LETTER: Short-sighted at British Gas
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Lord Gillford
Sir: Richard Giordano is quick to assert that British Gas's "take-or- pay" contracts are "a legacy of a monopolistic era", when BG entered into contracts as a state monopoly in order to meet national supply obligations ("Thousands more Gas jobs at risk", 23 February). Quite ironically, British Gas is now calling for the Mergers and Monopolies Commission to conduct an inquiry into the matter.
At the time when Mr Giordano accepted the position of a non-executive director in 1993, BG's monopoly had already been broken, its share of the industrial market was in steady decline and plans to extend competition into the domestic market were well publicised. And yet, BG continued to purchase available gas production in the North Sea long after this time, even until the first quarter of 1994.
The real reason why BG finds itself in the current dilemma is because its highly paid executives failed to foresee the consequences of a combination of declining market share, a fall in prices and a gas glut.
If British Gas cannot find a way of addressing strategic errors of its own creation, without calling on the charity of other incidentally affected companies, then shareholders should find a new management that can.
Yours sincerely,
Gillford
London, SW1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments