Bid for Australia's Santos risks government veto over energy security
RURIKA IMAHASHI
SYDNEY -- The nearly $19 billion offer by a Middle Eastern-led consortium to buy Australia's Santos faces a risk of being blocked by the government over concerns about a leading energy company falling into foreign hands.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Mainichi
an hour ago
- The Mainichi
Japan to push firms' foray into Africa under new initiative
TOKYO (Kyodo) -- The Japanese government will announce a new initiative next week to expand investment in Africa, in cooperation with India and Middle Eastern countries, at an international conference on the high-potential continent, government sources said Thursday. At the three-day Tokyo International Conference on African Development, starting next Wednesday in Yokohama near Tokyo, Japan and African nations are also expected to agree to promote academic, industrial and governmental discussions to boost trade between the regions, the sources said. Amid China's growing influence in Africa through large financial contributions, Japan will stress its role as a "partner" in working with African states to address social challenges, including fostering industries, the sources said. At the TICAD gathering, the ninth since its launch in 1993, Japanese and African political leaders are set to discuss concrete measures to strengthen cooperation in the three key areas of "economy," "society" and "peace and stability." Under the "Indian Ocean and Africa" economic initiative, Tokyo will work with New Delhi to help Japanese companies, mainly those operating in India, tap into the African market. "In general, Japanese businesses that have already advanced to India tend to view Africa as a realistic target market," and supporting them will be an effective way to contribute to Africa's development, a source said, adding that Japanese firms in the Middle East have a similar tendency. Among other economic agenda items, Japan will promote a more proactive "offer-based" official development assistance policy, replacing its traditional "request-based" approach, with a focus on northern Mozambique, which has abundant natural resources and a good natural harbor, the sources said. Japan's push for digitalization in the medical field and demining efforts in Africa, in partnership with Cambodia, which cleared thousands of landmines from its decades-long civil war that ended in the early 1990s, are also likely to be among the topics, the sources said. The triennial conference will be co-chaired by Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and Angolan President Joao Lourenco, with more than 40 African nations expected to participate, according to government officials. Japan last hosted the TICAD talks in 2019.
Japan Today
3 days ago
- Japan Today
Japan's deepening political woes cloud budget, rate hike timing
Japanese Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru attends a joint press briefing with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen (not pictured) and European Council President Antonio Costa (not pictured), after their meeting at Prime Minister Office on July 23. By Takaya Yamaguchi and Leika Kihara Japan's deepening political uncertainty risks prolonging policy paralysis that could affect the drafting of next year's budget and the timing of the central bank's next interest rate hike, analysts say, clouding the outlook for the fragile economy. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba is facing increased calls from within his ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) to step down and take responsibility for the party's huge defeat in an upper house election in July and a lower house poll last year. While Ishiba has denied he has any plans to resign, his fading support has triggered inevitable questions about his political future and analysts say a leadership change would likely have implications for the outlook for fiscal and monetary policy. In a meeting on Friday, lawmakers decided to consider holding a rare leadership race even with the party head Ishiba still presiding. Under LDP rules, such a race would take place if the majority of the party's lawmakers and regional heads agreed to hold one. But it is uncertain how long it would take for the party to decide, according to lawmakers and government officials familiar with the procedure told Reuters. That contest could happen in September at the earliest, they say, which would allow the new administration to compile a spending package to cushion the economic blow from U.S. tariffs. But if the race does not take place in September, it may have to wait until early next year to avoid disrupting the government's drafting of next fiscal year's budget, they say. "We would not be surprised if the LDP calls for a leadership election in September," UBS analysts said in a research note. "It seems that uncertainties regarding politics are unlikely to resolve soon." In Japan, the Ministry of Finance collects spending requests from ministries in August and finalises the government's draft budget in late December. The budget must pass parliament in time to take effect from the April start of a new fiscal year. Failure to pass the budget through parliament would force the government to compile a stop-gap budget, which could hurt the economy by causing delays in expenditure. Some ruling party lawmakers say there is no choice but for Ishiba to step down to resolve the deadlock. Having lost control in both houses of parliament, the LDP-led ruling coalition needs opposition party support to pass legislation and budget through parliament. Opposition parties have ruled out forming a coalition unless Ishiba steps down. "Japan needs a stable coalition government. Otherwise, it's impossible to pursue consistent policies," LDP heavyweight Ken Saito told Reuters last week. "It's best for the LDP to seek a coalition partner under a new leader." COMPLICATION FOR BOJ Ishiba's weak political standing and prolonged political uncertainty also complicate the Bank of Japan's decision on how soon to resume interest rate hikes. While few analysts expect the BOJ to hike rates at its next policy meeting in September, some see a good chance of action in October, December or January next year when more data becomes available on the impact of U.S. tariffs on the economy. Known as a fiscal hawk, Ishiba has endorsed the central bank's efforts to gradually wean the economy off a decade-long, massive stimulus as inflation remains above its 2% target for well over three years. But his bitter election defeat has made his administration vulnerable to calls for big spending and loose monetary policy. Many opposition parties have urged the BOJ to hold off, or go slow, in raising rates and focus on supporting the economy. If the LDP were to hold a leadership race, the event could put the spotlight on the views of candidates like Sanae Takaichi, a reflationist-minded lawmaker who in the past blasted the idea of interest rate hikes as "stupid." All this could discourage the BOJ from raising rates in coming months to avoid drawing unwanted political attention. "All we can say is that we would continue to take appropriate policies to sustainably and stably achieve our 2% inflation target," Governor Kazuo Ueda told a news briefing earlier this month, when asked how the BOJ would respond if political changes lead to fresh demands on monetary policy. "It's impossible to predict how politics will unfold, which means for the BOJ it's best to take a wait-and-see stance," said a source familiar with the bank's thinking. © Thomson Reuters 2025.
