SM
Thanks for that, I had almost forgotten some of those excellent websites you pointed out such as Royal Dutch Shell which do indeed give an excellent overview of Smell 
Shell North Sea History of Safety Violations and Blackmail
I hadn't realised that NEITI was a Smell initiative. Of course Global EITI had been around for some while before it was adopted in Nigeria, because it's more widely publicised as an initiative of that paragon of transparency, President Olusegun Obasanjo
The government of President Olusegun Obasanjo domesticated it with the formation of The Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI) in 2004. Thereafter, the Nigeria Extractive Initiative (NEITI) bill was sent to the National Assembly in December that year. However, it was not passed into law until May 28, 2007, just a day before that administration exited.
Former Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo sought partners in China, India, South Korea and elsewhere to buy oil blocks before leaving office in 2007 in return for billions of dollars of infrastructure and downstream investment.
But not a single barrel of oil has been produced by Asian national oil companies in Nigeria nor has any downstream commitment been started, leaving the Nigerian economy with no tangible benefit, the London-based organization said.
"President Obasanjo's stated grand design to achieve a 'development dividend' through the oil-for-infrastructure scheme with Asian national oil companies has fallen apart," it said.
"With it went the impact that it might have made on the Nigerian landscape," Chatham House said in a 60-page report.
Five decades of oil extraction in Africa's most populous country have enriched a small elite, but the vast majority of the country's 140 million people still live on two dollars a day or less.
Chatham House blamed the lack of progress on political interference in what should have been purely business decisions.
"The scale of the corruption, mismanagement and non-execution of projects in the Obasanjo years has sent shockwaves through Nigeria," the report said.
At least it's good to know that Tony Blair, that pillock of the community and well known sleaze-fighter gave it his imprimatur
Public life is so corrupt I fear no one can clean up Blair's legacy of sleaze
By PETER OBORNE
Last updated at 1:13 AM on 24th March 2010
Fortune: Tony Blair tried to keep the public in the dark over his dealings with South Korean oil firm UI Energy Corporation
Only a generation ago, Britain was rightly famed throughout the world for the high standards of integrity, decency and probity in our public life.
Our civil servants did not take bribes - in sharp contrast to the deplorable conduct of officials across most of Europe, Africa and beyond.
And our politicians were keenly conscious of the distinction between public service and private greed. They did not go into government to make a fortune.
On the contrary, with a few benighted exceptions - such as Conservative Cabinet minister Jonathan Aitken, who was jailed for perjury - they were driven by a fierce belief in public duty.
But over the past 13 years, British public life has undergone a terrible deterioration. As the Commons expenses scandal so graphically demonstrates, MPs today think nothing of extorting money from the taxpayer.
Meanwhile, former ministers shamelessly profit from office by making ruthless use of their contacts.
And the office of Prime Minister, instead of being the ultimate ambition for every aspiring MP, is now seen as a stepping stone for joining the super-rich.
The great historian A.J.P. Taylor once remarked that David Lloyd George, who led Britain during World War I, was the first Prime Minister since the notoriously corrupt Sir Robert Walpole in the 18th century to make money as a direct consequence of holding high office.
But in the league of shame, Tony Blair is arguably the worst of them all.
We now know that the wretched Blair has multiplied his personal fortune many times over by trading off the connections he made while in Downing Street.
Shockingly, he fought a long battle to conceal the source of his new-found wealth, and only this month did it finally become public that one of his largest clients was a South Korean oil company, the UI Energy Corporation, with extensive interests in Iraq.
Since he has also made £1million from advising the Kuwaiti royal family, it can be fairly claimed that Blair has profiteered as a result of the Iraq War in which so many hundreds of thousands of people died - including, of course, many British servicemen.
In all, Blair is thought to have made some £20million since leaving Downing Street in July 2007.
NEITI really doesn't seem to have been too successful so far does it?
NEITI is mandated by law to promote transparency and accountability in the management of Nigeria's oil, gas and mining revenues.
But its latest report is a sad tale on the part of its stakeholders. The report on 2005 audits on the extractive industries in Nigeria released recently indicted the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR), Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), the oil companies and Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) of inadequate and controversial disclosures.
For example, according to The Executive Secretary of NEITI, Haruna Yunusa Sa'eed, DPR provided production data that differed from the data provided by the oil companies. In most instances, the company data appeared to be more consistent with other data obtained. The department could not even resolve a glaring disagreement between Shell and Chevron about the amount of Chevron production piped to Bonny Terminal during July-November 2005.
The report shows that the CBN did not record some Petroleum Profit Tax (PPT) payments by oil companies, amounting to $241 million net difference while there are discrepancies in the revenues that oil companies paid to the NDDC and the one declared by the commission itself.
It also reveals that the CBN recorded higher receipts than the ones made by Nigeria Agip Oil Company (NAOC), Phillips and Continental while it did not report the reserves Additional Bonus by the NAOC. Also, the PPT payment for the year by five oil companies namely Brass Exploration, Pan Ocean, Phillips, Conoil and Continental could not be located on CBN template.
And that: "The CBN recorded higher receipts than the ones made by Amni, Elf, and NAOC, while it recorded higher receipts (net) than the ones made by Conoil, Moni Pulo, Panocean Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC), Philips and Elf."
We had thought that since NEITI is backed by law, it could enforce compliance, reconcile conflicting data and sanction erring stakeholders. But as the 2005 report suggests, there is total disorder.
That is embarrassing. At the country's level of development, there is no excuse for its inability to account for the crude oil and gas production and exports. As discovered by the various consultants that have probed the operations of the oil sector, huge sums of money and petroleum products are still unaccounted for.
Really we are worried that NEITI, may not be able to effectively tackle some of the secretive stakeholders . For proper sanitization of the industry, NEITI and the other supervisors and regulators, notably the NNPC, DPR, Federal Ministry of Petroleum Resources and the Federal Ministry of Finance should be properly resourced and equipped.
NEITI itself should demonstrate its ability to do its job convincingly. We wonder why a 2005 report would be presented in 2010. That is unscientific and the data it provides are unlikely to be very reliable.
We suggest a sea change in the attitudes of all the stakeholders. If that requires a review of the NEITI Act 2007, it should be done without delay. No price is too much to pay for healthy accounting and the creation of a culture of due process in an environment that is riddled with corruption at the moment. Happily, we have enough models in other oil producing countries to follow.
The government must now prove that it can initiate and prosecute institutional decency required in the spirit of the NEITI Act and transparency in the oil sector.
As everything is so transparent in Shell, can you direct me to the bit where it says that if it suits those aviation advisors who are trying to recruit the people they want to be flying for a new company in the Management of Change to a futureristic new company will allow another operating those S-76s, with their 1979 certification standards to operate next week without complying with the Shell requirement to be fitted with IHUMS