Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 97115 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
ETRD EAGR ETTC EAID ECON EFIN ECIN EINV ELAB EAIR ENRG EPET EWWT ECPS EIND EMIN ELTN EC ETMIN EUC EZ ET ELECTIONS ENVR EU EUN EG EINT ER ECONOMICS ES EMS ENIV EEB EN ECE ECOSOC EK ENVIRONMENT EFIS EI EWT ENGRD ECPSN EXIM EIAD ERIN ECPC EDEV ENGY ECTRD EPA ESTH ECCT EINVECON ENGR ERTD EUR EAP EWWC ELTD EL EXIMOPIC EXTERNAL ETRDEC ESCAP ECO EGAD ELNT ECONOMIC ENV ETRN EIAR EUMEM ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID EREL ECOM ECONETRDEAGRJA ETCC ETRG ECONOMY EMED ETR ENERG EITC EFINOECD EURM EENG ERA EXPORT ENRD ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EGEN EBRD EVIN ETRAD ECOWAS EFTA ECONETRDBESPAR EGOVSY EPIN EID ECONENRG EDRC ESENV ETT EB ENER ELTNSNAR ECHEVARRIA ETRC EPIT EDUC ESA EFI ENRGY ESCI EE EAIDXMXAXBXFFR EETC ECIP EIAID EIVN EBEXP ESTN EING EGOV ETRA EPETEIND ELAN ETRDGK EAIDRW ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC ENVI ELN EAG EPCS EPRT EPTED ETRB EUM EAIDS EFIC EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM EAIDAR ESF EIDN ELAM EDU EV EAIDAF ECN EDA EXBS EINTECPS ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ EPREL EAC EINVEFIN ETA EAGER EINDIR ECA ECLAC ELAP EITI EUCOM ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID EARG ELDIN EINVKSCA ENNP EFINECONCS EFINTS ECCP ETC EAIRASECCASCID EINN ETRP EAIDNI EFQ ECOQKPKO EGPHUM EBUD ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ ENERGY ELB EINDETRD EMI ECONEFIN EIB EURN ETRDEINVTINTCS EIN EFIM ETIO ELAINE EMN EATO EWTR EIPR EINVETC ETTD ETDR EIQ ECONCS EPPD ENRGIZ EISL ESPINOSA ELEC EAIG ESLCO EUREM ENTG ERD EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ECINECONCS ETRO ETRDECONWTOCS ECUN EFND EPECO EAIRECONRP ERGR ETRDPGOV ECPN ENRGMO EPWR EET EAIS EAGRE EDUARDO EAGRRP EAIDPHUMPRELUG EICN ECONQH EVN EGHG ELBR EINF EAIDHO EENV ETEX ERNG ED
KMDR KPAO KPKO KJUS KCRM KGHG KFRD KWMN KDEM KTFN KHIV KGIC KIDE KSCA KNNP KHUM KIPR KSUM KISL KIRF KCOR KRCM KPAL KWBG KN KS KOMC KSEP KFLU KPWR KTIA KSEO KMPI KHLS KICC KSTH KMCA KVPR KPRM KE KU KZ KFLO KSAF KTIP KTEX KBCT KOCI KOLY KOR KAWC KACT KUNR KTDB KSTC KLIG KSKN KNN KCFE KCIP KGHA KHDP KPOW KUNC KDRL KV KPREL KCRS KPOL KRVC KRIM KGIT KWIR KT KIRC KOMO KRFD KUWAIT KG KFIN KSCI KTFIN KFTN KGOV KPRV KSAC KGIV KCRIM KPIR KSOC KBIO KW KGLB KMWN KPO KFSC KSEAO KSTCPL KSI KPRP KREC KFPC KUNH KCSA KMRS KNDP KR KICCPUR KPPAO KCSY KTBT KCIS KNEP KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNNB KGCC KINR KPOP KMFO KENV KNAR KVIR KDRG KDMR KFCE KNAO KDEN KGCN KICA KIMMITT KMCC KLFU KMSG KSEC KUM KCUL KMNP KSMT KCOM KOMCSG KSPR KPMI