Tags

, , , , , , ,

NOAA has suffered budget cuts for the last eight years – according to CNN guest scientist.

Well, that isn’t good, now is it? Whose crappy idea was that? Let me guess.

Hmmmm……

Republicans were in charge of the country and most states and the Congress. Let me see, who would’ve done such a thing?

well …

I guess they didn’t like the fact that NOAA was doing a good job and showing science that they didn’t like. That sounds about right. So, the Republicans in charge used their typical strategy of cutting the funding to the agency. Yep, that’s probably about it.

And, now we need what NOAA can do because of a national crisis – and likely it will be an international crisis before its over – and their funding is still far less than it needed to be for eight years of budget cuts and the destruction to their lab facilities and educated professional teams of scientists is costing us – again.

Figures.

There was a note at 9.38 am this morning, 06-08-10, about Rich Steiner, Marine Biologist who read the disaster preparedness plan – disaster response plan the BP had submitted to the Minerals Management Service for this well. He said it was 583 pages and appeared to have been a “cut and paste” job more than anything else. It included protections for seals and walruses (in the Gulf of Mexico.) I don’t think those live in the Gulf of Mexico. However, he did read it and now I’m wondering where he found the durn thing – because I’ve been trying to find it for days without success. The one thing I did find is that most of those documents, for some reason are located in federal depository libraries onsite only where it must be viewed in person – and I found a list of which ones have the various disaster preparedness and response plans which I posted on an earlier post. (Mr. Steiner was on CNN earlier today).

I’ve been watching the news off and on today – mostly early this morning and noted a couple things including a point at which on one of the news shows – probably CNN but maybe FoxNews or Bloomberg or cnbc – where they  offered a wonderful chart of the six companies whose responsibilities are tied into this situation with the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. They had BP, of course – but also Andarko, Mitsui, TransOcean, Halliburton and Cameron. The chart showed how much their stock prices have plummeted since this event started. One of the news segments showed – maybe this one – that TransOcean has a court case before a judge right now using an 1851 Maritime Law to limit their liability to $26.7 million dollars total. The judge is deciding that now.

And, last night (06-07-10) there was a mention by David Cameron on Larry King Live about the ideas team put together with recommendations about what could be done to cap or contain the well – an important note that the pressure down under the seabed for this well is estimated to be 13,000 psi. Some of the scientists and engineers had already given estimates a couple weeks ago, that the oil being released was around 6,200 psi – (also probably from news shows.)

On AC360, I think it was – also last night (06-07-10) there was a mention that the 1990 Oil Act makes the oil company the first authority and gives rights over all in the event of an oil spill or oil disaster to the oil company over all government, government agencies, local and federal and state rights of say or authority.

If I understand it correctly, it is the reason that the oil company and their marine spill response corporation has the full authority and first rights of say about anything and everything throughout the Gulf of Mexico and the Gulf Coast of the United States – including demanding that the FAA ground all flights with media on board so they can’t take aerial photos of the oil spill. It is also the reason that BP could hire a security company to keep the reporters, photographers and state leaders and agencies out of the marshes in Louisiana after the thick crude oil was found there.

It is also the reason that every state, county, town, city, coastal area, and marine group must go through BP and their contractor to do anything to prevent the oil from coming onshore or to place any other method of solving the problem or save a bird or rescue a dolphin or sea turtle, place a sand berm along their own waters – even the ones being placed in Destin, Florida.

It is also the reason that over the thousands of products that are known to work to get up the oil, contain the oil or suck up the oil, only those that were originally on the list of the BP contractor are being used and only their list of subcontractors / companies pre-assigned by them are being used in the cleanup and skimming and whatever else.

Very interesting. How many times has this cost us immensely just as it is now? And, whose insistence placed this into the law? Hmmm….. Let me guess.

– cricketdiane

***

I noticed over the last few days, that CNN shows at different times during the day have been showing segments which allow inventors and companies with solutions to show those solutions on air and demonstrate their products. Each one, when asked if they have shown or told BP of these things, has said they have and received only a generic form response or no response at all, even when they’ve called to try and set up a time to make a presentation to them. I think some have presentations they are trying to make this week, but I don’t know that it is to BP. One of the company owners said that he tried to call the EPA at each of the states to show it to them and got nowhere with absolutely no opportunities for his company’s products to be included in those under consideration. So what’s the deal?

There is a place on CNN to enter videos of solutions under the iReport side of their site under the word “fixit” and there somewhere, they have the links for the numerous government and EPA and BP places to submit solutions. Apparently over 40,000 solutions have been sent to the BP site already and 278 or something are being considered for further review.

http://www.ireport.com/ir-topic-stories.jspa?topicId=444632

Rig survivors: BP ordered shortcut

***

On cnbc or bloomberg or foxnews earlier today – now see, I should’ve written it down – but there was a man who wrote in the NY Times about BP maybe needing to prepare for a worst case scenario and how they can declare bankruptcy / form a merger and put a ring around liabilities to prevent the total costs from undermining shareholders’ value and company assets. It was something like that – but in the process of him discussing the article he had written, the man described the method that is being considered by bankers and others to isolate and diminish the financial liabilities BP has from the spill. It looks like preparations are being made to do that, as BP Hayward had told shareholder’s meeting on last Friday am or Thursday, that BP was making a company within their company to handle the oil spill and all of their liabilities about it. Then, this week – it looks like they’ve made it into another division in their company with one of the BP executives heading it – Bob Dudley maybe or Doug Suttles. Anyway, there is the possibility that the plan is to contain the liabilities in such a way that any outstanding civil suits in the future would not be viable. In bankruptcy – Chapter 11, the bond holders, creditors and shareholders would be given protection and consideration but future liabilities from the oil spill probably would not.

By the way – that man whose article appeared in the NY Times or wherever this morning – he mentioned in the interview on the news that the current estimations of the costs expected to BP – and I don’t know how they’ve derived this number – but that those costs to BP are expected to be $40 Billion dollars, as of this point. (that’s billion with a B).

There was also a mention on the news yesterday that many of the judges have accepted money from the oil industry such that they would have an innate conflict of interest for any cases resulting from this oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico – throughout all of the states on the Gulf Coast and the federal justices as well.

– cricketdiane

***

The other thing I noted today – well, two other things –

One, is that the laws BP lawyers and attorney teams are using – do not supercede the US Constitution and other US Codes about the rights and authorities of our government and its agencies. They are picking and choosing which laws to bring out to support BP’s and the Marine Spill Response Corporation’s rights and authority to manipulate, control, qualify, maneuver, decide, and to require all to come through them to do anything.

However, the oil act of 1990 does not supercede other laws and the rights, authorities, responsibilities and ultimate authority given to the federal government, federal and state agencies, as well as state, county and local elected officials and representatives. So, the oil company lawyers are simply using those laws that serve their purposes but leaving out all those other laws that don’t suit their position – and we are supposed to know better, but no one is challenging them about it.

Two, is that the chart provided on the CNN clip – or whatever station that I was watching at the time earlier today, that showed 6 companies who are ultimately liable in this event is wrong. The final tally of those whose liability is connected to this event extends to those whose decisions made it worse and abrogated that authority of the US government, US government agencies, state agencies and local elected officials along the coast. These directly include the Marine Spill Response Corporation and the Marine Preservation Association (whose membership is solely oil industry interests) which backs it along with the subcontractors they have chosen.

When I was watching a bit of the coverage from Florida, whose pleas to get some skimmers, booms and other equipment out to them fell on deaf ears over at the BP group and the Marine Spill Response Corporation as the contractor required by all to go through for anything – the idea was presented that there are only so many resources to go around and those must be shared by all the states and communities along the Gulf Coast as well as the entire region of ocean that makes up the Gulf of Mexico. All of these resources are being managed and assigned by this contractor exclusively. Therefore, they are ultimately and directly responsible for failures which have incentivised failure to meet the needs and critical timeliness of the response across the broad areas of this crisis. They have also been responsible directly for mismanagement of resources, misplacement of resources, misdirection of resources and mistakes of coordination which yielded a radically worse oil spill pervading every section of the disaster.

These contractors and subcontractors are directly responsible for making the disaster worse and more pervasive, especially along the shoreline coasts and marshes – along with having insisted on using a toxic chemical dispersant that was known to be dangerous to marine wildlife, birds, fishes, marine mammals, coral reefs, aquatic food chains and people. They are the ones who are also responsible for using the subcontractors as they have. And, they are the ones responsible for having the few resources at hand along with the plan for their placement and use which has been in no way prepared properly or in appropriate numbers for any spill of any appreciable size, including this one.

So, these companies are on the list along with those six listed on the news as parties liable for the disaster that has occurred.

It is also possible that those organizations whose lobbying and insistence created the legal framework which allowed the oil industry to play by their own rules and takeover the rights to the entire Gulf of Mexico, the entire Gulf Coast and every state, local and federal authority – could also be liable.

– cricketdiane

***

The other thing that I was working on – was from last week – when there was a comment from someone over at the US Chamber of Commerce who challenged me to place the sources where I found some information about their lobbying efforts over the years which have yielded results that I don’t find to be in the interests of the human race whatsoever. And, as funny as it isn’t – I said that I’d be glad to look in my notes to find those and post them.

My ability to put a name on a file leaves a lot to be desired, so – I went online and back into my files to find the information. It yielded not a thing I was looking to find – but it did yield a bunch of very nifty stuff – including this –

– cricketdiane

***

Non-Governmental Organizations which have been
granted Consultative Status with IMO – International Maritime Organization –

Name and address

Telephone/facsimile/
e-mail/Web

Advisory Committee on Protection of the Sea (ACOPS)
11 Dartmouth Street
London SW1H 9BN
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44 (0)207 799 3033
Fax:  +44(0)207 799 2933
Email: info@acops.org
Web:  www.acops.org
BIMCO
Bagsvaerdvej 161
DK-2880 Bagsvaerd
Denmark
Tel:  +45 44 36 6800
Fax:  +45 44 36 6868
Email:  mailbox@bimco.dk
Web:  www.bimco.org
European Federation of Insurance Intermediaries (BIPAR)
c/o London and International Insurance Brokers’ Association

2nd floor
78 Leadenhall Street
London EC3A 3DH
United Kingdom

Head office:
Avenue Albert-Elizabeth 40
B-1200 Brussels
Belgium

Tel: +44 (0)207 280 0156
Fax: +44(0)207 280 0150
Web: www.liiba.co.uk

Tel:  +32 2 735 6048
Fax: +32 2 732 14 18
Email:  bipar@skynet.be

European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC)
Avenue E. Van Nieuwenhuyse 4
B-1160 Brussels
Belgium

Tel:  +32 2 676 7201
Fax:  +32 2 676 7310
Email: apy@cefic.be
Web: www.cefic.org

Community of European Shipyards’ Associations (CESA)
Rue Marie de Bourgogne 52-54, 3rd floor
B-1000 Brussels
Belgium
Tel:  +32 2 230 2791
Fax:  +32 2 230 4332
Email:info@cesa.eu
Website: www.cesa.eu

Comité International Radio-Maritime (CIRM)
Southbank House
Black Prince Road
London SE1 7SJ
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)207 587 1245
Fax:  +44(0)207 587 1436
Email:  secgen@cirm.org
Web:  www.cirm.org

Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA)

910 SE 17th Street
Suite 400
Fort Lauderdale
FL 33316
USA

Tel: +1 754 224 2200
Fax: +1 754 224 2251
Email:info@cruising.org
Web: www.cruising.org

Comité Maritime International (CMI)
c/o SCP Villeneau, Rohart & Simon Associates

15 Place du Général Catroux
F-75017 Paris
France

Tel:  +32 3 227 3526
Fax:  +32 3 227 3528
Web: www.comitemaritime.org

Dangerous Goods Advisory Council (DGAC)

1100 H Street NW
Suite 740
Washington, DC 20005
United States of America

Tel: +1 202 289 45 50
Fax: +1 202 289 40 74
Email: info@dgac.org
Web: www.dgac.org

The European Association of Internal Combustion Engine Manufacturers (EUROMOT)
Lyoner Strasse 18
60528 Frankfurt
Germany

Tel:  +49 69 6603 1354
Fax:  +49 69 6603 2354
Email:  euromot@vdma.org
Web:  www.euromot.org

Friends of the Earth International (FOEI)
Secretariat PO Box 19199
1000 gd Amsterdam
The Netherlands

Tel:  +31 20 622 1369
Fax:  +31 20 639 2181
Email: foei@foei.org
Web:www.foei.org

The Federation of National Associations of Ship Brokers and Agents (FONASBA)
85 Gracechurch Street
London EC3V 0AA
United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)20 7623 3113
Email: generalmanager@fonasba.com
Web: www.fonasba.com

Global Maritime Education & Training Association (GlobalMET)
GlobalMET Executive Secretary
AustralAsian Maritime Education Services Ltd.

P O Box 307
Waikanae 5250
Kapiti Coast
New Zealand

Tel: +64 4 905 6198
Fax: +64 4 905 6190
Email: secretariat@globalmet.org
Web: www.globalmet.org

Greenpeace International (GREENPEACE INTERNATIONAL)
Ottho Heldringstraat 5
1066 AZ Amsterdam
The Netherlands

London office:
Canonbury Villas
London N1 2PN
United Kingdom

Tel:  +31 20 71 82 000
Fax:  +31 20 51 48 151
Email: supporter.services.int@greenpeace.org

Tel:  +44(0)20 7865 8100
Fax:  +44(0)20 7865 8200
Email: info@uk.greenpeace.org
Web:  www.greenpeace.org.uk


The Hot Briquetted Iron Association (HBIA)

624 Matthews-Mint Hill Road
Suite 410 Matthews
NC 28105-1774
United States of America

Tel: +1 704 815 3285
Fax: +1 704 841 4251
Email: director@hbia.org

Web: www.hbia.org

International Association of Airport and Seaport Police (IAASP)
111, B3-1410Parkway Boulevard
Coquitlam, British Columbia
Canada V3E 3J7

Tel: +1 604 782 6386
Fax: +1 604 945 6134
Email: garet@toddington.com
Web: www.iaasp.net

International Association of Classification Societies(IACS)
Permanent Secretariat
6th floor, 36 Broadway
London SW1H 0BH
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)20 7976 0660
Fax:  +44(0)20 7808 1100
Email:  permsec@iacs.org.uk
Web:  www.iacs.org.uk

International Association of Drilling Contractors (IADC)
P.O. Box 4287
Houston, Texas 77210-4287
United States of America

United Kingdom office:
P.O. Box 296
Ruislip
Middx HA4 7WZ

Tel: +1 713 292 1945
Fax: +1 713 292 1946
Email:  info@iadc.org
Web:  www.iadc.org

Tel:  +44(0)1895 621 889
Email:  dominic.cattini@iadc.org

Web:  www.iadc.org

International Association of Institutes of Navigation (IAIN)
c/o Royal Institute of Navigation

1 Kensington Gore
London SW7 2AT
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)20 7591 3130
Fax:  +44(0)20 7591 3131
Email:  admin@rin.org.uk
Web:  www.rin.org.uk

International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and  Lighthouse Authorities (IALA)
20 ter, rue Schnapper
78100 St. Germain en Laye
France

Tel:  +33 1 34 51 70 01
Fax:  +33 1 34 51 82 05
Email:  iala-aism@wanadoo.fr
Web: www.iala-aism.org
International Association of Maritime Universities (IAMU)
c/o Dalian Maritime University

1 Linghai Road
Liaoning Province Dalian 116026
China
IAMU Secretary’s Office
Kaiyo Senpaku Building
6th floor
1-15-16, Toranomon
Minato-Ku, Tokyo
Japan 105-0001

Tel: +86 411 8472 7874
Fax: +86 411 8472 7993
Web: www.iamu.edu.org

Tel: +81 3 5251 4131
Fax: +81 3 5251 4134
Email: iamusec@iamu-edu.org
Email: info@iamu.edu.org

Web: www.iamu.edu.org

International Association of Ports and Harbors (IAPH)
7th floor, South Tower New Pier Takeshi
1-16-1 Kaigan
Minato-ku
Tokyo 105-0022
Japan

IAPH Europe Office
P.O. Box 60
2910 AB Nieuwerkerk
The Netherlands

Tel: +81 3 5403 2770
Fax: +81 3 5403 7651
Email: info@iaphworldports.org
Web: www.iaphworldports.org

Tel: +31 180 323399
Fax: +31 180 318569
Email: info@iaph.nl

Web: www.iaphworldports.org

International Bar Association (IBA)

Head Office:
10th floor, 1 Stephen Street
London W1T 1AT

International Bar Association (IBA)
c/o Clyde & Co.