Japan Today
6 days ago
- Japan Today
‘Go woke, go broke' is no longer true. Socially aware capitalism is the future of corporate responsibility
By Peter Underwood The phrase 'go woke, go broke' is often used by critics of corporate social responsibility. It implies that companies face a binary choice: embrace progressive values or pursue profit. But this dichotomy between 'wokeness' and capitalism is both simplistic and increasingly out of step with corporate reality. Many companies are learning to navigate a middle path. They are embedding social, environmental and ethical considerations into their business strategies – not in spite of profit, but because it contributes to long-term value creation. Understanding this shift – and the backlash to it – is fundamental to grasping modern corporate responsibility. Our research examines the growing tension between evolving 'woke' agendas within firms and the enduring demands of shareholder value, known as 'shareholder revanchism'. We explore this dynamic using academic Archie Carroll's Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility, where economic responsibility forms the foundation for higher legal, ethical and philanthropic obligations. Ultimately, we argue for a reassessment of the prevailing emphasis on shareholder profit and short-termism. Directors should adopt a more balanced approach when pursuing profit and discharging their duties. The illusion of choice The idea that directors must choose between shareholders and stakeholders – between profit and progressive causes – has deep roots in law and economics. For decades, shareholder primacy prevailed in global business. This principle was famously reinforced in court decisions such as the 1919 Dodge v Ford case in the United States. Henry Ford was found to have a duty to operate his company in the interests of shareholders. It was later popularised by Milton Friedman, who declared that 'the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits'. A stark example of this tension came with the ousting of Emmanuel Faber, chief executive of food giant Danone in 2021. Faber was accused by some shareholders of failing to 'strike the right balance between shareholder value creation and sustainability'. His critics felt he focused too much on people, the planet and social responsibility and not enough on profits. Yet corporate law has begun to evolve. In the United Kingdom, section 172 of the Companies Act 2006 still requires directors to promote the success of the company 'for the benefit of its members'. But the legislation also requires directors to consider employees, suppliers, communities and environmental outcomes. This model – sometimes termed 'enlightened shareholder value' – preserves profit as the goal, while recognizing that broader factors shape how it is achieved. New Zealand's brief experiment with section 131 of the Companies Act 1993, which allowed directors to consider environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors, is another example. The amendment was introduced under Labour before being revoked by the National-led coalition. Canada has a similar provision. The challenge of defining 'woke capitalism' The phrase 'woke capitalism' was popularised in a 2018 New York Times opinion piece about corporate activism. It originally described how firms were supporting progressive causes to attract younger, values-driven consumers – not out of altruism, but to strengthen brand appeal. In 2019, the US Business Roundtable – a group of 200 top chief executives – rejected shareholder primacy in favor of stakeholder governance. It pledged to run companies for the benefit of all stakeholders: customers, employees, suppliers, communities and shareholders. This followed a 2018 letter by Larry Fink, chairman of BlackRock, calling on firms to pursue a broader purpose and serve all their stakeholders. Yet corporate activism carries risks. Nike's campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick boosted sales but sparked backlash over the American football player's support for Black Lives Matter. Bud Light's brief partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney triggered boycotts. Gillette's 'toxic masculinity' campaign alienated many long-time customers. Jaguar's sales plunged after a rebrand was criticised as pandering. Even ice cream company Ben & Jerry's has clashed with parent company Unilever over the limits of its political expression. These examples show that progressive branding is not always rewarded – but nor is silence. Companies now risk criticism for failing to speak out on issues their stakeholders care about. It is clear consumers are increasingly attuned to corporate social responsibility. Creating value for everyone A central challenge in reconciling these tensions is the definition of profit itself. Traditional corporate law treats profit as the ultimate end of business activity. But scholars such as Edward Freeman argue that profit is a precondition for continuity – not an end in itself. As he puts it, profit to a company is like red blood cells to a human: essential for survival, but not the purpose of life. Under this view, profit becomes cyclical. It is a means of sustaining activity, not a fixed destination. This may seem open ended, but it avoids the fiction that companies ever reach a final 'profit goal'. Firms pursuing social impact are not abandoning capitalism; they are redefining it. In a polarized climate, 'woke capitalism' remains a lightning rod. But the supposed conflict between ethics and economics is a false one. Courts, lawmakers and firms alike are recognizing that social responsibility can support, rather than undermine, long-term value. Directors are no longer torn between duty and decency. They are navigating a broader understanding of corporate success – one in which 'wokeness' and capitalism are not opposing forces, but interdependent elements of a sustainable business strategy. This article is based on research completed with Dr Philip Gavin from the University College of London. Peter Underwood is Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau, New Zealand. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts. External Link © The Conversation
