In case a reminder is needed, my phrase ‘greedy bastards’ refers neither to a propensity to become obese nor to a readiness to pull the wings off butterflies or mug older and vulnerable citizens. Rather, it denotes the surfing, reflexive or otherwise, of a subset of social structures to one’s personal advantage. Chief among this subset are exploitative structures or relations of class and oppressive structures or relations of command (that is, of the state). The qualification ‘reflexive or otherwise’ recognises a broad spectrum of self-awareness; but it does not remove either causal or moral responsibility for the – intended or unintended – consequences of greedy bastards’ actions.
Philip May is portrayed as a thoroughly decent chap, a likeable ‘gentleman’, Theresa’s unassuming rock. Let’s explore this further, drawing on sources already in the public domain.
Philip was born in Norwich on 18 September 1957. His father, John, was a sales representative for a shoe wholesaler, and his mother, Joy, a French teacher. He grew up close to Liverpool and attended Calday Grange Grammar School in West Kirby. He went on the study history at Lincoln College, Oxford, and served as the Oxford Union Society’s President in 1979 (taking over this role from future Conservative MP Alan Duncan, and being succeeded by future journalist Michael Crick).
As if to confirm the salience of Oxbridge, Philip was introduced to fellow undergraduate Theresa Brasier by the future Prime Minister of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto at an Oxford University Conservative Party disco (maybe where Theresa first rehearsed her dance moves). They were said to have bonded over a shared love of cricket, and they married on 6 September 1980. For reasons of health they have not been able to have children. Throughout Theresa’s political career, and not least during her time as Prime Minister, Philip, himself a long-term Conservative activist and campaigner (he was briefly chair of the local Conservative Party association in Wimbledon), has acted as her ‘most trusted adviser’, if in an unofficial capacity.
On graduating from Oxford, Philip opted to build a career in finance. En route to his present post with Capital International/Group, which commenced in 2016, he was variously a fund manager for de Zoete & Bevan, Prudential Portfolio Managers and Deutsche Asset Management. His field, according to his LinkedIn profile, is pension fund and insurance relationship management.
When Theresa became the last candidate for the Conservative Party leadership, and destined to become PM, Philip’s employer issued a statement asserting that his job distanced him from investment decision-making: ‘he is not involved with, and doesn’t manage, money and is not a portfolio manager. His job is to ensure the clients are happy with the service and that we understand their goals.’ So that was ok then. He has continued his long-term habit of keeping his head down.
Things are not always as uncomplicated as they are painted, at least in some people’s eyes. Consider Philip’s employment – as a ‘senior executive’ – at Capital Group. This investment fund is one of the largest and most potent of extant global finanancial institutions. It controls $1.4 trillion in assets. Los Angeles based Capital Group’s portfolio apparently owns significant stakes in a heterogeneous assortment of companies, including investment bank JP Morgan Chase, defence giant Lockheed Martin, tobacco company Philip Morris International, the pharmaceutical sector’s Merck & Co, and Ryanair.
Philip works out of the company’s office in Mayfair. He is, to reiterate (this from an interview with The Independent): ‘a client relationship manager who stays in contact with organisations and institutions in the UK to ensure they are happy with the service being delivered by Capital Group and that we understand their goals. Philip is not involved with our investment research or portfolio management activities.’ So that’s ok.
A complication arose however when it was revealed in 2016 that Capital Group’s portfolio included $20 billion of shares in Amazon and Starbucks, both of which were cited – actually by PM-designate Theresa – in her pledge to crack down on tax avoidance. She said: ‘we need to talk about tax. It doesn’t matter to me whether you’re Amazon, Google or Starbucks: you have a duty to put something back, you have a debt to your fellow citizens, you have a responsibility to pay your taxes. So as Prime Minister, I will crack down on individual and corporate tax avoidance and evasion.’ Maybe she was unaware that her husband’s company was such a significant investor in Amazon and Starbucks (in fact, in March of 2016, Capital Group, through its various divisions and funds, including Capital World Investors and Capital Research Global Investors – these things can get very complicated – owned at least 32 million shares in Amazon, worth about $20 billion: its 6% stake made it one of Amazon’s biggest shareholders). It also owned about $2 billion of Starbucks shares. Other shareholdings included at least $7 billion in JP Morgan Chase, $9 billion in Philip Morris International, $5 billion in McDonald’s, $6.6 billion in Lockhead Martin, and $1.5 billion in Rynair.