KRAD KIND KCRP KAUST KWAWC KTER KCHG KRDP KPAS KITA KTSC KPAOPREL KWGB KIRP KJUST KMIG KLAB KTFR KSEI KSTT KAPO KSTS KLSO KWNN KPOA KHSA KNPP KPAONZ KBTS KWWW KY KJRE KPAOKMDRKE KCRCM KSCS KWMNCI KESO KWUN KPLS KIIP KEDEM KPAOY KRIF KGICKS KREF KTRD KFRDSOCIRO KTAO KJU KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KEN KO KNEI KEMR KKIV KEAI KWAC KRCIM KWCI KFIU KWIC KCORR KOMS KNNO KPAI KBWG KTTB KTBD KTIALG KILS KFEM KTDM KESS KNUC KPA KOMCCO KCEM KRCS KWBGSY KNPPIS KNNPMNUC KWN KERG KLTN KALM KCCP KSUMPHUM KREL KGH KLIP KTLA KAWK KWMM KVRP KVRC KAID KSLG KDEMK KX KIF KNPR KCFC KFTFN KTFM KPDD KCERS KMOC KDEMAF KMEPI KEMS KDRM KEPREL KBTR KEDU KNP KIRL KNNR KMPT KISLPINR KTPN KA KJUSTH KPIN KDEV KTDD KAKA KFRP KWNM KTSD KINL KJUSKUNR KWWMN KECF KWBC KPRO KVBL KOM KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KEDM KFLD KLPM KRGY KNNF KICR KIFR KM KWMNCS KAWS KLAP KPAK KDDG KCGC KID KNSD KMPF KPFO KDP KCMR KRMS KNPT KNNNP KTIAPARM KDTB KNUP KPGOV KNAP KNNC KUK KSRE KREISLER KIVP KQ KTIAEUN KPALAOIS KRM KISLAO KWM KFLOA
PHUM PINR PTER PGOV PREL PREF PL PM PHSA PE PARM PINS PK PUNE PO PALESTINIAN PU PBTS PROP PTBS POL POLI PA PGOVZI POLMIL POLITICAL PARTIES POLM PD POLITICS POLICY PAS PMIL PINT PNAT PV PKO PPOL PERSONS PING PBIO PH PETR PARMS PRES PCON PETERS PRELBR PT PLAB PP PAK PDEM PKPA PSOCI PF PLO PTERM PJUS PSOE PELOSI PROPERTY PGOVPREL PARP PRL PNIR PHUMKPAL PG PREZ PGIC PBOV PAO PKK PROV PHSAK PHUMPREL PROTECTION PGOVBL PSI PRELPK PGOVENRG PUM PRELKPKO PATTY PSOC PRIVATIZATION PRELSP PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PMIG PREC PAIGH PROG PSHA PARK PETER POG PHUS PPREL PS PTERPREL PRELPGOV POV PKPO PGOVECON POUS PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PWBG PMAR PREM PAR PNR PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PARMIR PGOVGM PHUH PARTM PN PRE PTE PY POLUN PPEL PDOV PGOVSOCI PIRF PGOVPM PBST PRELEVU PGOR PBTSRU PRM PRELKPAOIZ PGVO PERL PGOC PAGR PMIN PHUMR PVIP PPD PGV PRAM PINL PKPAL PTERE PGOF PINO PHAS PODC PRHUM PHUMA PREO PPA PEPFAR PGO PRGOV PAC PRESL PORG PKFK PEPR PRELP PREFA PNG PGOVPHUMKPAO PRELECON PINOCHET PFOR PGOVLO PHUMBA PRELC PREK PHUME PHJM POLINT PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PGOVE PHALANAGE PARTY PECON PEACE PROCESS PLN PRELSW PAHO PEDRO PRELA PASS PPAO PGPV PNUM PCUL PGGV PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PGIV PRFE POGOV PEL PBT PAMQ PINF PSEPC POSTS PHUMPGOV PVOV PHSAPREL PROLIFERATION PENA PRELTBIOBA PIN PRELL PGOVPTER PHAM PHYTRP PTEL PTERPGOV PHARM PROTESTS PRELAF PKBL PRELKPAO PKNP PARMP PHUML PFOV PERM PUOS PRELGOV PHUMPTER PARAGRAPH PERURENA PBTSEWWT PCI PETROL PINSO PINSCE PQL PEREZ PBS