51 Eastcheap
London EC3M 1JP

Tel:  +44(0)20 7691 6868
Fax:  +44(0)20 7691 6544
Email:[name]@int-bar.org
Web: www.ibanet.org

Tel:  +44(0)20 7623 4244
Fax:  +44(0)20 7623 5427
Email: firstname.surname@inf.co.uk

Web: www.ibanet.org


International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA)

Ground floor, Latimer House
5-7 Cumberland Place
Southampton
Hampshire SO15 2BH
United Kingdom

Tel: +44(0)23 8022 6555
Fax: +44(0)23 8022 1777
Email: ian.adams@ibia.net
Web: www.ibia.net/

International Bulk Terminals Association (IBTA)
6 Robertson Road
Brighton BN1 5NL
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)1273-505 100
Fax:  +44(0)1273-549 602
Email: info@sph-global.com
Web: www.drybulkterminals.com

International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
38 Cours Albert 1er
75008 Paris
France

Tel:  +33 1 49 53 28 28
Fax:  +33 1 49 53 2859
Email:  icc@iccwbo.org
Web:  www.iccwbo.org

ICC Commercial Crime Services

The ICC International Maritime Bureau (IMB) is a specialised division of the International Chamber Of Commerce (ICC). The IMB is a non-profit making
www.icc-ccs.org/

ICHCA International Limited (ICHCA)
Suite 2, 85 Western Road
Romford
Essex RM1 3LS
United Kingdom

Tel:  01708-735 295
Fax:  01708-735 225
Email: info@ichcainternational.co.uk
Web:  www.ichcainternational.co.uk

International Christian Maritime Association (ICMA)
Herald House
15 Lambs Passage
London EC1Y 8TQ
United Kingdom

Tel:  020-7256 9216
Fax:  020-7256 9217
Email: icma.secgen@btconnect.com
Web: www.icma.as

International Council of Marine Industry Associations  (ICOMIA)
Marine House
Thorpe Lea Road
Egham
Surrey TW20 8BF
United Kingdom

Tel:  1784-223 703
Fax:  1784-223 705
Email: info@icomia.com
Web: www.icomia.com

International Chamber of Shipping (ICS)
Carthusian Court
12 Carthusian Street
London EC1M 6EZ
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)20 7417 8844
Fax:  +44(0)20 7417 8877
Email:  post@marisec.org
Web: www.marisec.org

International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)
3 Rue de Varembé
P.O. Box 131
CH-1211 Geneva 20
Switzerland

Tel:  41 22-919 02 11
Fax:  41-22-919 0300
Email:  info@iec.ch
Web: www.iec.ch

International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW)
Boulevard Charlemagne 1 (Bte 72)
B-1041 Brussels
Belgium

Tel: +32 2 230 9717
Fax: +32 2 231 0402
Email: info@ifaw.org
Email: info-eu@ifaw.org
Web: www.ifaw.org

International Federation of Shipmasters’ Associations (IFSMA)
202 Lambeth Road
London SE1 7JY
United Kingdom

Tel:  020 7261 04 50
Fax:  020 7928 90 30
Email:  hq@ifsma.org
Web:  www.ifsma.org

International Harbour Masters’ Association (IHMA)
P.O. Box 314
Fareham
Hants PO17 5XZ
United Kingdom

Tel.: +44 1329 832771
Fax: +44 1329 834975
Email: secretary.ihma@
harbourmaster.org
Web: www.harbourmaster.org

Institute of International Container Lessors (IICL)
1990 M St NW
Suite 650
Washington, D.C. 20036-3417
USA

Tel:  +1 202 223 9800
Fax: +1 202 223 9810
Email:   info@iicl.org
Web:   www.iicl.org

Instituto Iberoamericano Derecho Maritimo (IIDM)

Permanent Secretariat:
Paraná 489 – Piso 9̊ – Oficina 55
C.P. 1017 – Cuidad Autónoma de Buenos Aires
Argentina

Tel:  +54 (011) 4371 7854
Fax:  +54 (011) 4371 7854
Email:  iidm@itcom.com.ar
Web: www.iidmaritimo.org

International Lifesaving Appliances Manufacturers’ Association (ILAMA)
P.O. Box 952
Shoreham
West Sussex BN43 6AP
United Kingdom

Tel:  01273 45 41 87
Fax:  01273 45 42 60
Email: admin@ilama.org
Web:   www.ilama.org

The Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology (IMarEST)
80 Coleman Street
London EC2R 5BJ
United Kingdom

Tel:  (0)20 7382 2600
Fax:  (0)20 7382 2670
Email:  info@imarest.org
Web: www.imarest.org

The International Marine Contractors Association (IMCA)
52 Grosvenor Gardens
London SW1W 0AU
United kingdom

Tel:  (0)20 7824 5520
Fax:  (0)20 7824 5521
Email:  imca@imca-int.com
Web: www.imca-int.com

International Maritime Health Association (IMHA)
Italië 51
B-2000 Antwerp
Belgium
Tel: 32-3-229 0776
Fax: 32-3-225 2038
Email: IMHA@online.be
Web: www.imha.net

International Maritime Lecturers Association (IMLA)
c/o World Maritime University

P.O. Box 500
S-20124 Malmö
Sweden

Tel:  +46 40 356 330
Fax:  +46 40 128 442
Email: tn@wmu.se
Web: www.wmu.se

International Maritime Pilots’ Association (IMPA)
HQS Wellington
Temple Stairs
Victoria Embankment
London WC2R 2PN
United Kingdom

Tel:  (0)20 7240 3973
Fax:  (0)20 7240 3518
Email: office@impahq.org
Web: www.impahq.org

International Maritime Rescue Federation (IMRF)
(formerly International Lifeboat Federation (ILF))

c/o Royal National Lifeboat Institution
West Quay Road
Poole, Dorset BH15 1HZ
United Kingdom

Tel: 44 (0)1202 663398
Fax: 44 (0)1202 663399
Email: info@international-maritime-rescue.org
Web: www.international-maritime-rescue.org
Interferry
No. 8, 735 Moss Street
Victoria, BC, V8V 4N9
Canada

Tel: 1-250-592 9612
Fax: 1-250-592 9613
Email: len.roueche@interferry.com
Web: www.interferry.com

International Association of Dry Cargo Shipowners (INTERCARGO)
9th floor, St Clare House
30-33 Minories
London EC3N 1DD
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44 (0)20 7977 7036
Fax:  +44 (0)20 7977 7031
Email:  info@intercargo.org
Web:  www.intercargo.org

International Ship Managers’ Association (InterManager)

20 avenue de Font Vieille
9800 Monaco
Principality of Monaco

Mailing address:
P.O. Box 156
Horsham RH13 9ZH
United Kingdom

Tel: +377 9205 5444
Fax: +336 8086 0986
Web: www.intermanager.org

International Association of Independent Tanker Owners (INTERTANKO)
801 North Quincy Street
Susite 200
Arlington
VA 22203
USA

London office:
9th floor, St Clare House
30-33 Minories
London EC3N 1DD

Tel:  00-1-703 373 2269
Fax:  00-1-703 841 0389
Email: chairman@intertanko.com
Web:  www.intertanko.com

Tel:  +44 (0)20 7977 7010
Fax:  +44 (0)20 7977 7011
Email:  london@intertanko.com

Web:  www.intertanko.com

International Ocean Institute (IOI)
P.O. Box 3
Gzira GZR 01
Malta

Tel:   356-21 346 528
Fax:   356-21 346 502
Email:  ioihq@ioihq.org.mt
Web:  www.ioinst.org

International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA)
5th floor, 209/215 Blackfriars Road
London SE1 8NL
United Kingdom

Tel:  (0)20 7633 2371
Fax:  (0)20 7633 2389
Email:  info@ipieca.org
Web:  www.ipieca.org
International Paint and Printing Ink Council (IPPIC)
IPPIC Secretariat
NPCA
1500 Rhode Island Avenue
NW, Washington DC 20005-5597
USA
Tel: 202 462 6272
Fax: 202 462 8549
Email: ippic@paint.org
Web:www.ippic.org

International Parcel Tankers Association (IPTA)
Halton Green East
Halton
Lancaster LA2 6PA
United Kingdom

Tel:  01524-811 892
Fax:  01524-811 956
Email:  mail@ipta.org.uk
Web: www.ipta.org.uk

International Road Transport Union (IRU)
3 rue de Varembé
CH-1211 Geneva 20
Switzerland

Tel:  +41 22 918 2700
Fax:  +41 22 918 2741
Email:  iru@iru.org
Web:  www.iru.org

International Sailing Federation (ISAF)
Ariadne House, Town Quay
Southampton
Hampshire S014 2AQ
United Kingdom

Tel:   +44 (0)2380 635 111
Fax:  +44 (0)2380 635 789
Email:  secretariat@isaf.co.uk
Web:  www.sailing.org
International Spill Control Organization (ISCO)
Balbithax House
Kintore
Inverurie
Aberdeenshire AB51 0UQ

Tel: 01467 632 282
Email: info@spillcontrol.org
Web: www.spillcontrol.org

International Shipping Federation Limited (ISF)
Carthusian Court
12 Carthusian Street
London EC1M 6EZ
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)20 7417 88 44
Fax:  +44(0)20 7417 88 77
Email:  isf@marisec.org
Web: www.marisec.org

International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
Case postale 56
1 Chemin de la Voie-Creuse
CH-1211 Geneva 20
Switzerland

UK office:
c/o British Standard Institution
389 Chiswick High Road
London W4 4AL

Tel:  41 22-749 01 11
Fax:  41 22-733 34 30
Email:  central@iso.org
Web:  www.iso.org

Tel:  +44(0)20 8996 9000
Fax:  +44(0)20 8996 7400
Email:  info@bsi.org.uk

Web:  www.iso.org

International Shipsuppliers & Services Association (ISSA)
The Baltic Exchange
St. Mary Axe
London EC3A 8BH
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44-(0)20-7626 6236/7
Fax:  +44-(0)20-7626 6234
Email: secretariat@shipsupply.org
Web:  www.shipsupply.org

International Salvage Union (ISU)
Fleet Place House
2 Fleet Place
Holborn Viaduct
London EC4M 7RF
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44 (0)20 7653 1624
Fax:  +44(0)20 7236 1974
Email:  isu@marine-salvage.com
Web:  www.marine-salvage.com

International Tranport Workers’ Federation (ITF)
49-60 Borough Road
London SE1 1DR
United Kingdom

Tel: +44(0)207 403 2733
Fax: +44(0)207 357 7871
Fax: +44(0)207 407 0115
Email: mail@itf.org.uk
Web: www.itfglobal.org

International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation Limited (ITOPF)
1 Oliver’s Yard
55 City Road
London EC1Y 1HQ
United Kingdom

Tel:  (0)20 7566 6999
Emergency:  07623 984 606
Fax:  (0)20 7566 6950
Email:  central@itopf.com
Web:  www.itopf.com
International Towing Tank Conference (ITTC)
c/o Force Technilogy
Division of Maritime Industry

Hjortekaersvej 99
DK-2800 Lyngby
Denmark

Tel: 00 45 7 215 7775
Fax: 0045 7 215 7701
Email: aad@force.dk
Web: www.ittc.sname.org

International Union of Marine Insurance (IUMI)
c/o Swiss Insurance Association

C.F. Meyer-Strasse 14
Postfach 4288
CH-8022 Zurich
Switzerland

Tel.   +41 44 208 2870
Fax:  +41 44 208 2800
Email:  mail@iumi.com
Web: www.iumi.com

International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
Rue Mauverney 28
CH-1196 Gland
Switzerland

Tel:   +41 22 999 000/291
Fax: +41 22 999 0025
Email:  mail@hq.iucn.org
Web:  www.iucn.org

NACE International

National Association of Corrosion Engineers
1440 South Creek Drive
Houston, TX 77084-4906
United States of America

Tel: +1 281 228 6200
Fax: +1 281 228 6300
Email: firstservice@nace.org
Web: www.nace.org

The Nautical Institute
202 Lambeth Road
London, SE1 7LQ
United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)20 7928 1351
Fax: +44 (0)20 7401 2817
Email: sec@nautinst.org
Web: www.nautinst.org

Oil Companies International Marine Forum (OCIMF)
29 Queen Anne’s Gate
London SW1H 9BU
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)20 7654 12 00
Fax:  +44(0)20 7654 12 05
Email:  enquiries@ocimf.com
Web: www.ocimf.com

International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP)
209-215 Blackfriars Road
London SE1 8NL
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44 (0)20 76330272
Fax:  +44 (0)20 7633 2350
Email:  reception@surname@ogp.org.uk
Web:  www.ogp.org.uk

International Group of P & I Associations
(P & I CLUBS)
Peek House
20 Eastcheap
London EC3M 1EB
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44 (0)20 7929 3544
Fax:  +44 (0)20 7621 0675
Email:  secretariat@internationalgroup.org.uk
Web: www.igpandi.org

PIANC, the World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure
(PIANC)

Général Secretariat
Graaf de Ferraris – 11eme etage – boite 3
Boulevard du Roi Albert II No. 20
B-1000 Brussels
Belgium

PIANC UK Committee:
HR Wallingford
Howberry Park
Wallingford
Oxon OX10 8BA

Tel:  +32 2 553 71 61
Fax:  +32 2 553 71 55
Email:  info@pianc-aipcn.org
Web: www.pianc-aicpn.org

Tel:  +44(0)1491 822296
Fax: +44(0)20 7799 1325
Web:  www.pianc-aipcn.org

The Royal Institution of Naval Architects (RINA)
10 Upper Belgrave Street
London SW1X 8BQ
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44 (0)20-7235 4622
Fax:  +44 (0)20-7359 5912
Email: hq@rina.org.uk
Web:   www.rina.org.uk

Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators Limited (SIGTTO)
17 St. Helen’s Place
London EC3A 6DG
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)20 7628 11 24
Fax:  +44(0)20 7628 31 63
Email:  secretariat@sigtto.org
Web:  www.sigtto.org

International Vessel Operators Hazardous Materials Association, Inc. (VOHMA)
10 Hunter Brook Lane
Queensbury, NY 12804
United States of America

Tel:  +1 518 761 0263
Fax: +1 518 792 7781
Email:  mail@vohma.com
Web:  www.vohma.com

World Nuclear Transport Institute (WNTI)
Remo House
310-312 Regent Street
London W1B 3AX
United Kingdom

Tel.:  +44(0)20 7580 1144
Fax: +44(0)20 7580 5365
Email:  wnti@wnti@co.uk
Web: www.wnti.co.uk

World Shipping Council (WSC)
1156 15th Street, N.W.
Suite 300
Washington D.C. 20005
United States of America

Tel: +1 202 589 1230
Fax: +1 202 589 1231
Email: info@worldshipping.org
Web: www.worldshipping.org

World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)
Avenue du Mont-Blanc 27
1196 Gland
Switzerland

