Anti-bribery and corruption
In the course of our business we interact with a wide range of government officials and private sector individuals or businesses, including government regulators, inspection authorities and healthcare professionals.
We do not tolerate bribery, corruption, kickbacks or other types of improper benefits, whether committed by our own people or by anyone we deal with.
Most of the countries in which we operate have strict anti-bribery and corruption laws that apply to our interactions with public officials. We have processes in place for assessing anti-bribery and corruption risk and implement measures to mitigate these risks.
Failing to comply with these laws could have serious consequences for us, both as individuals and as an organisation. In some cases, these consequences could include criminal charges.
Our Code of Conduct sets out our expectations for all employees in combatting bribery and corruption. We never offer or accept (or ask a third party to offer or accept) bribes, facilitation payments, secret commissions or kickbacks to or from any person. These rules apply to all our business activities, including any interactions we may have with government officials or with any private person or business, either locally or overseas.
The Code requires that where we suspect bribery or corruption, either by our own people or by any of our suppliers, customers or other business partners, we report it immediately. The Speak Up policy ensures that all employees know how to make such a report, and can be confident that concerns will be taken seriously and investigated and will not result in retaliation or other harassment.
On 22 March 2017, a former employee, Simon Hall, pleaded guilty to charges laid by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), in relation to actions taken while an employee of Fisher & Paykel Healthcare. It is understood that Mr Hall received approximately $213,000 in payments.
When the company became aware in 2014 of issues relating to the management of two Middle East distributors, the company commissioned a third party to conduct an internal investigation. Following the outcome of the investigation, Mr Hall was dismissed for misconduct and the matter was referred to the SFO. The company does not tolerate this type of behaviour and, following an independent review, we are confident in our systems to prevent a recurrence.