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 07LONDON2587, DFID'S "COST" INITIATIVE: MORE QUESTIONS THAN

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #07LONDON2587.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
07LONDON2587 2007-07-06 09:06 2011-08-25 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Embassy London
VZCZCXRO4748
RR RUEHRN
DE RUEHLO #2587/01 1870906
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 060906Z JUL 07
FM AMEMBASSY LONDON
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4311
INFO RUEHSS/OECD POSTS COLLECTIVE
RUEHNY/AMEMBASSY OSLO 0716
RUEHHI/AMEMBASSY HANOI 0052
RUEHDR/AMEMBASSY DAR ES SALAAM 0128
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 0948
RUEHLMC/MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE CORPORATION WASHINGTON DC
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 1156
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 LONDON 002587 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
EEB/IFD/OMA FOR ABESMER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ECON EIND ETRD EFIN PINS KCOR UK
SUBJECT: DFID'S "COST" INITIATIVE: MORE QUESTIONS THAN 
ANSWERS 
 
REF: SECSTATE 84287 
 
LONDON 00002587  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
1. (SBU) Summary: Participants from government, industry and 
the private sector agreed that transparency is a concern in 
the construction sector but questioned the value added by 
DFID's Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST). 
Econoff raised reftel concerns widely at a June 20, DFID- 
hosted informational meeting to gather support for the 
initiative.  DFID plans to incorporate participants' feedback 
in an updated project outline that will form the basis for 
interested countries to press forward with pilot programs in 
the fall that will determine if the initiative is viable. 
The UK announced at the meeting that it would be one of the 
pilot countries.  Vietnam and Tanzania also showed interest. 
End Summary. 
 
------------------- 
The CoST Initiative 
------------------- 
 
2. (U) DFID created this initiative to improve transparency, 
and thereby reduce opportunities for corruption, in the 
construction sector.  DFID argued that some progress has been 
made to improve transparency and accountability in 
international tendering, but this initiative is needed to 
help in the post-contract period.  CoST seeks to build upon 
the "success" of the Extractive Industries Transparency 
Initiative (EITI), under which companies and governments in 
the extractive industries publish what they pay/get for these 
resources. 
 
3. (U) DFID argued that CoST differs from existing 
anti-corruption initiatives since it brings in a 
multi-stakeholder approach (governments, companies, civil 
society).  Further, a sectoral approach is necessary because 
issues differ by sector.  Construction is a sector countries 
and the development banks recognize has great problems. 
Finally, CoST involves downstream transactions that are not 
currently addressed through multilateral agreements. 
 
------------------------ 
Questions and Challenges 
------------------------ 
 
4. (U) Discussions at the June 20 meeting raised more 
questions than answers.  The group of government 
representatives from countries considering piloting the 
initiative questioned the boundaries of the initiative ) 
which construction contracts would be covered and how would 
the initiative mesh with existing country policies and 
structures?  They also questioned the extent of financial 
disclosures that would be required and the process of 
implementation (e.g. at country level, what is the 
appropriate level of authority for the review group within 
the government?). 
 