Tel:  +41 22 364 91 11
Fax:  +41 22 364 4892
Web:  www.panda.org

About IMO
IMO Bravery Award
World Maritime Day
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Site Index
General objectives and policies
Strategic Plan and High Level Action Plan
Structure
Conference (Meetings and Documents)
Conventions
IMO 60 years
Membership
NGOs and IGOs
IMO Training Institutes
Secretary-General
International Maritime Prize
Seafarers’ Memorial
Working at IMO
Procurement
Internships
Fellowships
Just for Kids
IMO: What it is, what it does and how it works
L’OMI: ce qu’elle est, ce qu’elle fait…
OMI: qué es, qué hace, cómo funciona
What is IMO? Poster (PDF)
What is IMO? (Powerpoint)

http://www.imo.org/About/mainframe.asp?doc_id=851&topic_id=315

***

google search –
1993 US ICC Chamber of Commerce position policy

#
U.S. Immigration Policy – Council on Foreign Relations
Before 1981, Bush served in various positions at Texas Commerce Bank in …. In addition, he serves as a senior international fellow at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. …. and in 1993 joined the Criminal Division as chief of staff to the … This report offers a backdrop of the U.S.-ICC relationship and policy …
http://www.cfr.org › by publication type › task force reports – Cached – Similar
#

***

Oiling the wheels of corporate domination – International Chamber …
Of Swiss nationality and Greek origin, she was educated in the US (Harvard), … culminating symbolically with the closure in 1993 of the UN Centre on … At this point Cattaui moved to the ICC, the world’s largest corporate lobby group. … Any policy discussion – especially on the environment – that might lead in …
http://www.newint.org/columns/…/2004/08/…/maria-livanos-cattaui/ – Cached – Similar

Home » Columns » Worldbeaters

August 2004 • Issue 370

Maria Livanos Cattaui

Name:
Maria Livanos Cattaui
Job:
Secretary General of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC).
Reputation:
The public face of corporate globalization.
Sense of humour:
Rarely evident in public: ‘Most people in this world would love to have somebody else telling them how things are going to go… We feel we’re out there alone with our pants down and the cold wind blowing.’
Low cunning:
Cattaui is on the Board of the International Youth Foundation. She claims it ‘helped to start the global alliance for workers and communities, which investigated Nike’s often twice-removed suppliers in the footwear market. And it was Nike who gave us the money to do it. Those studies congratulated Nike on what it had done in response to public concern, but pointed out areas and policies still requiring change and said there were further actions needed. I applaud companies that can open their books and stand ready to be exposed to public scrutiny.’
Sources:
Belén Balanyá, Anne Doherty, Olivier Hoedeman, Adam Ma’anit and Erik Wesselius, Europe Inc, Pluto Press and Corporate Europe Observatory, London, 2000; The Straits Times, 17 November 2003; http://news.bbc.co.uk 2 December 2003; http://www.opendemocracy.net 2 August 2001 and 25 October 2001; http://www.corporateeurope.org; http://www.iccwbo.org

‘The events of 11 September are likely to have a short- to medium-term effect on the costs for business,’ said Maria Livanos Cattaui just a few weeks after the events in 2001. She was responding to a question about how they might impact on her concept of ‘globalization’. ‘Higher insurance costs, delays at customs, heightened security measures and concern among companies about risks they can take in furthering their activities in many developing countries.’

Maria Livanos Cattaui, Secretary General of the ICC since 1996, could never be accused of lacking focus. She is a passionate and efficient believer in the virtues of business. These she extols on any conceivable topic, from the salvation of Africa to the wonders of a security system that tracks individual shipping containers. She recommends cost-benefit analysis as the best approach to the ‘war on terror’.

Two things distinguish her from run-of-the-mill business propagandists. The first is that she is a woman. The second is that she has never worked in business. Of Swiss nationality and Greek origin, she was educated in the US (Harvard), then went on to editorial supervision at Encyclopaedia Britannica and Time-Life Books. In 1977 she joined the World Economic Forum in Geneva, where she worked her way up to become Managing Director. Her special area of responsibility was for the notorious annual meeting of the Forum in the upscale Davos ski resort.

Lest we forget, this was the heyday of the Masters of the Universe. The mood was captured well enough in the film Wall Street or the novel Bonfire of the Vanities. It was as if divine revelation had spawned a new cult, its high priests gathering every year in the snows of Davos to be attended upon by nodding intellectuals, governments, anyone with any ambitions at all in the power-broking, money-making game. Manifest destiny lay in corporate globalization, culminating symbolically with the closure in 1993 of the UN Centre on Transnational Corporations, which still had mild regulatory ambitions. All the while, there was Maria Livanos Cattaui servicing the ritual.

So complete was the triumph of corporate power over democratic control that it became a new orthodoxy – which, like all orthodoxies, then had to be protected from itself. At this point Cattaui moved to the ICC, the world’s largest corporate lobby group. While a plethora of powerful business ‘dialogues’ had flourished alongside the Forum, the ICC remained relatively comatose, scarcely organizing a single international gathering.

Cattaui changed all that. Grand ‘global’ shindigs and specialist hit squads were launched by the ICC. Renewed regulation of any sort had to be slaughtered at birth. Any policy discussion – especially on the environment – that might lead in that direction would be headed off at the pass. The innate virtues of business made voluntary self-regulation more than sufficient. Corporate influence over such institutions as the World Trade Organization and the UN itself needed to be institutionalized. In July 2000, no more than seven years after the closure of the Centre on Transnational Corporations, the UN duly signed a ‘Global Compact’ with private corporations. Most observers credited Cattaui with a remarkable coup.

Make no mistake, she is a smooth and supple operator. She no longer claims to favour ‘free’ trade. She prefers ‘rules-based’ trade – given, of course, that the rules are made by business. For her, business is part of ‘civil society’, perfectly entitled to wield influence in the same way as, say, the Church – although it’s a civil society that excludes troublemakers, particularly anyone who ‘trashes cars’.

She scorns the idea that corporations have become more powerful than governments. ‘Oh, that’s crazy!’ she protests. ‘Who can raise taxes? Who can spend [them]? Who can set up a judiciary? Who can incarcerate? Who can raise an army? There’s no company in the whole world that does that! This is the job of government! And they do it, more than they ever have before.’

So that’s all right, then. Cattaui knows exactly what governments are for – to keep everyone in good order for business. Meanwhile, there’s an expanding area of corporate territory that self-styled democratic governments, as if by telepathy, no longer dare or desire to enter. In truth, there’s nothing telepathic about it. Maria Livanos Cattaui sees to that.

http://www.newint.org/columns/worldbeaters/2004/08/01/maria-livanos-cattaui/

**

Corporate Europe Observer
The CEO Quarterly Newsletter
Issue 1, May 1998

United Nations Under Siege

Corporate Takeover of the United Nations Continues…

In the last issue of Corporate Europe Observer, we reported on a June 1997 luncheon in UN headquarters with corporate executives and global political leaders, including UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. Discussion topics included business participation in the UN decision-making process and a UN-business partnership in development policies. That this event was not an isolated case becomes clear in the following two articles: one describing the increasingly successful attempts of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) to gain privileged access to the UN; and the other detailing a particularly inappropriate case of corporate sponsorship — Nestlé’s recent hosting and sponsoring of a UN workshop on women and sustainable development.
The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) — the self- proclaimed “world business organization” — wants privileged access to the United Nations and other international organizations. During last year’s presidency of Nestlé’s Helmut Maucher, the ICC’s ambitions seemed to materialize and take flight.

UN-Business Partnership

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), contrary to what its name might suggest, is primarily an organization representing the largest transnational corporations on earth, including corporate giants like General Motors, Novartis, Bayer and Nestlé. The ICC, which for many years has pushed for global economic deregulation within the World Trade Organization, the G-7 and the OECD, now has its sights set on the United Nations.

“The way the United Nations regards international business has changed fundamentally. This shift towards a stance more favourable to business is being nurtured from the very top,” ICC Secretary General Maria Livanos Cattaui concluded with satisfaction in a column in the International Herald Tribune in February. Cattaui quotes UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in saying that the time is ripe for consultation between the UN and business.[1]

Cattaui’s optimism was confirmed the same week in a February 9th meeting of 25 ICC business leaders with a heavyweight UN delegation headed by Kofi Annan, heralded as the first step in “a systematic dialogue.” The ICC delegation included captains of industry from Coca Cola, Unilever, McDonalds, Goldman Sachs and Rio Tinto Zinc. In a joint statement, the ICC and the UN Secretary General stated that “broad political and economic changes have opened up new opportunities for dialogue and cooperation between the United Nations and the private sector”. The two sides committed themselves to “forge a close global partnership to secure greater business input into the world’s economic decision-making and boost the private sector in the least developed countries.” The industry representatives used the occasion to argue for “establishing an effective regulatory framework for globalization, including investment, capital markets, competition, intellectual property rights and trade facilitation.”[2] The ICC has worked with UN institutions before, but not on the highest level and not on the potentially very wide range of political matters around which ‘partnership’ now seems to have emerged.[3]

ICC and UNCTAD Hand-in-Hand

One of the concrete projects agreed upon at the February consultation between the UN and ICC is a joint series of business investment guides to the least developed countries, to be produced by the UN Centre for Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the ICC. The aim of these guides is to increase foreign direct investment flows into the 48 countries which the UN considers ‘least developed’, 38 of which are African. The guides “are to contain accurate, objective, investor-oriented and comparative information on investment opportunities and conditions in the countries covered.”

Another example of the new fruitful cooperation arose in March, when the ICC and UNCTAD presented the results of a joint “worldwide survey of leading multinational companies” which showed that corporations had not lost interest in investing in East and Southeast Asia. ICC Secretary-General Cattaui concluded from the survey of 198 TNCs that “business still sees enormous investment opportunities to be derived from the projected growth of Asian markets in the 21st century.”[4] The survey shows that 34% of European firms, and 19% of US and Japan-based TNCs plan to increase their activities in Asia. A senior UNCTAD investment expert explained that: “In the short and medium term, the lower costs for multinationals in the most affected countries create immediate incentives for additional direct investment.”[5] UNCTAD Secretary-General Rubens Ricupero said that the interest expressed by TNCs “augurs well for recovery in the region.”[6]

Geneva Business Dialogue

The most ambitious event this year in the ICC’s strategy for forging closer links with UN and other international institutions is the Geneva Business Dialogue, a conference slated to take place on September 23-24 1998. “The Geneva Business Dialogue,” a press release explains, “is the ICC’s initiative to create a successful mechanism to deal with the effects, promises and progress of globalization.” Participants at this conference, which organizers plan to hold annually, will be from “the ICC and the many important international organizations based in Geneva.” [7]

ICC president Maucher amplifies: “During two days of intensive meetings in September, we shall bring together the heads of international companies and the leaders of international organizations so that business experiences and expertise is channelled into the decision-making process for the global economy.”[8] The programme — details are yet to be released will deal with “some of the significant and contentious issues raised by an increasingly integrated international economy.” [9]

The ICC boasts that the initiative “is welcomed at the highest level of the World Trade Organization, the United Nations system and other international bodies”, and the preliminary participants list confirms that the Geneva Business Dialogue will bring together influential players including EU Commissioner Yves-Thibault de Silguy, WTO Director-General Renato de Ruggiero, high-level officials from the World Bank and the Industrial Standards Organization (ISO), as well as presidents, prime ministers and other top ministers from the US, Finland, Hungary, Thailand and Switzerland. Among the many high-level UN representatives are UNCTAD Secretary-General Rubens Ricupero and UN Under-Secretary General Vladimir Petrovsky. Secretary-General Kofi Annan will address the dialogue through a satellite connection. In addition to Helmut Maucher himself, business will be represented by CEOs from Unilever, ICI, Mitsubishi, Goldman Sachs, Lyonnaise des Eaux, Norsk Hydro, Siemens, BASF, Shell and many other global corporations.

Maucher’s Ambitions

The new “partnership” between the ICC and the UN is the result of the former’s ambitious strategy pursued since Helmut Maucher took the helm in early 1997. Maucher, who recently left his job as CEO of Nestlé but remains on the board of directors, felt that the ICC had hitherto been neither sufficiently influential nor visible in the media.[10] Maucher has observed the efficient work of environmental and human rights NGOs within the UN system with great concern. In one of his first interviews as ICC president, Maucher warned: “We have to be careful that they do not get too much influence.” [11]

Within both the WTO and the UN, the ICC is pushing for the implementation of “a framework of global rules” which it plans to help draft, “as the only organization qualified to speak for every business sector in all parts of the world. Governments have to understand,” Maucher argues, “that business is not just another pressure group but a resource that will help them set the right rules.”[12] The joint statement between the UN Secretary- General and the ICC clarifies the ICC’s reasons for wanting to be involved in global decision making: “Business has a strong interest in multilateral cooperation, including standard-setting through the United Nations and other intergovernmental institutions and international conventions on the environment and other global and transborder issues.”

When Maucher became vice president of the ICC in 1995, he immediately dove into a reorganization process. He brought in a new Secretary-General, Maria Livanos Cattaui, who for many years had organized the World Economic Forum in Davos and like Maucher has a wide ranging network of international contacts.

Maucher himself divides his time as ICC president with his leadership of the European Roundtable of Industrialists. (ERT; for background information see “Europe, Inc.”, CEO, 1997)

Maucher’s ambitions for the ICC also include formal status within the World Trade Organization (WTO): “We want neither to be the secret girlfriend of the WTO,” Maucher said in an interview, “nor should the ICC have to enter the World Trade Organization through the servants entrance.”[13]

To pursue this more intimate relationship with the WTO, Maucher has made former GATT general director Arthur Dunkel chairman of the ICC’s commission on trade. Dunkel is also a board member of Nestlé.

Shared Vision?

The ICC, with its strategic cooptation of the message spread by NGOs and people’s movements, is attempting to use the growing consensus that global deregulation is creating serious social and environmental problems to its advantage. As Maria Livanos Cattaui described the ICC’s new cooperation with the UN, “the dialogue is coming not a moment too soon. Globalization has the potential to bring immense benefits to the human race. But as recent events in East Asia have demonstrated, it can swiftly magnify local crises into problems affecting the entire world economy. Hence the need for a framework of rules on investment, capital markets, competition policy and a host of other areas.”

The ICC’s agenda of deregulated markets — in the interest of hardly anyone besides the large transnational corporations united in the ICC — is presented an idealistic strategy to benefit all people. Cattaui disturbingly claims to have UN support for the ICC’s vision: “What makes the dialogue possible is the perception by both sides that open markets are a precondition for spreading more widely the benefits of globalization, for integrating developing countries into the world economy, and for improving living standards of all the world’s peoples, and in particular the poor.”

The joint UN-ICC statement seems to confirm a wide-ranging consensus, as it emphasizes the importance of  “the effective functioning of the global market place and on the existence of open, equitable, inclusive economic systems, based on the free flow of trade, investment for economic growth and development and the avoidance of protectionist pressures.”

The UN seems to have largely given up worrying about the growing economic dominance of transnational corporations worldwide. Until 1993, the UN still had its Centre on Transnational Corporations (UNCTC) which carried out research and served the Commission on Transnational Corporations, an intergovernmental body with the mandate of developing a Code of Conduct for TNCs. Corporations were extremely hostile to the UNCTC, which also developed environmental guidelines for TNCs and promoted restricting foreign investment in the South Africa under the apartheid regime. In 1993 the UNCTC was dismantled as part of a ‘reorganization’, and UNCTAD became the new UN focal point for work on TNCs. UNCTAD, however, does not address the regulation of TNC activities, but rather works closely with them in order to stimulate foreign investment flows to the Third World. Work on the Code of Conduct on TNCs has stopped entirely.

