LONDON, April 28 - State-backed Asian oil companies, scrambling to secure energy supplies overseas, should publish evidence of anti-corruption efforts to help ensure oil wealth is not wasted, Transparency International (TI) said on Monday.
The anti-corruption watchdog criticised China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC), China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC), India's Oil and Natural Gas Corp (ONGC) and Malaysia's Petronas [PETR.UL] for not disclosing information on anti-corruption efforts.
"Disclosure is relatively absent in the areas of payments and anti-corruption programmes, whether in terms of reporting on policy, management systems or performance," TI said of the state-backed companies.
The non-governmental organisation (NGO)'s 2008 report on "Revenue Transparency of Oil and Gas Companies" also criticised the companies for not fully disclosing payments to oil-producing countries.
And it said many Western oil majors, including the world's largest non-government controlled oil company by market value, Exxon Mobil (XOM.N: Quote, Profile, Research), were also weak in this area.
Chinese, and to a lesser extent Indian, oil companies have expanded their international footprint dramatically in recent years as they seek to secure energy supplies for booming domestic economies.
"I think that is not a balanced view," CNOOC Ltd. head of investor relations Xiao Zongwei said of the report. "If you look at our announcements and the code of conduct you will find that there are very strict policies" on corruption, he said.
CNOOC Ltd. is the listed unit of the CNOOC group, which handles most of the group's overseas business. CNPC, ONGC, Exxon and Petronas were not immediately available for comment.
CNPC, CNOOC and ONGC are active in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America, sometimes in countries, such as Sudan and Iran, where sanctions or investor and NGO pressure stops Western oil companies from operating.
China's willingness to offer generous financial packages to secure resources, without requiring commitments on good governance, has led to fears among some development campaigners that its growing presence may encourage corruption.
PUBLISH WHAT YOU PAY
Western oil majors such as Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSa.L: Quote, Profile, Research) were commended for having anti-corruption programmes, although TI did not verify actual performance on reducing or encouraging bribery.
TI said all oil companies should publish what they pay every country in upfront licensing payments or ongoing revenues and national oil companies and international oil majors both need to do more on this.
The western oil majors say they do not disclose payments to all countries because governments often oppose it.
In 2001, BP told transparency campaigners it would publish all payments to Angola and noted it had paid a signature bonus of $111 million for an Angolan oil block.
The Angolan state oil company responded with a threat to rescind the contract in a letter which was circulated to other western companies, according to Human Rights Watch.
However, TI said the fact Norwegian state oil company StatoilHydro now reported payments to Angola showed that companies could get around any hostility to openness.
The anti-corruption watchdog criticised China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC), China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC), India's Oil and Natural Gas Corp (ONGC) and Malaysia's Petronas [PETR.UL] for not disclosing information on anti-corruption efforts.
"Disclosure is relatively absent in the areas of payments and anti-corruption programmes, whether in terms of reporting on policy, management systems or performance," TI said of the state-backed companies.
The non-governmental organisation (NGO)'s 2008 report on "Revenue Transparency of Oil and Gas Companies" also criticised the companies for not fully disclosing payments to oil-producing countries.
And it said many Western oil majors, including the world's largest non-government controlled oil company by market value, Exxon Mobil (XOM.N: Quote, Profile, Research), were also weak in this area.
Chinese, and to a lesser extent Indian, oil companies have expanded their international footprint dramatically in recent years as they seek to secure energy supplies for booming domestic economies.
"I think that is not a balanced view," CNOOC Ltd. head of investor relations Xiao Zongwei said of the report. "If you look at our announcements and the code of conduct you will find that there are very strict policies" on corruption, he said.
CNOOC Ltd. is the listed unit of the CNOOC group, which handles most of the group's overseas business. CNPC, ONGC, Exxon and Petronas were not immediately available for comment.
CNPC, CNOOC and ONGC are active in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America, sometimes in countries, such as Sudan and Iran, where sanctions or investor and NGO pressure stops Western oil companies from operating.
China's willingness to offer generous financial packages to secure resources, without requiring commitments on good governance, has led to fears among some development campaigners that its growing presence may encourage corruption.
PUBLISH WHAT YOU PAY
Western oil majors such as Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSa.L: Quote, Profile, Research) were commended for having anti-corruption programmes, although TI did not verify actual performance on reducing or encouraging bribery.
TI said all oil companies should publish what they pay every country in upfront licensing payments or ongoing revenues and national oil companies and international oil majors both need to do more on this.
The western oil majors say they do not disclose payments to all countries because governments often oppose it.
In 2001, BP told transparency campaigners it would publish all payments to Angola and noted it had paid a signature bonus of $111 million for an Angolan oil block.
The Angolan state oil company responded with a threat to rescind the contract in a letter which was circulated to other western companies, according to Human Rights Watch.
However, TI said the fact Norwegian state oil company StatoilHydro now reported payments to Angola showed that companies could get around any hostility to openness.