5. (U) The construction industry group focused on the 
potential costs of the initiative and questioned the capacity 
of governments and the construction sector to implement the 
initiative.  They wanted to make sure the initiative did not 
duplicate existing structures or delay construction projects. 
 They also questioned the level of authority of the review 
group and if information disclosed as part of CoST could be 
used as evidence during contract disputes.  If implemented, 
the industry group thought the oversight group should be 
independent and have influence, but their material should not 
be used for audits or prosecutions. 
 
6. (SBU) Potential donors echoed reftel concerns both during 
the breakout session and, individually, on the margins of the 
meeting.  They sought more definition of the objectives of 
the initiative (e.g. how does increased transparency 
translate into less corruption?).  They questioned the value 
added of the initiative and were concerned that the 
initiative would divert attention, funds, and human resources 
from existing initiatives.  In terms of implementation, they 
challenged countries' capacity to carry out the initiative 
and the complicated structure of the proposed review 
mechanism.  Econoff urged pursuing CoST's goals through 
existing anti-corruption and transparency initiatives within 
the WTO and the UN Convention on Anti-Corruption.  While many 
 
LONDON 00002587  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
agreed duplication was a concern, none were familiar enough 
with these organizations to assess the viability of this 
suggestion in practice. 
 
------------------ 
DFID's Perspective 
------------------ 
 
7. (SBU) Econoff met with Mary Hunt, Policy Analyst in DFID's 
Business Alliances Team (responsible for CoST), in advance of 
the June 20 meeting.  In response to reftel points, Hunt 
recognized some of the challenges of CoST, but argued that 
the point of the pilots was to determine if the initiative is 
viable.  Hunt agreed that there are far more companies and 
countries involved in construction than was the case for 
EITI, but responded that only interested countries would 
participate.  She concurred that building new international 
structures is cumbersome, but argued that current 
anti-corruption agreements have not led to better outcomes, 
and it is envisioned that the initiative would only need to 
run for a couple years until its concepts are accepted as the 
norm.  Finally, there would likely be costs to donors similar 
to those for EITI.  Hunt's overall argument in response to 
reftel concerns was that CoST is still in the very early 
stages, so it should continue to be developed and tested via 
pilots before deciding if there is sufficient international 
interest to pursue it further. 
 
8. (SBU) The UK announced at the June 20 meeting that it 
would be one of the pilot countries.  It remains unclear 
which UK government agency will lead this process, which 
companies will participate, or what types of information will 
be disclosed.  Ben Mellor, Head of Director's Office for East 
and Central Africa at DFID told EconOff that DFID would like 
the UK pilot to be applied to construction projects related 
to the 2012 London Olympics, but this may prove too difficult 
to do within HMG. 
 
9. (SBU) Hunt was open to the idea of working with other 
organizations seeking to achieve the same goals as CoST, but 
she viewed CoST as a way to help countries fulfill 
transparency commitments made in large international fora, 
rather than these agreements providing the impetus to get 
countries to improve transparency in construction.  She 
asked: (1) What specifically do UNCAC and WTO do to encourage 
transparency in procurement? (2) How do these initiatives 
lead to better outcomes at the country level? (3) Is there 
anything specifically focused on implementation of 
construction projects?; and (4) Is there any flexibility 
within these structures to employ the multi-stakeholder 
approach? 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
10. (SBU) While there was wide skepticism of the viability 
and usefulness of this initiative, meeting participants 
agreed with the goal and were generally willing to let DFID 
try out the proposal in the pilot countries.  None offered 
financial support for this endeavor, however, and DFID made a 
point of leaving the discussion of costs for future meetings. 
 DFID participants did say that DFID plans to provide some 
funding.  The UK decision to implement a CoST pilot program 
in the UK could demonstrate the viability ) or lack thereof 
) of this initiative most quickly.  The UK will need to 
address the host of practical questions raised in order to 
carry out its own pilot.  If successful, this could provide a 
guide for other countries with less institutional capacity. 
 
Visit London's Classified Website: 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/london/index. cfm 
TUTTLE