Thanks for those links Protagoras.

Those articles certainly give pause for thought. Just when you think we are learning as a civilisation, bingo - there we go again.

Hello again, "Larry Luddite" back reporting but this time on the world's worst corporate citizen.

Following is a link on the latest scientific evaluation of glyphosate (Roundup formulations) soon to be used on large scale field trials for commercial food crops in WA, despite a parliamentary vote banning GM crops. Victoria and New South Wales lifted a GM crop ban last year.

One generally remains indifferent to the adverse findings on glyphosate when published by organic consumer agencies, however, the latest independent scientific report is cause for concern:

"We have evaluated the toxicity of four glyphosate (G)-based herbicides in Roundup formulations, from 10(5) times dilutions, on three different human cell types. This dilution level is far below agricultural recommendations and corresponds to low levels of residues in food or feed.

"All R formulations cause total cell death within 24 h, through an inhibition of the mitochondrial succinate dehydrogenase activity, and necrosis, by release of cytosolic adenylate kinase measuring membrane damage. They also induce apoptosis via activation of enzymatic caspases 3/7 activity."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19105591?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/04/07/Monsantos-Roundup-Residues-in-GM-Food-Cause-Cell-Damage.aspx"

Our parliamentary representatives have short memories. With emerging new evidence, more prudent nations are adhering to bans on GM crops however, there appears to be no universal understanding of corporate social responsibility, which apparently means different things to different governments. Our governments have again fallen prey to the shoddy corporations which are held responsible for the planet's worst environmental disasters.

I suspect the Pandora box of Monsanto's environmental ills will continue to plague Australia's fragile biodiversity. And what would we have to lose if we told Monsanto to get lost?

"Food-Health-Hope" is Monsanto's motto but for whom? Can we expect to see yet another poison on a platter, force-fed to a nation because of weak governance and a ruthless quest for corporate profits?

I more-or-less agree with foxy's list, but I　don't think pacific brands deserves to be on it.

They did what they had to. As for the whole issue of the CEO's pay, it wasn't a simple pay hike, she actually changed job. Sure, it was too high, but pacific brands just became the focal point of the economic crisis. There were and are much worse corporate players out there, they just didn't have the unlucky timing of pacific brands who had extraordinarily bad timing.

It was the equity firms who bought into pacific brands, leveraged it to the hilt, took out unsustainable debt, glossed over it all with a new look and new market demographic, then sold their way out with massive profits, who deserve to be drawn and quartered.

It's these equity parasites who deserve to be on these lists. They don't actually contribute anything to society. Love or hate PJ O'Rourke, his recent piece in The Australian did a good job of highlighting the fact that capitalism is a good system, but it needs to be predicated on benefits to society.
If equity firms were an animal, they would be vultures.

If you want to see some really shocking corporate behaviour, I've been a fan of this website for a long time. They do damn good work and must be one of the most courageous and honest news providers out there:

http://www.corpwatch.org/

For example, there's an interesting piece on Xstrata vs aboriginal groups in the NT:

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=15297

I don't necessarily oppose the Xstrate project, but it's interesting reading anyhow.

It's an utterly brilliant site. One of the best ones around, because it covers the uncomfortable and unprofitable news.