GSK's Chinese lesson

GlaxoSmithKline logo GSK says it is cooperating with authorities but has denied wrongdoing

GlaxoSmithKline's corporate defence against allegations that its people in China bribed hospitals, doctors and officials is that its board and head-office executives in London knew nothing.

Here is what GSK said about all this yesterday:

"We are deeply concerned and disappointed by these serious allegations of fraudulent behaviour and ethical misconduct by certain individuals at the company and third-party agencies.

"Such behaviour would be a clear breach of GSK's systems, governance procedures, values and standards... GSK shares the desire of the Chinese authorities to root out corruption.

"These allegations are shameful and we regret this has occurred."

Start Quote

There is a wider implication of all this, which is that maintaining ethical and legal standards in a sprawling global business appears to be a challenge (ahem) for a striking number of multinationals”

End Quote

You might call this the Murdoch defence, in that the media tycoon distanced himself from wrongdoing at his Sun and now-defunct News of the World newspapers (although the recent disclosure by Exaro of a private conversation he had with Sun journalists has been seen by many to have rather narrowed that distance).

It is not just a matter of pride and reputation for GSK that it will need to prove that its China-based executives were engaged in rogue, unauthorised behaviour when allegedly bunging £320m to doctors and officials to secure drug orders.

In both the US and UK, bribing officials to win business is a very serious offence indeed. And I am told that high on the list of GSK's priorities for the coming days is to explain to the Serious Fraud Office in Britain and the Department of Justice in Washington DC precisely what it thinks transpired (as far as it can glean).


The company is braced for fines in China. And, since it is fairly clear that the Chinese government is thinking about how to reform the structure and practices of its health service - especially how pharmaceuticals are procured and how much is paid for them - GSK is mulling whether it can make a gesture that would be seen to support such reforms.

There is a wider implication of all this, which is that maintaining ethical and legal standards in a sprawling global business appears to be a challenge (ahem) for a striking number of multinationals.

Apart from the lapses of Rupert Murdoch's UK newspapers, think about inadequate controls against money laundering at HSBC and Standard Chartered, safety lapses at BP, LIBOR manipulation at a handful of banks, alleged bribing connected to Rolls Royce, questions about how Barclays raised capital in the Middle East, the past scandal of commission payments at BAE Systems, and so on.

Big in business seems decreasingly beautiful.

Robert Peston Article written by Robert Peston Robert Peston Economics editor

How Labour pays for student fee cut

Labour would reduce tax relief for those earning £150,000 or more a year, shrink maximum pension pots to £1m and cut maximum annual pension contributions to £30,000 to pay for a cut to £6,000 in student fees.

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Robert


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 77.

    GSK got caught with their hands in the cookie jar! Others doing business have not yet. It is all nonsense that the upper management did not know 320 million pounds did not go in payments, that is either a lie or they are inept. I think it is the former.

  • rate this

    Comment number 76.

    This is really a matter of local management integrity and In my opinion it is still a big question mark for all big business joints that in spite of having lot regarding ethics and conduct, such type of events still happing around the business world, I think it will take still a long time till the race of being first finish.

  • rate this

    Comment number 75.

    “Bribery” is a relative term. Payments that are “bribery” in one country are simply gratuities in another. In some countries (including European countries) payments might be technically illegal but universally accepted as normal and a matter of good manners. Payments to powerful people may be entirely acceptable when made but become retrospectively illegal once their enemy is in charge.

  • rate this

    Comment number 74.

    If all competitors do the same things, you do not have too many choices.

  • rate this

    Comment number 73.

    I wonder why the UK SFO & US DOJ are getting involved in things that happen in China.
    Because the Bribery Act (UK) and the Corrupt Foreign Practices Act (US) apply globally.


Comments 5 of 77


Features & Analysis

  • Dana Lone HillDana Lone Hill

    The Native American names that break Facebook rules

  • Painting from Rothschild collectionDark arts Watch

    The 50-year fight to recover paintings looted by the Nazis

  • Mukesh SinghNo remorse

    Delhi bus rapist says victim shouldn't have fought back

  • Signposts showing the US and UK flagsAn ocean apart

    How British misunderstanding of the US is growing

From BBC Capital


  • Former al-Qaeda double agent Aimen DeanHARDtalk Watch

    Islamic State is about revenge says former al-Qaeda member turned spy Aimen Dean

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.