas by Shell in USA
Shell Pipeline rupture in Washington
Environmental law infringements in Brazil
Refinery contamination in Texas
Oil Refinery in Durban
US Clean Air Act violations
Emission violations at Shell Wood River Refinery in Illinois
Shell settles Martinez Refinery dumping suit for $3 Million
Shell fined $19.75 million for oil spill from Martinez Refinery
Explosion at Shell Louisiana refinery
Pollution at Rocky Mountain Arsenal, Denver, Colorado
Safety Issues
- 1 Fatal explosion at Equilon Puget Sound Refinery
- 2 Developments in March 2007
- 3 Resolution of Shell safety problems may impact on CEO succession
- 4 The Brent Bravo accident and aftermath
- 5 Allegations made by Bill Campbell, former North Sea OIM & Group Auditor of Shell International
- 6 Concerns expressed by Bill Campbell
- 7 Offshore unions voice safety concerns over pending sale of Shell North Sea assets
- 8 Oil majors send safety chiefs to summit as criticisms mount
- 9 Health and Safety Executive partially uphold claims about Shell safety
- 10 February 2008 allegations of safety concerns over Shell North Sea rigs
- 11 Shell admits blame for near disaster at Merseyside Refinery
- 12Shell safety critical issues raised in March 2008
Controversies surrounding Royal Dutch Shell
- 1 Sanctions busting in Rhodesia
- 2 Corruption in Italy
- 3 Shell to Sea
- 4 $153.6 million damages for U.S. patent infringement
- 5 Jiffy Lube International
- 6 $2 million fine by UN for violation of embargo against Iraq
- 7 The Vietnam War
- 8 Nigeria
- 9 Darfur region of Sudan
- 10 Exchange Control speculation in Japan
- 11 Brent Spar
- 12 Tainted Shell gasoline in North America
- 13 Poor fuel supply problem at Manchester Airport
- 14 Retirement fund deficiencies in Malaysia
- 15 Oil and gas reserves recategorisation
- 16 Sakhalin
- 17 The Shell Foundation
- 18 Bonus schemes
- 19 Domain name oversight
- 20 Tell Shell Forum
- 21 Participation in price fixing cartels
- 22 Fictitious trades
- 23 False reporting, fictitious sales, manipulation of natural gas prices
- 24 Alleged Shell espionage
- 25 Iran
- 26 Nicaragua
- 27 Alaska
- 28 Safety
- 29 Iraq
- 30Change of early retirement scheme in Ethiopia
A head-cut image of Alfred Donovan (now deceased) appears courtesy of The Wall Street Journal.
Royal Dutch Shell conspired directly with Hitler, financed the Nazi Party, was anti-Semitic and sold out its own Dutch Jewish employees to the Nazis. Shell had a close relationship with the Nazis during and after the reign of Sir Henri Deterding, an ardent Nazi, and the founder and decades long leader of the Royal Dutch Shell Group. His burial ceremony, which had all the trappings of a state funeral, was held at his private estate in Mecklenburg, Germany. The spectacle (photographs below) included a funeral procession led by a horse drawn funeral hearse with senior Nazis officials and senior Royal Dutch Shell directors in attendance, Nazi salutes at the graveside, swastika banners on display and wreaths and personal tributes from Adolf Hitler and Reichsmarschall, Hermann Goring. Deterding was an honored associate and supporter of Hitler and a personal friend of Goring.
Deterding was the guest of Hitler during a four day summit meeting at Berchtesgaden. Sir Henri and Hitler both had ambitions on Russian oil fields. Only an honored personal guest would be rewarded with a private four day meeting at Hitler’s mountain top retreat.