With this “systematic dialogue” with the UN, the ICC has made a disturbing leap forward in its desire to become the legitimate global representative of “business”. However, the ICC does by no means represent all businesses, but principally only the largest transnational corporations. The interests of these footloose global players differ significantly from those businesses which are grounded in and oriented towards a local market. But there are other fundamental questions besides whether or not the ICC is really “the world business organization”. Is it appropriate for corporations — which are supposed to compete, adapt and diversify — to organize themselves in what effectively equals a global political monopoly? And concerning the ICC’s ambitions for “global regulation”: should corporations not simply be following the rules — local, national or global – shaped by democratically elected governments assisted by citizens organisations?

Notes

1. Maria Livanos Cattaui: “UN-Business Partnership Forged on Global Economy”, February 6 in International Herald Tribune.

2. “UN-Business Partnership to Boost Economic Development”, ICC statement 9 February 1998.

3. For instance the ICC signed an agreement with the United Nations Development Programme in September 1992 “under which UNDP provides financial and practical support for ICC efforts to strengthen the private sector and chambers of commerce in developing countries and in eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union”, ICC website. The International Bureau of Chambers of Commerce (IBCC), which is a part of the ICC, is playing a leading role in implementing the agreement.

4. ICC and UNCTAD Press Release: “Leading Multinationals Vote their Confidence in Asia”, 18 March 1998.

5. Ibid.

6. ibid.

7. Helmut Maucher: “Ruling by Consent”, guest column in the Financial Times, 6 December 1997, FT Exporter, p. 2.

8. “Die Globalisierung Verlangt eine Kraftigere Stimme der Wirtschaft”, Frankfurter Algemeine 12 February 1997, p. 13.

9. Ibid.

10. Helmut Maucher: “Ruling by Consent”, guest column in the Financial Times, 6 December 1997, FT Exporter, p. 2.

11. Ibid.

12. ibid.

13. “Die Globalisierung Verlangt eine Kraftigere Stimme der Wirtschaft”, Frankfurter Algemeine 12 February 1997, p.13.

(from)

Corporate Europe Observatory
Paulus Potterstraat 20 1071 DA Amsterdam Netherlands tel/fax: +31-20-612-7023

e-mail: <ceo@xs4all.nl>

http://archive.corporateeurope.org/observer1/un.html

***

International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA)
5th floor, 209/215 Blackfriars Road
London SE1 8NL
United Kingdom

Tel:  (0)20 7633 2371
Fax:  (0)20 7633 2389
Email:  info@ipieca.org
Web:  www.ipieca.org

http://www.imo.org/About/mainframe.asp?doc_id=851&topic_id=315

***

http://www.ipieca.org/

Bringing together the
oil and gas industry on global,
environmental and social issues

Latest News
Managing biodiversity impacts: 10 tips for success in the oil and gas industry
IPIECA keeps you informed about the Gulf of Mexico response
New publication: Chain of custody options for sustainable biofuels
New Portuguese translation: A guide to malaria management programmes in the oil and gas industry
Recent Global climate policy developments workshop
New climate change publication: Oil and Natural Gas Industry Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Reduction Projects: Flare Reduction Project Family
CoP15 side session: Climate change and energy to 2020
Update to Human Rights Training Toolkit for the Oil and Gas Industry
New climate change publication: Addressing Uncertainty in Oil and Natural Gas Industry Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Indirect Land-Use Change workshop, 9-10 November 2009
Impact Assessment, Biodiversity and the Extractive Industries Workshop report
New health publication: Drilling Fluids and Health Risk Management
IPIECA Stakeholder Dialogue

***

About OFPIC

The Operational, Fuels & Product issues Committee (OFPIC) replaced the Fuels & Transportation Working Group at the end of 2006.

OFPIC provides a networking forum for senior downstream HSE managers to coordinate industry response on operational HSE issues throughout the downstream supply chain. In practical terms, this means working on diverse issues such as utilization of biofuels, marine air emissions, the use of fuel additives, product HSE management and stewardship, and other operational/fuel supply chain HSE issues that may be identified by SIAF or the wider membership

OFPIC News
New publication: Chain of custody options for sustainable biofuels
GHS guidance submitted to UNSCEGHS
Indirect Land-Use Change Workshop: 9–10 November 2009, Lausanne, Switzerland – Presentations now available!
New publication: “Biofuels, sustainability and the petroleum industry”

http://www.ipieca.org/activities/fuels/fuels_about.php

***

World Chambers Federation

2006-2008
Vice-Chairman   Robert Recker, Vice President, Orlando Regional Chamber of Commerce & Industry

2004-2005
Chairman           Avijit Mazumdar, Assocham India

Vice-Chairmen   Nancy Hughes Anthony, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Peter Mihok, Slovak Chamber of Commerce & Industry (Slovakia)
Park Yong-Sung, Korea Chamber of Commerce & Industry
Rona Yircali, Balikesir Chamber of Industry (Turkey)

2002-2003
Chairman          Avijit Mazumdar, Assocham India

Vice-Chairmen  Nancy Hughes Anthony, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Usamah M. Al Kurdi, Council of Saudi Chambers (Saudi Arabia)
Peter Mikoh, Slovak Chamber of Commerce & Industry (Slovakia)
Park Yong-Sung, Korea Chamber of Commerce & Industry

2001
Chairman         Avijit Mazumdar, Assocham India

Vice-Chairmen  Nancy Hughes Anthony, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Usamah M. Al Kurdi, Council of Saudi Chambers (Saudi Arabia)
Peter Mikoh, Slovak Chamber of Commerce & Industry (Slovakia)

International Bureau of Chambers of Commerce (BICC)

1999-2000
Chairman         Avijit Mazumdar, Assocham India

Vice-Chairmen  A.A Baramuli, Indonesian Chamber of Commerce & Industry
Helmut Klomfar, Vienna Economic Chamber (Austria)

1998
Chairman         Avijit Mazumdar, Assocham India

Vice-Chairmen  A.A Baramuli, Indonesian Chamber of Commerce & Industry
Pierre Tchanqué, Cameroon Chamber of Commerce, Industry & Mines
Helmut Klomfar, Vienna Economic Chamber (Austria)

1997
Chairman         Avijit Mazumdar, Assocham India

Vice-Chairmen  A.A Baramuli, Indonesian Chamber of Commerce & Industry
Pierre Tchanqué, Cameroon Chamber of Commerce, Industry & Mines
Helmut Klomfar, Vienna Economic Chamber (Austria)

1994-1996
Chairman         Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon);
President, General Union of Arab Chambers of Commerce & Industry

Vice-Chairmen  A.A Baramuli, Indonesian Chamber of Commerce & Industry
Avijit Mazumdar, Assocham India
Pierre Tchanqué, Cameroon Chamber of Commerce, Industry & Mines

1993
Chairman         Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon);
President, General Union of Arab Chambers of Commerce & Industry

Vice-Chairmen  A.A Baramuli, Indonesian Chamber of Commerce & Industry
Avijit Mazumdar, Assocham India
Pierre Tchanqué, Cameroon Chamber of Commerce, Industry & Mines
Keizo Saji, Japan Chamber of Commerce

1992
Chairman         Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon);
President, General Union of Arab Chambers of Commerce & Industry

Vice-Chairmen  A.A Baramuli, Indonesian Chamber of Commerce & Industry
Pierre Tchanqué, Cameroon Chamber of Commerce, Industry & Mines
Keizo Saji, Japan Chamber of Commerce

1991
Chairman         Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon);
President, General Union of Arab Chambers of Commerce & Industry

Vice-Chairmen  A.A Baramuli, Indonesian Chamber of Commerce & Industry
Pierre Tchanqué, Cameroon Chamber of Commerce, Industry & Mines
Keizo Saji, Japan Chamber of Commerce
Hari Shankar Singhania, Assocham India

1989-1990
Chairman         Hans Messer, Frankfurt Chamber of Commerce (Germany)

Vice-Chairmen  Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon)
Pierre Tchanqué, Cameroon Chamber of Commerce, Industry & Mines
Keizo Saji, Japan Chamber of Commerce
Hari Shankar Singhania, Assocham India

1987-1988
Chairman         Hans Messer, Frankfurt Chamber of Commerce (Germany)

Vice-Chairmen  Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon)
Pierre Netter, Assembly of French Chambers of Commerce (France)
Keizo Saji, Japan Chamber of Commerce
Hari Shankar Singhania, Assocham India

1985-1986
Chairman          Rudolf Schlenker, Hamburg Chamber of Commerce (Germany)

Vice-Chairmen   Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon)
Pierre Netter, Assembly of French Chambers of Commerce (France)
Susumu Furukawa, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)
Hari Shankar Singhania, Assocham India

1984
Chairman          Rudolf Schlenker, Hamburg Chamber of Commerce (Germany)

Vice-Chairmen   Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon)
Pierre Netter, Assembly of French Chambers of Commerce (France)
Isamu Saheki, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)
Hari Shankar Singhania, Assocham India

1980
Chairman          Rudolf Schlenker, Hamburg Chamber of Commerce (Germany)

Vice Chairmen   Raul de Goes, Confederation of Chambers of Commerce of Brazil
Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon)
Egil S Roed, Oslo Chamber of Commerce (Norway)
Isamu Saheki, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)

1978
Chairman          Phillip Schoeller, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber

Vice-Chairmen   Raul de Goes, Confederation of Chambers of Commerce of Brazil
I. Habibullah, Overseas Investors Chamber of Commerce (Pakistan)
Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon)
Egil S. Roed, Oslo Chamber of Commerce (Norway)
Isamu Saheki, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)

1977
Chairman          Phillip Schoeller, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber

Vice-Chairmen   Raul de Goes, Confederation of Chambers of Commerce of Brazil
I. Habibullah, Overseas Investors Chamber of Commerce (Pakistan)
Adnan Kassar,  Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon)
Egil S. Roed, Oslo Chamber of Commerce (Norway)
Isamu Saheki, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)

1974
Chairman          Phillip Schoeller, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber

Vice-Chairmen   Arch N. Booth, US Chamber of Commerce (USA)
Raul de Goes, Confederation of Chambers of Commerce of Brazil
I. Habibullah, Overseas Investors Chamber of Commerce (Pakistan)
Adnan Kassar, Beirut Chamber of Commerce (Lebanon)
Massimo Risso, Chamber of Commerce of Genova (Italy)
Egil S. Roed, Oslo Chamber of Commerce (Norway)
Isamu Saheki, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)

1972
Chairman          Phillip Schoeller, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber

Vice-Chairmen   Arch N. Booth, US Chamber of Commerce (USA)
W.H. Fockema Andrea, Rotterdam Chamber of Commerce (Netherlands)
Massimo Risso, Chamber of Commerce of Genova (Italy)
I. Habibullah, Overseas Investors Chamber of Commerce (Pakistan)
Isamu Saheki, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)

1969-1971
Chairman          B. Thorburn, Goteburg Chamber of Commerce & Industry (Sweden)

Vice-Chairmen   Arch N Booth, US Chamber of Commerce (USA)
Paul Förster, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber
I. Habibullah, Overseas Investors Chamber of Commerce (Pakistan)
Shinobu Ichikawa, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)
Massimo Risso, Chamber of Commerce of Genova (Italy)

1968
Chairman          Hans Rudolf Von Schröder, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber

Vice-Chairmen   Arch. N.Booth, US Chamber of Commerce (USA)
Paul Förster, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber
Shinobu Ichikawa, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)
Massimo Risso, Chamber of Commerce of Genova (Italy)

1966
Chairman          F.H. Tate, London Chamber of Commerce & Industry (UK)

Vice-Chairmen   Arch N Booth, US Chamber of Commerce (USA)
Paul Förster, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber
D.L. Morrell, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
D. Odawara, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)
Eugenio Radice Fossati, Union of Italian Chambers of Commerce
Rudolf Von Schröder, Hamburg Chamber of Commerce (Germany)

International Information Bureau of Chambers of Commerce (BIICC)

1964
Chairman          F.H. Tate, London Chamber of Commerce & Industry (UK)
Vice-Chairmen   Arch N Booth, US Chamber of Commerce (USA)
Paul Förster, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber
D.L. Morrell, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
D. Odawara, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)
Eugenio Radice Fossati, Union of Italian Chambers of Commerce
Rudolf Von Schröder, Hamburg Chamber of Commerce (Germany)

1962
Chairman          J.F. Sarasin, Basel Chamber of Commerce (Switzerland)
Vice-Chairmen   Arch N. Booth, US Chamber of Commerce
Paul Förster, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber
D.L. Morrell, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
D. Odawara, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)
F.H. Tate, London Chamber of Commerce & Industry (UK)

1960
Chairman          B.F. Enschedé, Haarlem Chamber of Commerce (Netherlands)
Vice-Chairmen   Paul Förster, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber
Gerhard Frentzel, Association of German Chambers of Ind. & Commerce
D.L. Morrell, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Michisuke Sugi, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)

1959
Chairman          Carlos Mantero, Lisbon Chamber of Commerce (Portugal)

Vice-Chairmen   Paul Förster, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber
Gerhard Frentzel, Association of German Chambers of Ind. & Commerce
D.L. Morrell, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Michisuke Sugi, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)

1956
President          Carlos Mantero, Lisbon Chamber of Commerce (Portugal)

Past Presidents Stefano Brun, Naples Chamber of Commerce (Italy)
Jacques Fougerolle, French German Chamber of Commerce

Vice-Presidents Sir Eric Carpenter, Manchester Chamber of Commerce & Industry (UK)
Guillermo Kraft, Chamber of Commerce of Argentina
D.L. Morell, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Michisuke Sugi, Osaka Chamber of Commerce (Japan)

FoundingChairman   Stefano Brun, Napels Chamber of Commerce (Italy)

This information has been sourced from the ICC Handbook published as per the years noted above.

http://www.iccwbo.biz/iccefhh/index.html

***

Robert Recker

Robert Recker

WCF Vice Chair 2006 – 2008

Robert Recker serves as the Executive Vice President of the Orlando Regional Chamber, the largest local chamber of commerce in Florida.  In his current capacity, Mr. Recker leads the strategic decisions for the organization’s development in the areas of Membership, Community Leadership, Public Policy, Non-Dues Income, Community Relations, International Relations, Communications, and Administration.

Mr. Recker has created innovative sales and marketing strategies that have increased  membership sales and retention for five consecutive years.  He is credited with developing the Chamber’s membership portfolio of benefits, programs and activities which are marketed to three distinct brands; the Small Business Chamber, Chamber Trustees, and the Regional Board of Advisors.  In addition, he has negotiated joint membership alliances with the Asian-American, African-American, and Hispanic Chambers of Commerce, Orlando/Orange County Convention and Visitors, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce.  Mr. Recker also leads the Chamber’s international relations activities for the organization through his involvement with the World Chamber Congress, World Trade Center Orlando, and the Metro Orlando International Affairs Commission.

Mr Recker is the Chairman of the Chamber Leadership Cabinet for the United States Council for International Business. The Leadership Cabinet, comprised of select chamber of commerce executives from across America, will serve as advisors and advocates for the USCIB within the International Chamber of Commerce and the World Chamber Federation. In addition, the Leadership Cabinet will oversee the development of USCIB’s Associates program, which serves to promote an open system of world trade, finance and investment as well as developing products and services for chambers of commerce that which will assist their members efforts to enter and stay competitive in the global marketplace.

http://www.iccwbo.biz/wcf/id5896/index.html

***

google search –
United States Council for International Business. The Leadership Cabinet

Welcome to USCIB – United States Council for International Business
Promotes an open system of world trade, finance, and investment from the perspective of business.
www.uscib.org/

***

However, the ICC does by no means represent all businesses, but principally only the largest transnational corporations. The interests of these footloose global players differ significantly from those businesses which are grounded in and oriented towards a local market. But there are other fundamental questions besides whether or not the ICC is really “the world business organization”. Is it appropriate for corporations — which are supposed to compete, adapt and diversify — to organize themselves in what effectively equals a global political monopoly?

