British arms firms forced to improve ethics, claim critics

Transparency International UK found that all 10 British companies included in its Defence Companies Anti-Corruption Index met the three highest bands of ethical standards

An unmanned Taranis drone (nicknamed Raptor) in front of a piloted fighter jet (BAE Systems)

The Bribery Act has forced British defence companies to improve their ethical standards above rivals in France, Germany and the US, according to a group that has been typically critical of their anti-corruption practices.

Transparency International UK found that all 10 British companies included in its Defence Companies Anti-Corruption Index, including BAE Systems and GKN, met the three highest bands of ethical standards.

This was a huge improvement on the 2012 findings. For example, Babcock International improved from a grade D to B, and Ultra Electronics is now a B, having been rated E before. Those rated a C were found to have shown “moderate” evidence of anti-corruption programmes; the lowest grade is F.

TI UK’s project officer Katie Fish said the firms had probably improved because they had adapted to the Bribery Act 2010. This enforced strict anti-corruption measures, such as placing strict liability on companies if they fail to prevent bribes being given on their behalf.

Ms Fish said that the UK average was now higher than German and French firms, which were both found to have firms whose practices were called into question. However, some of these might have superior standards that they operate in practice, but do not wish to reveal.

Looking at 163 companies from 47 countries, Ms Fish said that two-thirds of them “show little evidence of having ethics and anti-corruption programmes in place”. Only eight defence contractors around the world showed evidence of whistleblowing mechanisms to encourage staff to report concerns, and just 13 were proven to take out due diligence on their agents.

Several US firms rated in the bottom F band.