When the ‘Paradise Papers’ hit the headlines, Capital Group was among the companies accused of arranging investments in tax havens (scores of the UK’s super-rich were exposed as investing their money abroad to avoid paying their tax bills). Maybe, as Peston once hypothesised, they thought society’s social infrastructure – security, welfare, health care, housing, schooling, policing etc – were delivered ‘by the fairies’? The Labour Party, via Jeremy Corbyn and Jon Trickett, queried (a) Theresa’s commitment and policy intent, and (b) Philip’s role with Capital Group. Private Eye suggested that Capital Group uses the offshore law firm, Appleby, to arrange investments in tax havens. It is claimed that Capital Group’s Cayman Island funds and Bermuda investments are channeled through a South American agricultural company; both are offshore jurisdictions, known for zero rates of tax. When asked to comment, Theresa May’s spokesperson said: ‘Neither the Prime Minister nor Mr May have any direct offshore investments … Their investments have been declared to the Cabinet Office and are held in a blind trust.’ So that’s ok. Or is it? The key words here are ‘direct’ and ‘blind’. Their investments are carried out through third-party companies. Blind investments are truly unseen, but politicians, it is often said, place their personal assets in blind trusts to avoid public scrutiny and accusations of conflicts of interest.
It might, and has, also been noted that Theresa May’s military policies have indirectly enriched her husband and herself. Capital Group is the second largest shareholder in Lockheed Martin – which, a reminder, is a US military arms firm that supplies weapons systems, aircraft and logistical support. Its shares ‘rocketed’ in the wake of the air strikes on Syria. It has also been reported that BAE Systems, a British multinational defence, security and aerospace company, did very well out of the UK-US-France allied airstrikes during the Syrian conflict. Theresa May sanctioned the UK’s military strikes, leading to the firing of eight ‘Storm-Shadow’ missiles at an alleged chemical weapons facility, each of which cost £790,000 (totaling £6.2 million). The missiles were manufactured by BAE Systems. The Conservative-BAE links are deep. It is not just that Philip May’s company, Capital Group, is the largest shareholder in BAE Systems. George Osborne, former Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and current editor-in-chief at the Evening Standard, is also employed by Black Rock, which is the fifth largest shareholder in BAE Systems.
Note that it is not necessary to write about ‘conspiracies’ here. Rather, what American sociologist C W Mills called a ‘tacit understanding’ rooted in common patterns of class and elite socialisation generally gets the job done. Most greedy bastards are of course capable of conspiring. They just need to do so less frequently than is commonly assumed.
It is reasonable to maintain that Philip is not a category-one greedy bastard (there are degrees of culpability). If dirty work is done, he is not charged by Capital Group to do it: he merely pours oil on any troubled waters. Nor is the member of the Conservative Government, for all that he is Theresa’s closest and most trusted personal adviser. However, it is difficult for us to believe in/fall for his non-reflexivity or to trust either partner in this relationship. Their assets are hidden, squirelled away from transparency and scrutiny. Possibly Theresa, and Capital Group too, have ignored Philip’s pleas to act against unethical investments and the use of tax havens. Certainly Theresa May’s record of policy initiatives and voting in the Commons betrays an amoral, unprincipled obduracy that characterised her time at the Home Office as well as in her post as Prime Minister. If the current governing oligarchy or plutocracy could be charged with ‘oligarchic/plutocratic woman-slaughter’, she would make an excellent test case. Yes, Theresa May’s face will fit well with this new series of blogs, and her time will surely come.
So perhaps Philip has been banging his head against the wall. Probably not. It is precisely the – let’s take a wild guess, very well remunerated – Philips of this distorted, corrupted world of neoliberal ideology and financial capitalism that are required to afford back-up and cover for the ‘hard core’, the ‘big hitters’, of the largely transnational, capitalist executive that buy their way into the power elite at the apex of the national government of the UK (and elsewhere). Greedy bastards come in different shapes and sizes.