The new “partnership” between the ICC and the UN is the result of the former’s ambitious strategy pursued since Helmut Maucher took the helm in early 1997. Maucher, who recently left his job as CEO of Nestlé but remains on the board of directors, felt that the ICC had hitherto been neither sufficiently influential nor visible in the media.[10] Maucher has observed the efficient work of environmental and human rights NGOs within the UN system with great concern. In one of his first interviews as ICC president, Maucher warned: “We have to be careful that they do not get too much influence.” [11]

Within both the WTO and the UN, the ICC is pushing for the implementation of “a framework of global rules” which it plans to help draft, “as the only organization qualified to speak for every business sector in all parts of the world. Governments have to understand,” Maucher argues, “that business is not just another pressure group but a resource that will help them set the right rules.”[12] The joint statement between the UN Secretary- General and the ICC clarifies the ICC’s reasons for wanting to be involved in global decision making: “Business has a strong interest in multilateral cooperation, including standard-setting through the United Nations and other intergovernmental institutions and international conventions on the environment and other global and transborder issues.”

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), contrary to what its name might suggest, is primarily an organization representing the largest transnational corporations on earth, including corporate giants like General Motors, Novartis, Bayer and Nestlé.

The ICC, which for many years has pushed for global economic deregulation within the World Trade Organization, the G-7 and the OECD, now has its sights set on the United Nations. “The way the United Nations regards international business has changed fundamentally. This shift towards a stance more favourable to business is being nurtured from the very top,” ICC Secretary General Maria Livanos Cattaui concluded with satisfaction in a column in the International Herald Tribune in February. Cattaui quotes UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in saying that the time is ripe for consultation between the UN and business.[1]

Cattaui’s optimism was confirmed the same week in a February 9th meeting of 25 ICC business leaders with a heavyweight UN delegation headed by Kofi Annan, heralded as the first step in “a systematic dialogue.” The ICC delegation included captains of industry from Coca Cola, Unilever, McDonalds, Goldman Sachs and Rio Tinto Zinc. In a joint statement, the ICC and the UN Secretary General stated that “broad political and economic changes have opened up new opportunities for dialogue and cooperation between the United Nations and the private sector”.

The two sides committed themselves to “forge a close global partnership to secure greater business input into the world’s economic decision-making and boost the private sector in the least developed countries.” The industry representatives used the occasion to argue for “establishing an effective regulatory framework for globalization, including investment, capital markets, competition, intellectual property rights and trade facilitation.”[2] The ICC has worked with UN institutions before, but not on the highest level and not on the potentially very wide range of political matters around which ‘partnership’ now seems to have emerged.[3]

ICC and UNCTAD Hand-in-Hand

(from)

http://archive.corporateeurope.org/observer1/un.html

***

International Spill Control Organization (ISCO)
Balbithax House
Kintore
Inverurie
Aberdeenshire AB51 0UQ Tel: 01467 632 282
Email: info@spillcontrol.org
Web: www.spillcontrol.org

***

United States Council for International Business – Wikipedia, the …
United States Council for International Business (USCIB) is an independent business advocacy group originally founded in 1945 to promote free trade and help …
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Council_for_International_Business

United States Council for International Business (USCIB) is an independent business advocacy group originally founded in 1945 to promote free trade and help represent U.S. business in the, then new, United Nations. One of its primary goals is expanding market access for U.S. products and services abroad. The organization is fervently pro-trade and pro market- liberalization.

The USCIB has an active membership roster of over 300 multinational companies, law firms and business associations. The roster is replete with household corporate names including 26 of the 30 Dow Jones Industrial Average members. (The number will go to 27 on February 19, 2008 when Chevron is scheduled to replace Honeywell in the Dow.) Legal and consulting multinationals are also well represented.

International Affiliations

The USCIB is the U.S. affiliate of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the Business and Industry Advisory Committee to the OECD and the International Organisation of Employers. It functions as the U.S. representative to the ICC’s multifaceted dispute resolution services, including the ICC International Court of Arbitration which is charged with settlement of international business disputes and the legal and procedural aspects of arbitration.

Functions

The USCIB’s three function areas are policy advocacy, dispute resolution and ATA Carnet administration.

  • The organization promotes business interests both to U.S. policy makers and to international groups like the United Nations. Current, stated policy priorities include advancing sustainable development, expanding international trade and investment, ensuring strong intellectual property rights and supporting information & communication technology (ICT) enabled growth.
  • Dispute resolution is accomplished through the USCIB’s affiliation with the ICC and its dispute resolution service which includes the ICC International Court of Arbitration. The USCIB provides assistance in the nomination of arbitrators, makes referrals to parties seeking attorneys, organizes seminars and corporate roundtables, and answers questions from U.S. businesses regarding the arbitration process and other ICC dispute resolution services.
  • Since 1968, when U.S. Customs assigned them the task, the USCIB has been handling the administration of international customs documents know as ATA Carnets. In this capacity the organization issues and guarantees Carnets, which allow temporary, duty-free imports overseas for goods generally qualified for use in trade shows or as commercial samples and professional equipment.

References

United States Council for International Business

External links

***

International Association of Drilling Contractors (IADC)
P.O. Box 4287
Houston, Texas 77210-4287
United States of America

United Kingdom office:
P.O. Box 296
Ruislip
Middx HA4 7WZ

Tel: +1 713 292 1945
Fax: +1 713 292 1946
Email:  info@iadc.org
Web:  www.iadc.org

Tel:  +44(0)1895 621 889
Email:  dominic.cattini@iadc.org

Web:  www.iadc.org

Oil Companies International Marine Forum (OCIMF)
29 Queen Anne’s Gate
London SW1H 9BU
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)20 7654 12 00
Fax:  +44(0)20 7654 12 05
Email:  enquiries@ocimf.com
Web: www.ocimf.com

International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP)
209-215 Blackfriars Road
London SE1 8NL
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44 (0)20 76330272
Fax:  +44 (0)20 7633 2350
Email:  reception@surname@ogp.org.uk
Web:  www.ogp.org.uk

International Council of Marine Industry Associations  (ICOMIA)
Marine House
Thorpe Lea Road
Egham
Surrey TW20 8BF
United Kingdom

Tel:  1784-223 703
Fax:  1784-223 705
Email: info@icomia.com
Web: www.icomia.com

Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators Limited (SIGTTO)
17 St. Helen’s Place
London EC3A 6DG
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)20 7628 11 24
Fax:  +44(0)20 7628 31 63
Email:  secretariat@sigtto.org
Web:  www.sigtto.org

International Vessel Operators Hazardous Materials Association, Inc. (VOHMA)
10 Hunter Brook Lane
Queensbury, NY 12804
United States of America

Tel:  +1 518 761 0263
Fax: +1 518 792 7781
Email:  mail@vohma.com
Web:  www.vohma.com

International Chamber of Shipping (ICS)
Carthusian Court
12 Carthusian Street
London EC1M 6EZ
United Kingdom

Tel:  +44(0)20 7417 8844
Fax:  +44(0)20 7417 8877
Email:  post@marisec.org
Web: www.marisec.org

International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
38 Cours Albert 1er
75008 Paris
France

Tel:  +33 1 49 53 28 28
Fax:  +33 1 49 53 2859
Email:  icc@iccwbo.org
Web:  www.iccwbo.org

ICC Commercial Crime Services

The ICC International Maritime Bureau (IMB) is a specialised division of the International Chamber Of Commerce (ICC). The IMB is a non-profit making
www.icc-ccs.org/

***

Coalitions – California Chamber of Commerce
U.S. Council for International Business (USCIB) … Chamber of Commerce involved in international trade via a Leadership Cabinet of the USCIB. … passage of a free trade agreement between the United States and the Republic of Korea. …
http://www.calchamber.com/governmentrelations/lobbying/coalitions/pages/default.aspx

California Employer Coalition on Heat Stress
Represents the views of California employers to the Division of Occupational Safety and Health and to the Cal/OSHA Standards Board in the form of written comments and testimony regarding potential impacts proposed regulations on heat stress might have on California businesses and their workers.
Staff Contact: Marti Fisher

California Employers Coalition on Meal and Rest Period — Represents the views of California employers to the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement and the Legislature regarding potential impacts proposed regulations and legislation on meal and rest periods might have on California businesses and their workers.
Staff Contact: Kyla Christoffersen

California Employers Coalition
Comprised of employers and employer association representatives, CEC reviews and comments directly on issues that affect the employer/employee relationship. This coalition is the consensus voice of California employers to the state Legislature and state agency boards regarding the impact of proposed laws and regulations on businesses.
Staff Contact: Kyla Christoffersen

The Thursday Group
Seeks to promote an agenda that strikes a reasonable balance between economic growth and environmental protection. The goal of the Thursday Group is to encourage California decision-makers to work with the group to strike a reasonable compromise between the impact of legislation on California’s economy and environmental protection.
Staff Contact: Robert Callahan

***

International Business Report US Kitchen Cabinet Market Entry
Dec 10, 2008 … International Business ReportUS Kitchen Cabinet Market Entry … the kitchen cabinet industry and market in the United States and to ….. focus on cost leadership or product and service differentiation or a particular segment. …. Tile Council of America – http://www.tileusa.com International Solid …
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/2924278/International-Business-Report-US-Kitchen-Cabinet-Market-Entry-Analysis-for

Mission of the USTR | Office of the United States Trade Representative
The United States is party to numerous trade agreements with other countries, … The head of USTR is the U.S. Trade Representative, a Cabinet member who serves … and a member of the National Advisory Council on International Monetary and … USTR provides trade policy leadership and negotiating expertise in its …
http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/mission

Leadership Group – Breaux Lott
The firm unites two former United States Senators Trent Lott and John Breaux, … and Republicans and served as chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council. … an international business advisory firm headquartered in Austin, Texas. …. as to the Bush and Obama Administrations (White House, cabinet departments, …
http://www.breauxlott.com/leadership.html

from these results above –

Leadership Group
Based in Washington, D.C., The Breaux-Lott Leadership Group offers strategic advice, consulting and lobbying to a wide range of clients. The firm unites two former United States Senators Trent Lott and John Breaux, leaders from opposite parties with a combined total of nearly 70 years experience in Congress. It is clear over the last several years that the only way to accomplish true results in Washington is through a bipartisan approach.

Senator John Breaux
Senator John Breaux is a vital voice and force in the American political arena. He led a long and distinguished career in Congress before joining Patton Boggs as senior counsel after retiring from the United States Senate in 2005. He provided strategic advice to Patton Boggs’ attorneys and clients on a wide range of public policy matters, with special concentration in the areas of healthcare and energy law. His latest venture is cofounding the Breaux-Lott Leadership Group, an all-in-the-family lobbying firm for bipartisan solutions, with former Senator Trent Lott. Exclusively represented by Leading Authorities, he tackles today’s key issues in a comfortable manner, based on many years of experience in service to the nation.

A Politician with Balance. Breaux was elected to the House of Representatives in 1972 at the age of 28–at the time of his election he was the youngest member of the United States Congress. He was a widely recognized bipartisan leader in the Senate, and in 1993 was elected by his Democratic colleagues to the post of Deputy Minority Whip, a position he held until his retirement. He also held a number of key Senate committee positions. A senior member of the Finance Committee, Breaux served as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Social Security and Family Policy. He also held positions on two other Finance subcommittees, the Subcommittee on Health Care, and the Subcommittee on Taxation and IRS Oversight. From his position on the Finance Committee, he played instrumental roles in forging the compromises that led to passage of the welfare reform and health insurance reform bills in 1996. He was also a leader in the efforts to reduce the capital gains tax and to provide tax relief for college education expenses.

While in the Senate, Breaux was a beacon of insight on energy issues. He served as co-chair of the Oil and Gas Caucus and was a conferee on energy legislation that was eventually written into the 2005 Energy Bill. He was active in advancing legislation to promote domestic oil and gas production, and was a cosponsor of the Marginal Well Preservation Act, a tax incentive program that encouraged oil production from marginal oil wells. He was also a principal author of the Outer Continental Shelf Land Act.

Bipartisan Solidarity. Senator Breaux was a founder of the Centrist Coalition of Senate Democrats and Republicans and served as chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council. In 2005 President George W. Bush appointed Breaux as the co-chair of the President’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform, while in 2006, he was chosen to be a member of the Advisory Committee on Transformational Diplomacy at the U.S. Department of State. Breaux continues to serve as an effective and aggressive advocate for the state of Louisiana. His mainstream approach to government has earned him praise from conservatives, liberals, and moderates across the nation. As The Shreveport Times observed in a March 1997 editorial: “Breaux has sought to build bridges between Democrats and Republicans and is widely respected on both sides of the aisle.”

Senator Trent Lott
In December 2007, Trent Lott left the United States Congress where he has worked on behalf of the people of the State of Mississippi for the past 35 years. A champion of a strong national defense, he remains dedicated to encouraging economic growth and protecting Americans’ economic security by getting government off their backs and out of their pocketbooks. Seven Presidents have known both his cooperation and his opposition, for he has kept his country ahead of partisan and personal concerns.

As the House Republican Whip in 1981, he forged the bipartisan alliance that enacted President Ronald Reagan’s economic recovery program and his national security initiatives. Part of the reason for this and other victories was Congressman Lott’s creation of the House of Representative’s first modern whip organization, focusing on regular member-to-member contacts and extensive outreach to sympathetic Democrats. Counting votes, building coalitions, and moving legislation were things he seemed born to do, and he genuinely enjoyed the process.

Elected to the Senate in 1988, he was a member of the group of pro-growth stalwarts who opposed the tax increase forced on President Bush in 1990. When he became the Senate’s 16th Majority Leader in 1996, he again put his coalition-building skills to the test and, along with House Speaker Newt Gingrich, enacted his historic welfare reform bill of 1996. The next year, Lott, Gingrich and congressional Budget Committee chairmen John Kasich and Pete Domenici together produced an historic budget and tax cut agreement that limited some federal spending. But more important, it created new incentives to save and invest, thereby stimulating the economic growth that brought the federal budget into balance for the first time since 1968.

As the Republican Leader during the first two years of President George W. Bush’s administration, Senator Lott led the fight for passage of the President’s tax cut package, the President’s landmark education reform bill, the largest increase in defense spending since the Cold War, the most significant trade legislation in a decade, and the resolution supporting the President on military action in Iraq.

During the Senate’s lame duck session of November 2002, Senator Lott, drawing on his experience as a legislative negotiator, reached the compromises that created the Department of Homeland Security. In 2006, Senator Lott was elected Senate Republican Whip for the second time in his career. He is the only member of Congress to hold this position in both the House and Senate.

For 16 years in the House of Representatives and 19 years in the Senate, Trent Lott has been a driving force in the United States Congress. After his retirement from the United States Senate, Senator Lott founded the Breaux Lott Leadership Group with former Senator John Breaux of Louisiana, a partnership offering strategic advice, consulting and lobbying to a wide range of clients. The firm unites two former Senate leaders from opposite parties, with a combined total of nearly 70 years experience in Congress.

Senator Lott is married to Patricia (Tricia) Thompson Lott, his college sweetheart. They have two children- Chester Trent Lott, Jr. and Tyler Lott Armstrong-and have been blessed with four grandchildren, Chester Trent Lott III, Lucie Sims Lott, Shields Elizabeth Armstrong and Addison States Armstrong.

Bret Boyles
Email Bret – Download vcard

Bret K. Boyles is a founding member of the Breaux Lott Leadership Group and brings with him more than a decade of political and policy expertise. Most recently, Mr. Boyles served as Chief of Staff to Republican Whip, Senator Trent Lott. Prior to that Boyles served as Executive Director of the New Republican Majority Fund and as President of his own consulting firm, Principle Strategies Group. Early in his career Boyles served as a Legislative Assistant to Majority Leader Lott working on issues related to Commerce and Banking.

