What Does McKinsey Have To Do To Make A Few Tens Or Hundreds Of Millions Of Dollars Around Here?

Having its involvement with ICE publicized is so not what the consulting giant needs right now.
Author:
Updated:
Original:
 Not this, apparently.

Not this, apparently.

It’s hard being a giant consulting firm. Since you work with everyone—everyone who can pay, at least—potential conflicts of interest abound, and sometimes get noticed. So when some sweet, sweet non-overlapping business comes your way—say, from a sovereign government—you jump at it, maybe even a little too quickly.

The contract turned out to be illegal, a violation of South African contracting law, with some of the payments channeled to an associate of an Indian-born family, the Guptas, at the center of a swirling corruption scandal…. The Eskom affair is now part of an expansive investigation by South African authorities into how the Guptas used their friendships with Jacob Zuma, then the country’s president, and his son to manipulate and control state-owned enterprises for personal gain. International corruption watchdogs call it a case of “state capture.” Lawmakers here call it a silent coup. It has already led to Mr. Zuma’s ouster and a moment of reckoning for post-apartheid South Africa.

The above comes from a Times exposé last month, and would be bad enough on its own, but for a little paragraph thrown in dealing with some non-Gupta-related matters.

Since President Trump took office, McKinsey has greatly expanded consulting for Immigration and Customs Enforcement through that agency’s office of “detention, compliance and removals.” Their contracts with the agency exceed $20 million. Asked about those contracts, a McKinsey spokesman said the company’s work focused primarily on administration and organization and was unconnected to immigration policy, including the separation of children and parents at the border.

Right. Sure. That makes sense. I mean, what could administration and organization of detention, compliance and removals have to do with the separation of families and caging of children?

Well, either way, McKinsey would just really like to put these things behind them. So they’ve settled with the South Africans, and now they promise not to do anything with any human-rights-violating government agencies, even here at home.

While stating that McKinsey’s work for the agency did not involve carrying out immigration policies, Mr. Sneader wrote that the firm “will not, under any circumstances, engage in any work, anywhere in the world, that advances or assists policies that are at odds with our values.”

A tough, brave decision? As with what, exactly, management consulting services to ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations division, which sure sounds like it might be involved in enforcing U.S. immigration laws by taking crying children from their crying parents and sending them a thousand miles away, that’s not entirely clear.

While Mr. Sneader acknowledged the concerns about McKinsey’s contract, a spokesman said the firm had already finished the job.

At least they aren’t missing out on the fee income this time.

McKinsey Ends Work With ICE Amid Furor Over Immigration Policy [NYT]
How McKinsey Lost Its Way in South Africa [NYT]
McKinsey Reaches Settlement to Repay Fee to S.Africa’s Eskom [Bloomberg]

Related

Phil Falcone Will Borrow Hundreds Of Millions Of Dollars From Any Gated Investor Fund He Pleases

Phil Falcone, as some of you may know, has made some mistakes in the last couple years. Pouring his investors' money into a wireless start-up that may or may not ever get off the ground. Offering those who wanted out illiquid LightSquared equity instead of cash. Not getting his wife a driver for party-time.  If you're wondering why we haven't mentioned the time he borrowed $113 million from a gated fund in order to pay personal taxes, which he had not set aside enough money to cover, it's because Phil doesn't count it as a mistake, regardless of what you, or the SEC, or anyone else says. Hedge-fund manager Philip Falcone and his firm, Harbinger Capital Partners LLC, formally signaled their intent to seek the dismissal of fraud charges filed against them earlier this year by securities regulators, according to people familiar with the case. In June, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed civil charges accusing Mr. Falcone of putting his own interests, including maintaining a "lavish lifestyle," ahead of those of Harbinger's investors. The agency accused Mr. Falcone, Harbinger and Harbinger's former operating chief, Peter Jenson, of misleading investors and an outside law firm when Mr. Falcone took out a $113.2 million loan in 2009 from a Harbinger fund to pay his personal taxes, even as other investors in the fund were prevented from pulling their money. Lawyers for Mr. Falcone and Harbinger sent a letter to Judge Paul Crotty of U.S. District Court in Manhattan Friday, the deadline for responding to the SEC's complaint, saying they intended to seek dismissal, the people said. The letter also summarized arguments for the dismissal. Mr. Jenson also filed a letter Friday through his lawyers saying he intended to seek dismissal of the complaint. Representatives of Mr. Falcone and Harbinger have said before they planned to fight the allegations. In negotiations with securities regulators leading up to the charges, they had argued that Mr. Falcone and Harbinger were simply following sound advice from their legal counsel. Which, for those who missed it, was: “[L]ending money to principals is not part of the fund’s investment program” and "a loan . . . will never be a good idea" and "[We are] unequivocally against the loan idea for a number of reasons." Falcone To Seek Case's Dismissal [WSJ] Earlier: Phil Falcone’s Alleged Piggish Behavior Made Him Some Enemies