IN JULY 2007, MR BILL CAMPBELL (ABOVE, A RETIRED GROUP AUDITOR OF SHELL INTERNATIONAL SENT AN EMAIL TO EVERY UK MP AND MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS: 
MORE DETAILS:
on Mar 3rd, 2015 at 17:12
Deceived as probably many others, I came across this website in search of information about Shell. What an incredibly naïve bunch trying to make out as if Shell is the (only) big evil doer in the world. Most of the accusations are just too selective. When Shell does business in South Africa they are propping up the apartheid-regime but no word about for instance the countless companies that by the same logic were propping up the Blair regime supporting the US in a totally illegal and unjustified war against Iraq. This just because the Americans had the urge to show the world after Sep 11 that they were still a powerful nation and Blair saw an opportunity to relive some gore and glory of the empire days by clinging onto the big American boot. With hundreds of thousands (mainly civilians) killed as a result and millions displaced/disowned/homeless and leaving a perfect vacuum for IS to fill, the murderous Bush/Blair regimes make apartheid pale into insignificance. Logically, Shell should therefore have to leave the UK and the US. Also, paying a government royalties for permits is not corruption because the politicians steal part of it – that is a problem for the electorate. In London and New York politicians and criminal financiers continuously swap places making all excessively wealthy. Blair is still collecting millions every year providing advice and influence to many companies, most notably CitiBank, making Blair a rather well rewarded war criminal. And the list goes on and on. Not sure why it should be the responsibility of Shell to put an end to all that or leave the country even more so as the British electorate chose not to do a thing about it. Missing sorely is your endorsement of countries clean enough to allow Shell a presence. To put so much effort in persecuting Shell is just too ridiculous for words and the arguments pathetically naïve and seem mainly aimed at the gullible and the uneducated. Wake up to the real world and cut the crap.
REPLY BY JOHN DONOVAN
What deception? Where does it say that we believe Shell is the only evil doer in the world? This website is focussed on Shell, not other brands, companies, countries or politicians. The clue is in the domain name.
on Jan 17th, 2014 at 14:28
Most of your contributors seem to have worked for Shell in the past. Seems to me that they were happy to take the money until they were released. Perhaps some unbiased contributors would be in a better position to discuss issues.
on Apr 23rd, 2010 at 22:22
Anyone in the London area interested in meeting to talk about some of the anti-corruption measurements Ban-Ki Moon suggested be implicit in the creation of new corporate companies. I feel that talking in person is often easier, safer and more honest than from behind a screen.
Please post again on this page with reply and details to get in touch (e-mail preferably) by the 30/4/10.
I’m particularly interested in this so called “impoverished pensioner”
Regards,
CMM
on Feb 12th, 2010 at 14:40
I think the story about the leaked directory is a total Non-event and am bored reading about it. Strongly suggest you just drop it John. There are far more important things to discuss
on Oct 15th, 2009 at 23:26
The dirty little secret of Shell’s reorganization
It comes under many guises and code words, it is hushed at the high levels, among VPs, and in the HR circles, it is not to be openly recognized, it is hidden behind a thin veneer of diversity and giving opportunities to the young. The little secret of this reorganization is blatant age discrimination. Nobody will admit to it, at least not in public, but the signs and its effects are clear: age, specifically the 55-year-old barrier, is the determining factor in appointments at the EC-1 and EC-2 levels, and it has been hinted as one of the main criteria in EC-3 decisions. The statistics are eloquent: from the over 55 population that applied to EC-1 and EC-2 positions, barely a couple people survived, and will probably be out before the middle of next year. The less experienced VP’s and HR people will admit that renewing the management ranks and giving way to youth are goals of the transition. As one review panel member put it in choosing an inexperienced younger person over a clearly more qualified but over the hill candidate for an EC-2 position, the younger person had “higher potential”. Or that people are strongly discouraged from applying to lower salary group positions to give opportunities to younger staff. In other words, over 55 need not apply. The unwritten goal of the transition seems to be to shed 10 years off the average manager’s age. I suppose that the US Equal Opportunity Commission, and its EC equivalent would take a grim view of this policy. It would be hard to find written evidence, but it can be shown that age discrimination exists by its effects, like the changes in age distribution before and after the transition, or the percentage of unsuccessful over 55 applicants. Some took early retirement, some simply gave up and sold out, but many were simply forced and eased out. I am surprised that the staff council in Holland has not picked up on this. I am surprised that the head of HR and the head of ethics and compliance would go along with this policy.
on Jun 20th, 2009 at 03:23
First of all, welcome Ann Pickard to Australia. We anxiously await your arrival and hope you are not another of the same kind as your predecessor, the popular name that appears in this blog now and then! Time will tell….
On your successor, I never worked with Ian Craig, but I would at this stage think he is the lucky product of an outdated Shell internal selection process! To put it bluntly, he is probably the better one among the worse in the pool of Shell “talents”! But, you never know, the Nigerian may love him so much to give him the opportunity to shine……Again we will closely monitor the production situation from Nigeria in the coming months.
The bottomline is NEW or OLD Shell you may like to call it, it is the god damned SAME Shell with the same blood – nothing is changed unfortunately!