Boyles has twice been recognized by Roll Call Newspaper as a Top 50 Staffer for his “know how,” “access, ” and “strength” to get things done.

John Breaux Jr.
Download vcard

John Breaux Jr. has over 20 years experience in government and political relations and currently runs a successful consulting practice in Washington, D.C., and New Orleans, LA. Before starting his practice in 2001, Breaux Jr. served as a principal at Johnston & Associates. His experience includes serving as managing director for Public Strategies, an international business advisory firm headquartered in Austin, Texas. He also worked as a director of congressional affairs at the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association.

John Flynn
Email John – Download vcard

John P. Flynn joins The Breaux Lott Leadership Group with nearly 30 years of maritime and marine resource experience, including 10 years of practical experience on Capitol Hill.

Prior to joining The Breaux Lott Leadership Group, Mr. Flynn served as a government relations specialist for one of the Gulf South’s largest law firms, where he focused on maritime transportation, fisheries and other policy issues.

Mr. Flynn served as a Legislative Assistant and Congressional Fellow to U.S. Senator John Breaux (1998-2004). In this capacity, he functioned as his primary advisor on maritime, marine resource and transportation issues and related policy development. During his tenure as a staff member in the senate, Mr. Flynn worked on a wide variety of maritime and fisheries matters, including the Maritime Transportation Safety Act, Oceans Act, Aquatic Resources Trust Fund (Wallop-Breaux), Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act and numerous Coast Guard authorization bills. He has served as U.S. delegate to the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna.

Mr. Flynn served in the U.S. Coast Guard, both as a commissioned officer and senior enlisted member, from 1978-2002, in increasingly responsible positions, principally in the marine safety program. On the occasion of his retirement from the Coast Guard, he held virtually all attainable marine safety and marine inspection qualifications. He is also a National Interagency Incident Command System (ICS) Instructor.

Callie Fuselier Hickox
Email Callie – Download vcard

Callie Fuselier Hickox assists clients on a variety of public policy and regulatory issues that come before Congress and other federal and state forums.

Before joining The Breaux Lott Leadership Group, Ms. Hickox gained extensive knowledge of the legislative process and established strong Congressional and Executive Branch relationships by working on Capitol Hill, as well as at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and Patton Boggs, LLP.

During her seven years on Capitol Hill working for Senator John Breaux and then Minority Leader (now Majority Leader) Harry Reid, she worked with federal and state lawmakers on a wide range of matters. Ms. Hickox developed key relationships and interacted closely with both Democratic and Republican leadership staff, monitoring the daily legislative activity on the Senate floor. Her responsibilities also included facilitating meetings between the Senators and members of Congress, cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, and White House officials.

After leaving Capitol Hill, Ms. Hickox served as Deputy Chief of Staff for Commissioner Fred Hatfield at the CFTC and then as Public Policy Advisor at Patton Boggs, LLP.

Chester Trent Lott, Jr.
Email Chet – Download vcard

A graduate of the University of Mississippi (BPA), Chet Lott has an extensive business background in the private sector. In 2001, he joined his partner, former Congressman Larry Hopkins (R-KY), in forming the government relations consulting firm of Lott & Hopkins, LLC, based in Washington, DC and Lexington, KY. Two years later, the former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Honorable Bob Livingston, asked him to join prominent lobbying firm The Livingston Group. “He brings unique knowledge and experience in both private sector business and the workings of federal and state governments.”

Chet was a successful and recognized restaurateur, the recipient of many awards for operational excellence and sales. His real world experience with the way public policy impacts people’s livelihoods and businesses, along with his family tradition of public service, provided Chet an early and profound education in government and politics. He has worked on a varied set of issues affecting the defense, energy, shipping, medical/healthcare, telecommunications and gaming industries. Specific issues include contract management and procurement, border security matters, maritime and offshore energy projects.

A charitable project close to Chet’s heart is his Katrina relief benefit CD.  An accomplished musician from an early age, his music has raised over $125,000 for the Southeast Mississippi Chapter of the Red Cross.

Among Lott’s passions is the sport of polo.  He has reached the United States Polo Associations rating of one goal and has served on the Lexington Polo Club & National Polo Institute board of directors.   Chet and his wife Diane own Augustus Hill Farm in the beautiful bluegrass area of Kentucky.  The farm specializes in breaking thoroughbred racehorses for polo.

Chet has served on the Cardinal Hill Hospital board of directors and currently serves on the Headley-Whitney Museum Board of directors and the Kentucky Horse Park Board of Governors.

In January 2008, Chet joined his three partners, Senator Trent Lott, Senator John Breaux and John Breaux, Jr., in forming The Breaux Lott Leadership Group.  Representing fortune 100 companies, the firm has catapulted to one of the top political consulting firms in the country.  He travels weekly between Kentucky and Washington.

Kelly Mixon
Email Kelly – Download vcard

Kelly joined the Breaux Lott Leadership Group as an Associate in 2009 after serving several years as a professional staff member in both the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives.

Ms. Mixon served as Legislative Assistant to U.S. Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS). In this capacity, Ms. Mixon advised the Senator on issues related to the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee as well as the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Previously, she was a Legislative Correspondent for U.S. Senator Trent Lott. Prior to her time in the Senate, Kelly worked as a staff member for then-U.S. Representative Roger Wicker in his Washington D.C. office.

Originally from Oxford, Mississippi; Kelly earned a B.A. in Political Science from the University of Mississippi.

Manny Rossman
Email Manny – Download vcard

A well-respected Capitol Hill veteran, Rossman brings with him nearly a decade of bipartisan, senior-level experience in both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives.  For the last two-plus years he served as Chief of Staff to the Senate Republican Whip (Sen. Lott in 2007, and Sen. Jon Kyl in 2008-Feb. 2009), the second-ranking Republican in the Senate.   As Chief of Staff, Rossman was the lead advisor and strategist to the Whip and his team of deputy whips, and was responsible for formulating strategy and implementing the priorities of a diverse caucus across all issues before the Senate. Rossman was the principal liaison from the Whip office to all Senate and House leadership offices, Committees, and Member offices, as well as to the Bush and Obama Administrations (White House, cabinet departments, and transition office).

Before serving in the Whip office, Rossman focused on the legislative activities of the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means Committees.  From 2005-2006, Rossman was Finance Counsel to Sen. Lott, in which capacity he played a leading role in shaping all major tax, international trade, health care and pension legislation before the Finance Committee and the Senate, much of which is law today.

From 2003-2004 Rossman was Legislative Director to Rep. Phil Crane, then-Chairman of the Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee, where he worked on numerous tax and trade bills, many of them bipartisan, which were signed into law.

Rossman has a B.A. from Colgate University, and a J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania School of Law.  He and his wife, Jennifer, reside in Arlington, Virginia.

http://www.breauxlott.com/leadership.html

***

Business group opposes climate change bill

Published: June 26, 2009 at 10:14 PM

Related Searches

*  cap-and-trade system  search results
*  climate change bill  search results
*  U.S. Chamber of Commerce  search results

Related Stories

* House approves climate change bill
* U.S. climate change impacts are forecast
* Climate change: Here now and intensifying

WASHINGTON, June 26 (UPI) — The head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce advised legislators Friday to take time to read and consider the climate change bill before voting.

The House of Representatives passed the measure 219-212 in the evening.

Tom Donohue, the chamber president and chief executive officer, said at a lunch sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor that his group wants a bill reducing greenhouse gases. But he said any bill the chamber supports would need to avoid onerous requirements on businesses and preserve jobs, The Hill reported.

Last night, those people being asked to vote were given a 1,200-and-some-odd-page document that they have never seen before. This is ‘hurry up and do it,’  Donohue said.  Bob Dole used to say to members of the Senate, ‘Let’s all hurry up and vote on this before anybody has a chance to read it.’

The chamber sent House members a letter Thursday urging them to vote against the bill in its current form.

The bill — which supporters said was crafted to limit greenhouse gas emissions, promote clean energy technology and create jobs that cannot be outsourced overseas — included the controversial cap-and-trade system, which would require polluters to accrue credits through buying and selling for all the greenhouse gases they produce. The cap-and-trade system would help reduce emissions to 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, supporters said.

Eight Republicans voted in favor and 44 Democrats voted against the measure, which next goes to the U.S. Senate, where political analysts say it is likely to undergo some changes.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/06/26/Business-group-opposes-climate-change-bill/UPI-72311246068864/

***

Climate change: Here now and intensifying

Published: June 16, 2009 at 4:31 PM

Related Searches

*  climate change  search results
*  heavy downpours  search results
*  regional drought  search results

Related Stories

* Global warming, CO2 linkage confirmed
* Global warming causing mass migration
* Scientists urged to cut carbon emissions

CHAMPAIGN, Ill., June 16 (UPI) — U.S. scientists say climate change in the form of regional drought, higher temperatures and heavy rainfall is now common in many parts of the nation.

The scientists representing 13 U.S government agencies, universities and research institutes say the human-induced climate changes are likely to increase in intensity.

The 190-page study is said to be the most comprehensive report to date on national climate change, offering the latest information on rising temperatures, heavy downpours, extreme weather conditions, sea level changes and other results of U.S. climate change.

The study, led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, focuses on effects by region and details how the nation’s transportation, agriculture, health, water and energy sectors will be affected.

University of Illinois Professor Don Wuebbles, a contributor to the report, said average temperatures have risen in the Midwest during recent decades and the growing season has been extended by one week. Heavy downpours are now twice as frequent as they were a century ago and the Midwest has experienced two record-breaking floods during the past 15 years, he said.

Wuebbles said average annual temperatures are expected to increase by about 2 degrees Fahrenheit during the next few decades and by as much as 7 to 10 degrees by the end of the century.

http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2009/06/16/Climate-change-Here-now-and-intensifying/UPI-50851245184318/

***
2000 August – International Labor Affairs Report
After the Ministerial, USCIB President Tom Niles led a business delegation …. A week after the International Labor Conference, the United Nations held a …
www.uscib.org/index.asp?documentID=1385

http://www.uscib.org/
United States Council for International Business
The United States Council for International Business promotes open markets, competitiveness and innovation, sustainable development and corporate responsibility, supported by international engagement and prudent regulation.  USCIB’s vision and strength are provided by an active membership of leading corporations and organizations, while our unique global network  helps turn the vision into reality.  USCIB also provides a range of business services, including the ATA Carnet for temporary exports, to facilitate overseas trade and investment.

Worldwide Access, Worldwide Influence

USCIB provides key platforms for American business to participate in – and influence – major multilateral discussions and negotiations.  As sole U.S. affiliate of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the International Organization of Employers (IOE), and the Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC) to the OECD, USCIB presents informed business views and solutions to government leaders and policy makers worldwide.

(move your cursor over a logo to learn more)

USCIB’s unique global network of business affiliates provides unparalleled access to international policy makers and regulatory authorities worldwide.  Our members’ views are heard in national capitals and at major international economic forums around the world.

No other American organization can provide comparable channels for business to interface with key inter-governmental bodies such as the United Nations, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and the International Labor Organization.  ICC, IOE and BIAC act as important global business forums in their own right.

USCIB’s global approach begins at home, with Congress and the Executive Branch.  We have established relationships with key U.S. government departments and officials, who look to USCIB for solid business analysis on key issues affecting U.S. commercial interests and the international economy.

Our advocacy role is enhanced by an extensive international network of business affiliations, through which USCIB pursues world business consensus and leadership on critical international economic issues, while we ensure that business views are communicated to international decision-makers and institutions.

USCIB affiliates around the world
USCIB – ICC – International Chamber of Commerce.jpg

http://www.uscib.org/

***

FACTBOX: U.S. states in balancing act on budgets
Fri Jun 26, 2009 10:51am EDT

NEW YORK (Reuters) – U.S. states are resorting to some unusual measures to balance budgets as the economic recession decimates their revenue.

States are forbidden from running a deficit, forcing political leaders to resort to spending cuts or tax hikes during times of stress.

Forty-six U.S. states face fiscal 2010 budget deficits totaling at least $130 billion, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. During the current fiscal year, 42 states were hit with mid-year shortfalls of a combined $60 billion, according to the Washington think-tank.

That compares with the $1.8 trillion deficit run up by the federal government, which is allowed to operate with a deficit.

So far this year, 23 states have enacted tax increases and another 13 are considering similar moves.

Here are some of the measures that have been enacted or proposed:

* Prison Cuts

Colorado, Kansas, Michigan, North Carolina and Washington have closed prisons this year as a cost-cutting measure.

New York State and Kentucky changed sentencing laws and bolstered substance abuse programs to keep more drug offenders out of prison. New York expects its changed regulations to save the state about a quarter of a billion dollars a year.

The U.S. has the world’s largest prison population with one in every 31 adults in the corrections system, which includes jail, prison, probation and supervision. States spent a record $51.7 billion on corrections in fiscal 2008.

*  Sin  taxes

Arkansas, Colorado, Hawaii, Florida, Mississippi, Kentucky, Rhode Island and Vermont have increased tobacco taxes.

Wyoming and Maine changed the method for taxing tobacco products to base them on weight.

New York raised taxes on beer, wine and cigars.

Kentucky ended its sales tax exemption on alcoholic beverages.

California is mulling legalizing marijuana and charging a $50-per-ounce tax on it along with the state’s sale tax.  Continued…
California lawmakers have further proposed increasing sales taxes on sexually-explicit content.

Virginia is considering taxing hotel movie rentals.

Georgia is mulling charging customers at erotic dance bars a $5  pole tax.

South Dakota increased taxes on gaming proceeds.

* Personal income and sales taxes

New York and Hawaii have increased taxes for the wealthy.

California increased personal income taxes by 1 percent.

California increased the sales tax by 1-cent.

Kentucky applied sales taxes to digital products, such as software and cellphone ring tones.

Maine extended its sales tax to include amusement parks and sporting events, as well as maintenance and service transactions, including auto repair and dry cleaning.

Nevada increased its sales tax by 0.35 percent.

Vermont made changes to its income tax structure that eliminates an exemption on capital gains income and caps the amount of state and local income taxes that can be deducted from federal adjusted gross income.

Virginia raised income tax revenue by restructuring a credit for land preservation.

New York raised taxes on wireless devices and increased registration fees for motorcycles, cars and boats, hunting and fishing licenses and introduced a saltwater fishing license fee. It also added a new 5-cent beverage deposit on bottled water.

* Business taxes

Iowa and Maryland scaled back business tax credits.

Kansas suspended its film production tax credit for two years.

New York restructured business tax benefits in its  Empire Zone  program.

Virginia expanded its corporate income tax to include investment income from real estate investment trusts.

Nevada restructured its business payroll tax.
* Court fees

Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada and Utah raised court fees.

* Source: Reuters reports, Stateline.org, a nonprofit, non-partisan news service sponsored by the Pew Center on the States, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a non-partisan think tank.

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE55N2O820090626
FACTBOX: U.S. states in balancing act on budgets
Fri Jun 26, 2009 10:51am EDT

***

Asset allocation fund

These funds split investments between growth stocks, income stocks/bonds, and money market instruments or cash for stability. Fund advisers switch the percentage of holdings in each asset category according to the performance of that group. Example: A fund may have 60% invested in stocks, 20% in bonds, and 20% in cash or money market. If the stock market is expected to do well, that could switch to 80% stocks, and 10% each in both bond and cash investments. Conversely, if the stock market is expected to perform poorly, the fund would decrease its stock holdings.

Fund of funds

Fund of funds  implies that the assets of a fund are other funds. The other funds may be stock funds, in which case the original fund can be called  fund of stock funds . See fund of funds.

Hedge funds

Hedge fund  is a legal structure. Hedge funds often trade stocks, but may trade or invest in anything else depending on the fund. See hedge fund.

See also

* Collective investment scheme
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_investment_scheme

* Investment management
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_management

* Venture capital
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venture_capital

Retrieved from  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_fund
Categories: Funds | Finance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_fund

***

http://www.un.org/ga/econcrisissummit/

United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Development – June 24 – 26, 2009

The United Nations is convening a three-day summit of world leaders from 24 to 26 June 2009 at its New York Headquarters to assess the worst global economic downturn since the Great Depression. The aim is to identify emergency and long-term responses to mitigate the impact of the crisis, especially on vulnerable populations, and initiate a needed dialogue on the transformation of the international financial architecture, taking into account the needs and concerns of all Member States.

The United Nations summit of world leaders in June was mandated at the Follow-up International Conference on Financing for Development, held in December 2008 in Doha, Qatar. Member States requested the General Assembly President Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann to organize the meeting “at the highest level”.

**

Draft outcome document of the Conference on the
World Financial and Economic Crisis and its Impact
on Development

We, Heads of State and Government and High Representatives, met in New
York from 24 to 26 June 2009 for the United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Development.

1. The world is confronted with the worst financial and economic crisis since the Great Depression.

The evolving crisis, which began within the world’s major financial centres, has spread throughout the global economy, causing severe social, political and economic impacts. We are deeply concerned with its adverse impact on development. This crisis is negatively affecting all countries, particularly developing countries, and threatening the livelihoods, well-being and development opportunities of millions of people.

The crisis has not only highlighted longstanding systemic fragilities and imbalances, but has also led to an intensification of efforts to reform and strengthen the international financial system and architecture.
Our challenge is to ensure that actions and responses to the crisis are commensurate with its scale, depth and urgency, adequately financed, promptly implemented and appropriately coordinated internationally.

2. We reaffirm the purposes of the United Nations, as set forth in its Charter,
including “to achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character” and “to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends”. The principles of the Charter are particularly relevant in addressing the current challenges.

The United Nations, on the basis of its universal membership and legitimacy, is well positioned to participate in various reform processes aimed at improving and strengthening the effective functioning of the international financial system and architecture.

This United Nations Conference is part of our collective effort towards recovery. It builds on and contributes to what already is being undertaken by diverse actors and in various forums, and is intended to support, inform and provide political impetus to future actions.

This Conference also highlights the importance of the role of the United Nations in international economic issues.

[etc.]

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.214/3&Lang=E

***

http://www.un.org/ga/econcrisissummit/

United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Development – June 24 – 26, 2009

The United Nations is convening a three-day summit of world leaders from 24 to 26 June 2009 at its New York Headquarters to assess the worst global economic downturn since the Great Depression. The aim is to identify emergency and long-term responses to mitigate the impact of the crisis, especially on vulnerable populations, and initiate a needed dialogue on the transformation of the international financial architecture, taking into account the needs and concerns of all Member States.

http://www.un.org/ga/econcrisissummit/

**

The United Nations summit of world leaders in June was mandated at the Follow-up International Conference on Financing for Development, held in December 2008 in Doha, Qatar. Member States requested the General Assembly President Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann to organize the meeting “at the highest level”.

**

Draft outcome document of the Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and its Impact on Development

We, Heads of State and Government and High Representatives, met in New
York from 24 to 26 June 2009 for the United Nations Conference on the WorldFinancial and Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Development.

1. The world is confronted with the worst financial and economic crisis since the Great Depression. The evolving crisis, which began within the world’s major financial centres, has spread throughout the global economy, causing severe social, political and economic impacts. We are deeply concerned with its adverse impact on development.

This crisis is negatively affecting all countries, particularly developing countries, and threatening the livelihoods, well-being and development opportunities of millions of people. The crisis has not only highlighted longstanding systemic fragilities and imbalances, but has also led to an intensification of efforts to reform and strengthen the international financial system and architecture.

Our challenge is to ensure that actions and responses to the crisis are commensurate with its scale, depth and urgency, adequately financed, promptly implemented and
appropriately coordinated internationally.

2. We reaffirm the purposes of the United Nations, as set forth in its Charter,
including “to achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character” and “to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends”. The principles of the Charter are particularly relevant in addressing the current challenges.

The United Nations, on the basis of its universal membership and legitimacy, is well positioned to participate in various reform processes aimed at improving and strengthening the effective functioning of the international financial system and architecture.

This United Nations Conference is part of our collective effort towards recovery. It builds on and contributes to what already is being undertaken by diverse actors and in various forums, and is intended to support, inform and provide political impetus to future actions. This Conference also highlights the importance of the role of the United Nations in international economic issues.

[etc.]

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.214/3&Lang=E

***

Impacts of the crisis
8.

The crisis has produced or exacerbated serious, wide-ranging yet differentiated impacts across the globe.

Since the crisis began, many States have reported negative impacts, which vary by country, region, level of development and severity, including the following:
• Rapid increases in unemployment, poverty and hunger
• Deceleration of growth, economic contraction
• Negative effects on trade balances and balance of payments
• Dwindling levels of foreign direct investment
• Large and volatile movements in exchange rates
• Growing budget deficits, falling tax revenues and reduction of fiscal space
• Contraction of world trade
• Increased volatility and falling prices for primary commodities
• Declining remittances to developing countries
• Sharply reduced revenues from tourism
• Massive reversal of private capital inflows
• Reduced access to credit and trade financing
• Reduced public confidence in financial institutions
• Reduced ability to maintain social safety nets and provide other social
services, such as health and education
• Increased infant and maternal mortality
• Collapse of housing markets.
Causes of the crisis
9.

The drivers of the financial and economic crisis are complex and multifaceted.
We recognize that many of the main causes of the crisis are linked to systemic
fragilities and imbalances that contributed to the inadequate functioning of the global economy.

Major underlying factors in the current situation included inconsistent and insufficiently coordinated macroeconomic policies and inadequate structural reforms, which led to unsustainable global macroeconomic outcomes.


These factors were made acute by major failures in financial regulation, supervision and monitoring of the financial sector, and inadequate surveillance and early warning.

These regulatory failures, compounded by over-reliance on market selfregulation, overall lack of transparency, financial integrity and irresponsible behaviour, have led to excessive risk-taking, unsustainably high asset prices,irresponsible leveraging and high levels of consumption fuelled by easy credit and inflated asset prices.

Financial regulators, policymakers and institutions failed to appreciate the full measure of risks in the financial system or address the extent of the growing economic vulnerabilities and their cross-border linkages.

Insufficient emphasis on equitable human development has contributed to significant inequalities among countries and peoples. Other weaknesses of a systemic nature also contributed to the unfolding crisis, which has demonstrated the need for more effective government involvement to ensure an appropriate balance between the market and public interest.

[etc.]

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.214/3&Lang=E

***
http://www.financialstabilityboard.org/

Financial Stability Board – Financial Stability Forum

16 Jun

The Financial Stability Board will hold its Inaugural Meeting in Basel on 26-27 June.

***
Fully Spend Stimulus Money to Back Crisis Recovery, Says IMF

With advanced economies still struggling, the IMF is urging governments to fully implement the spending measures they have announced to combat the global economic crisis and not to relax in supporting an incipient recovery.click for more

[ from – ]

http://www.imf.org/external/index.htm

# IMF Invites Input on Governance Reform
# Join the Conversation

IMF AND CIVIL SOCIETY
IMF Invites Civil Society Input Into Governance Reform

IMF Survey online

June 26, 2009

* Move follows calls from civil society for voice in reform process
* Proposals to be channeled by independently run website
* Process to culminate at IMF-World Bank Annual Meetings in Istanbul

The IMF is asking civil society organizations (CSOs) for input into proposals to reform the way the institution is governed.

An independently run website has been set up to help collate and synthesize the CSO input, which will feed into IMF staff’s preparation of governance reform papers for IMF Executive Board discussions before the IMF-World Bank Annual Meetings in October. The process will culminate in a meeting between IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn and CSOs during the 2009 Annual Meetings in Istanbul, Turkey.

The effort to involve CSOs in IMF governance reform—called the Fourth Pillar—follows calls from civil society for a voice in the process. The move started with a series of letters to civil society figures from Strauss-Kahn in late 2008 and also involved an April videoconference between Strauss-Kahn and CSOs on three continents.
Roles reassessed

Governance reform at the IMF is one of the most important tasks facing the institution. In March 2008, the Executive Board approved a resolution increasing the voice and participation of emerging market economies and low-income countries in the institution. Now further reforms are under consideration.

Additional proposals include a reassessment of the roles and responsibilities of the Board of Governors, the International Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFC), the Executive Board, and IMF Management, as well as procedures for selecting the IMF Managing Director. The Fourth Pillar—like the other three pillars—will inform a forthcoming Board paper on governance reform, which will be presented to the Board of Governors at the 2009 Annual Meetings in Istanbul.

The three existing pillars comprise work already done by

• The IMF’s Independent Evaluation Office, which released a report on “Governance of the IMF” in May 2008
• The IMF Executive Board, which is examining proposals from a Working Group on IMF Corporate Governance, and
• The Committee of Eminent Persons on IMF Governance Reform, which reported in March 2009.

The IMF uses the term civil society organization to refer to the wide range of citizens’ associations that exists in virtually all member countries to provide benefits, services, or political influence to specific groups within society. CSOs include business forums, faith-based associations, labor unions, local community groups, nongovernmental organizations, philanthropic foundations, and think tanks. Usually excluded are branches of government—such as government agencies and legislators—and also individual businesses, political parties, and the media. Labor unions often distinguish themselves from CSOs.
Road to Istanbul

June 19: the CSO administrator has submitted the first round of core documents to the IMF staff who are writing a paper to be discussed by the IMF Board on July 22.
By Friday, July 10: the CSO administrator will draft a three-page paper compiling principles, recommendations, and issues to be submitted to the IMF Board for its meeting of July 22.
Mid-June to mid-August: CSOs will meet personally or by teleconference and/or video conference with IMF staff to discuss additional inputs, indicate priorities, and exchange views.
Late August/early September: an informal CSO meeting with the IMF Board is to be arranged.
Early September: CSO recommendations to be submitted.
October 6/7: at the IMF-World Bank Annual Meetings in Istanbul, Strauss-Kahn will meet with CSOs to discuss their inputs and proposals.

The IMF has invited the New Rules for Global Finance Coalition to coordinate the inputs and interaction with CSOs during the consultation period. The coalition is a Washington, D.C.-based organization that advocates advancing reforms of the governance and practices of international financial institutions.

The IMF is providing logistical support through the funding and development of the independent and interactive website, where CSOs can submit materials, engage in debates, and offer feedback. New Rules for Global Finance will be the sole administrator of the website.

Proposals can be submitted through the website, or directly to the IMF at ngoliaison@imf.org. A representation of submitted materials will be translated into French, Spanish, and English; translations in additional languages will be accommodated where possible.

Comments on this article should be sent to imfsurvey@imf.org

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2009/NEW062509A.htm

***

# FSF Principles for Cross-border Cooperation on Crisis Management
# FSF Principles for Sound Compensation Practices
# Ongoing and Recent Work Relevant to Sound Financial Systems
# Report of the Financial Stability Forum on Addressing Procyclicality in the Financial System
# Report of the Financial Stability Forum on Enhancing Market and Institutional Resilience – Update on Implementation

http://www.financialstabilityboard.org/

***

Recommendations and principles to strengthen financial systems

On 2 April 2009, the Financial Stability Forum (FSF) issued reports covering:

* Recommendations for Addressing Procyclicality in the Financial System;
* Principles for Sound Compensation Practices; and
* Principles for Cross-border Cooperation on Crisis Management.

The Forum also published today an update on the implementation of the recommendations contained in the FSF’s April 2008 Report on Enhancing Market and Institutional Resilience.

Addressing procyclicality in the financial system

The present crisis has demonstrated the disruptive effects of procyclicality – mutually reinforcing interactions between the financial and real sectors of the economy that tend to amplify business cycle fluctuations and cause or exacerbate financial instability. Addressing procyclicality in the financial system is an essential component of strengthening the macroprudential orientation of regulatory and supervisory frameworks.

The recommendations set out in this report mitigate mechanisms that amplify procyclicality in both good and bad times. They encompass a mix of quantitative/rules-based and discretionary measures that are interrelated and reinforce one another. They will be implemented over time once conditions in financial markets return to normal.

Principles for Sound Compensation Practices

The Principles require compensation practices in the financial industry to align employees’ incentives with the long-term profitability of the firm. The principles call for effective governance of compensation, and for compensation to be adjusted for all types of risk, to be symmetric with risk outcomes, and to be sensitive to the time horizon of risks. Implementation by firms will be reinforced through supervisory examinations at the national level.

Principles for Cross-border Cooperation on Crisis Management

Through these Principles , relevant authorities, including supervisory agencies, central banks and finance ministries, commit to cooperate both in making advanced preparations for dealing with financial crisis and in managing them.

Update on the Implementation of the April 2008 FSF Recommendations

The update on progress in implementing the recommendations of the April 2008 Report on Enhancing Market and Institutional Resilience covers actions in five areas: (i) strengthening capital, liquidity and risk management in the financial system; (ii) enhancing transparency and valuation; (iii) changing the role and uses of credit ratings; (iv) strengthening the authorities’ responsiveness to risks; and (v) putting in place robust arrangements for dealing with stress in the financial system.

The previous follow-up report, issued in October 2008, is available here.

http://www.financialstabilityboard.org/

***

***

http://www.cpsc.gov/
US Consumer Product Safety Commission website

Recalls and Product Safety News
Help keep your family safe by checking product recalls and safety news from CPSC.

Neighborhood Safety Network (Español)
Help all Americans become aware of lifesaving safety information.

Report an Unsafe Product
Report an incident with a product that caused an injury. Medical Professionals and Fire/Police Investigators: file MECAP, incident reports.

***

Qantas cuts back on Dreamliner order
SIDNEY, Australia, June 26 (UPI) — Australian airline Qantas Airways said Friday it was canceling an order for 15 Dreamliner 787 jets, Boeing’s long-delayed, wide-body aircraft.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/

***

Qantas cuts back on Dreamliner order
Published: June 26, 2009 at 8:21 AM

Boeing employees clean a 787 Dreamliner wing at the company’s plant during Boeing’s Media Day on May 19, 2008 in Everett, Washington. The Dreamliner, the first new Boeing jet in 14 years, is being built in the 42-acre factory and is slated for its first flight sometime late in 2008. (UPI Photo/Jim Bryant)

Related Stories

* Boeing delays launch of 787 Dreamliner
* Boeing 787 Dreamliner in final tune-ups
* Dreamliner 787 finishing final tests
* Boeing: 787 on track for first flight
* Boeing says a Dreamliner order is canceled
* Test Boeing 787s have temporary fasteners

SIDNEY, Australia, June 26 (UPI) — Australian airline Qantas Airways said Friday it was canceling an order for 15 Dreamliner 787 jets, Boeing’s long-delayed, wide-body aircraft.

The airline also said it would put off delivery of 15 other 787 Dreamliners for four years, The New York Times reported Friday.

A cancellation of 15 jets would save the company $3 billion, Qantas said.

Qantas is still represents Boeing’s largest customer for the more-fuel efficient aircraft, with 50 other jets on order.

Chief Executive Officer Alan Joyce said the cancellation was an economic decision, not based on the latest delay of the aircraft’s first test flight, which Boeing announced earlier this week.

Qantas announced its original B787 order in December 2005, and the operating environment for the world’s airlines has clearly changed dramatically since then,  Joyce said.

That explanation, however, does not bode well for Boeing, as many other airlines are suffering from falling revenue and could follow suit with canceled or delayed orders.

For Qantas to pull or defer deliveries is a major, major step,  said industry analyst Derek Sadubin, at the Center for Asia Pacific Aviation, an Australian consulting company.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2009/06/26/Qantas-cuts-back-on-Dreamliner-order/UPI-18711246018903/

***

Boeing says a Dreamliner order is canceled

Published: Feb. 2, 2009 at 9:42 AM

CHICAGO, Feb. 2 (UPI) — U.S plane maker Boeing said a customer, presumably Russian airline S7, canceled its order for 15 new 787 Dreamliner jets.

The company planned to identify the customer later Monday, the Financial Times reported.

Although long production delays have forced Boeing to give discounts on Dreamliner orders to customers, Chief Executive Officer Jim McNerney said the cancellation was due to the economic environment, not the delays.

Boeing said a machinist strike and a charge of $685 million for delays in the development of the latest 747 jumbo jet resulted in a loss of $56 million in the fourth quarter. The company announced it was cutting 10,000 jobs to adjust to the slowing economy.

In 2007, Boeing made $1 billion in the fourth quarter.

Before the cancellation, there were 910 Dreamliners on order. McNerney said Boeing expected other cancellations as the economy slowed.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2009/02/02/Boeing-says-a-Dreamliner-order-is-canceled/UPI-88021233585730/

Related Stories

* Boeing to lay off an additional 5,500
* Boeing snags Osprey service contract
* Boeing receives full funding for satellite
* Boeing contracts GE for Indian navy P-8Is
* Test Boeing 787s have temporary fasteners

[also]

* Boeing to discuss B787 costs with partners: paper
* Boeing CEO calls slump ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ event
* Boeing delays Dreamliner test flight again

***

http://www.unescap.org/stat/

Data Centre
Last update: 10 June 2009
Online databases
Annual Core indicators     Short-term Indicators for Asia and the Pacific

Annual Core indicatorsAnnual Core Indicators (last update: 21 April 2009).The online database contains time series data for selected indicators covering a wide range of issues in relation to the secretariat’s work: demography, migration, education, health, poverty, gender, employment, economy, government finance, employment, transport, and environment.

Among other indicators, this database contains data published in the Statistical Yearbook for Asia and the Pacific 2008. The time series are generally longer and more complete in the database. Because of different presentation requirements, the indicator names in the database and the Yearbook may be slightly different.

Short-term Indicators for Asia and the PacificShort-term indicators (last update: 10 June 2009). The online database contains time series data for 31 of the regional members and associate members of ESCAP and is designed to provide up-to-date monthly (or quarterly) data to assess economic trends for countries or areas in the region. The online database covers the period from January 2003 and is updated every quarter.

Short-term indicators: Introduction and explanatory note.

http://www.unescap.org/stat/data/index.asp

UNESCAP – United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
United Nations Statistics Division

***

Jacques Polak Research Conference
Call for Papers:
Financial Frictions and Macroeconomic Adjustment
November 5—6, 2009

Previous IMF Annual Research Conferences

* Macro-Financial Linkages November 13–14, 2008
* Exchange Rates
November 15-16, 2007
* Capital Flows
November 9-10, 2006

The International Monetary Fund will hold the Tenth Annual Jacques Polak Research Conference at its headquarters in Washington, DC, on November 5-6, 2009.

The conference is intended to provide a forum for discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among researchers and policy makers. Ricardo Caballero (MIT) will deliver the Mundell-Fleming lecture.

The theme of this year’s conference is Financial Frictions and Macroeconomic Adjustment. Possible topics include (but are not restricted to):

* Dynamics of balance sheets and insolvencies during liquidity and solvency crises


* Amplification mechanisms during financial crises and their macroeconomic implications


* The impact of balance sheet adjustments on macroeconomic and financial aggregates


* Lessons from history and country cases about liquidity and solvency crises, and their resolution


* Policy responses to cope with financial imbalances and widespread insolvencies


* The treatment of insolvencies in various legal frameworks and its effects on aggregate outcomes


* The political economy of insolvencies and bailouts

Papers that do not fit into these categories, but that are related to the main theme of the conference, are also welcome.

Interested contributors should submit a draft paper or a two-page proposal to the Program Committee. The proposal should include the title of the paper, the author(s)’ affiliation and contact information, the main questions to be examined, the most relevant literature, the intended contribution of the paper to the literature, and the possible data sets and methodology to be employed. Authors should also provide a copy of their curriculum vitae. All presenters will be reimbursed for travel expenses and accommodation.

Please submit your proposals (in a Word or PDF file) by May 31, 2009 (e-mail to ARC2009@imf.org). Please use the contact author’s name as the name of the file. The Program Committee will evaluate all proposals in terms of originality, analytical rigor, and policy relevance and will contact the authors whose papers have been selected by late June. A 15-page work-in-progress draft will be required by August 14, 2009. Further information on the conference program will be posted on the this webpage.

http://www.imf.org/external/np/res/seminars/2009/arc/index.htm

***

Facing Crisis at Home

Advanced eonomies are experiencing a serious downturn in the face of the most dangerous shock in mature financial markets since the 1930s. The major advanced economies are in recession, following the world economy’s longest run of high growth, low inflation, and low interest rates in the postwar period.

To combat the crisis, leaders of advanced economies have undertaken an unprecedented and concerted fiscal expansion to create jobs. Central banks in many advanced economies have also taken exceptional action, aggressively cutting interest rates in many cases and pledging to maintain expansionary policies for as long as needed.

And policymakers are taking steps to restore the normal flow of credit through the financial system—a move designed to breathe new life into the economy—although this is an area where the IMF thinks more needs to be done.

This page highlights the main policy issues facing the advanced economies, as well as the IMF’s work to monitor, advise, and support them.

Country News

*
IMF’s Regular Review of Sweden’s Economy

Press release
*
IMF’s Regular Review of Euro Area Countries

Press release
*
IMF Reviews Loan to Iceland

Press release
*
IMF’s Regular Review of Greece’s Economy

Press release
*
IMF’s Regular Review of New Zealand’s Economy

Public information notice
*
IMF’s Regular Review of Luxembourg’s Economy

Press release
*
IMF’s Regular Review of Canada’s Economy

Press release

IMF Policy Papers

*
Why Has Japan Been Hit So Hard by the Global Recession?

Policy paper
*
U.S. Fed Balance Sheet: What Happened and Why it Matters

Working paper
*
Systemic Bank Restructuring

Policy report
*
The Crisis: Basic Mechanisms and Appropriate Policies

Working paper
*
Reforming the International Financial Architecture

Working paper
*
Fiscal Implications of the Crisis
Policy report
*
Initial Lessons of the Crisis

Policy report

Background Information

*
Promoting Global Economic Stability

Factsheet
*
IMF Surveillance of Countries’ Policies

Factsheet
*
IMF’s Work on Vulnerability Indicators

Factsheet
*
Multilateral Consultation on Global Imbalances

Issues Brief

http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/key/advanced.htm

***

G8 member nations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Group of Eight  redirects here. For the Australian league of universities, see Group of Eight (Australian universities). For the Pontiac vehicle with the same name, see Pontiac G8. For other uses, see G8 (disambiguation).
Group of Eight
Map of G8 member nations and the European Union

Canada
Prime Minister Stephen Harper

France
President Nicolas Sarkozy

Germany
Chancellor Angela Merkel

Italy
Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi
President of the G8 for 2009

Japan
Prime Minister Taro Aso

Russia
President Dmitry Medvedev

United Kingdom
Prime Minister Gordon Brown

United States
President Barack Obama

Also represented

European Union[1]
Commission President José Manuel Barroso
Council President Jan Fischer

The Group of Eight (G8, and formerly the G6 or Group of Six) is a forum, created by France in 1975, for governments of eight nations of the northern hemisphere: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States; in addition, the European Union is represented within the G8, but cannot host or chair.[1]  G8  can refer to the member states or to the annual summit meeting of the G8 heads of government. The former term, G6, is now frequently applied to the six most populous countries within the European Union (see G6 (EU)). G8 ministers also meet throughout the year, such as the G7/8 finance ministers (who meet four times a year), G8 foreign ministers, or G8 environment ministers.

Each calendar year, the responsibility of hosting the G8 rotates through the member states in the following order: France, United States, United Kingdom, Russia, Germany, Japan, Italy, and Canada. The holder of the presidency sets the agenda, hosts the summit for that year, and determines which ministerial meetings will take place. Lately, both France and the United Kingdom have expressed a desire to expand the group to include five developing countries, referred to as the Outreach Five (O5) or the Plus Five: Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa. These countries have participated as guests in previous meetings, which are sometimes called G8+5. Recently, France, Germany, and Italy are lobbying to include Egypt to the O5 and expand the G8 to G14.[2]
Contents

* 1 History
* 2 Structure and activities
o 2.1 Global energy
o 2.2 The Annual Summit
* 3 G8 member facts
* 4 Cumulative influence of member nations
* 5 Criticism and demonstrations
* 6 See also
* 7 Notes, links, and references
o 7.1 External links
o 7.2 Official G8 sites of member states (not summit specific)
o 7.3 References
o 7.4 Footnotes

History

The concept of a forum for the world’s major industrialized democracies emerged following the 1973 oil crisis and subsequent global recession. In 1974 the United States created the Library Group, an informal gathering of senior financial officials from the United States, the United Kingdom, West Germany, Japan and France. In 1975, French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing invited the heads of government from West Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States to a summit in Rambouillet. The six leaders agreed to an annual meeting organized under a rotating presidency, forming the Group of Six (G6). The following year, Canada joined the group at the behest of Germany’s Chancellor Helmut Schmidt and U.S. President Gerald Ford[3] and the group became the ‘Group of Seven’ -or G7. The European Union is represented by the President of the European Commission and the leader of the country that holds the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. The President of the European Commission has attended all meetings since it was first invited by the United Kingdom in 1977[4] and the Council President now also regularly attends.

Following 1994’s G7 summit in Naples, Russian officials held separate meetings with leaders of the G7 after the group’s summits. This informal arrangement was dubbed the Political 8 (P8) – or, colloquially, the G7+1. At the invitation of United Kingdom Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President Bill Clinton[5], Russia formally joined the group in 1997, resulting in the Group of Eight, or G8.

Structure and activities
Leaders of the G8 on 7 June 2007, in Heiligendamm, Germany

The G8 is intended to be an informal forum, and it therefore lacks an administrative structure like those for international organizations, such as the United Nations or the World Bank. The group does not have a permanent secretariat, or offices for its members. In 2008, the president of the European Union Commission participated as an equal in all summit events.

The presidency of the group rotates annually among the member countries, with each new term beginning on 1 January of the year. The country holding the presidency is responsible for planning and hosting a series of ministerial-level meetings, leading up to a mid-year summit attended by the heads of government. Japan held the G8 presidency in 2008, Italy is the 2009 president, and Canada will be president in 2010.

The ministerial meetings bring together ministers responsible for various portfolios to discuss issues of mutual or global concern. The range of topics include health, law enforcement, labor, economic and social development, energy, environment, foreign affairs, justice and interior, terrorism, and trade. There are also a separate set of meetings known as the G8+5, created during the 2005 Gleneagles, Scotland summit, that is attended by finance and energy ministers from all eight member countries in addition to the five  Outreach Countries : Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa.

In June 2005, justice ministers and interior ministers from the G8 countries agreed to launch an international database on pedophiles.[6] The G8 officials also agreed to pool data on terrorism, subject to restrictions by privacy and security laws in individual countries.[7]

Global energy
Main articles: International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation and Climate Investment Funds

At the Heiligendamm Summit in 2007, the G8 acknowledged a proposal from the EU for a worldwide initiative on energy efficiency. They agreed to explore, along with the International Energy Agency, the most effective means to promote energy efficiency internationally. A year later, on 8 June 2008, the G8 along with China, India, South Korea and the European Community established the International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation, at the Energy Ministerial meeting hosted by Japan holding 2008 G8 Presidency, in Aomori. [8]

G8 Finance Ministers, whilst in preparation for the 34th Summit of the G8 Heads of State and Government in Toyako, Hokkaido, met on the 13 and 14 June 2008, in Osaka, Japan. They agreed to the “G8 Action Plan for Climate Change to Enhance the Engagement of Private and Public Financial Institutions.” In closing, Ministers supported the launch of new Climate Investment Funds (CIFs) by the World Bank, which will help existing efforts until a new framework under the UNFCCC is implemented after 2012. [9]

The Annual Summit
At the 34th G8 Summit at Toyako, Hokkaido, formal photo during Tanabata matsuri event for world leaders — Silvio Berlusconi (Italy), Dmitry Medvedev (Russia), Angela Merkel (Germany), Gordon Brown (UK), Yasuo Fukuda (Japan), George Bush (US), Stephen Harper (Canada), Nicolas Sarkozy (France), José Barroso (EU) — July 7, 2008.

The annual G8 leaders summit is attended by eight of the world’s most powerful heads of government. However, as noted by commentators the G-8 summit is not the place to flesh out the details of any difficult or controversial policy issue in the context of a three-day event. Rather, the meeting is to bring a range of complex and sometimes inter-related issues. The G8 summit brings leaders together not so they can dream up quick fixes, but to talk and think about them together.[10]

The G8 summit is an international event which is observed and reported by news media, but the G8’s relevance is unclear.[11] The member country holding the G8 presidency is responsible for organising and hosting the year’s summit, held for three days in mid-year; and for this reason, Tony Blair and the United Kingdom accumulated the lion’s share of the credit for what went right (and wrong) at Gleneagles in 2005. Similarly, Yasuo Fukuda and Japan hope to garner the greater part of the credit for what went well (and what did not) at the Hokkaido Summit in 2008.

Each of the 34 G8 summit meetings could have been called a success if the events had been re-framed as venues to generate additional momentum for solving problems at the other multilateral conferences that meet throughout the year. The G8 summit sets the stage for what needs to be done and establishes an idea of how to do it, even if that idea is, at best, rough and patchy.[10]

The summits have also been the site of numerous, large-scale anti-globalization protests.
Date     Host country     Host leader     Location held     Website     Notes
1st     November 15–17, 1975      France     Valéry Giscard d’Estaing     Rambouillet         G6 Summit
2nd     June 27–28, 1976      United States     Gerald R. Ford     San Juan, Puerto Rico         Canada joins the group, forming the G7
3rd     May 7–8, 1977      United Kingdom     James Callaghan     London         President of the European Commission is invited to join the annual G-7 summits
4th     July 16–17, 1978      West Germany     Helmut Schmidt     Bonn, North Rhine-Westphalia
5th     June 28–29, 1979      Japan     Masayoshi O-hira     Tokyo
6th     June 22–3, 1980      Italy     Francesco Cossiga     Venice
7th     July 20–21, 1981      Canada     Pierre E. Trudeau     Montebello, Quebec
8th     June 4–6, 1982      France     François Mitterrand     Versailles
9th     May 28–30, 1983      United States     Ronald Reagan     Williamsburg, Virginia
10th     June 7–9, 1984      United Kingdom     Margaret Thatcher     London
11th     May 2–4, 1985      West Germany     Helmut Kohl     Bonn, North Rhine-Westphalia
12th     May 4–6, 1986      Japan     Yasuhiro Nakasone     Tokyo
13th     June 8–10, 1987      Italy     Amintore Fanfani     Venice
14th     June 19–21, 1988      Canada     Brian Mulroney     Toronto, Ontario
15th     July 14–16, 1989      France     François Mitterrand     Paris
16th     July 9–11, 1990      United States     George H. W. Bush     Houston, Texas
17th     July 15–17, 1991      United Kingdom     John Major     London
18th     July 6–8, 1992      Germany     Helmut Kohl     Munich, Bavaria
19th     July 7–9, 1993      Japan     Kiichi Miyazawa     Tokyo
20th     July 8–10, 1994      Italy     Silvio Berlusconi     Naples
21st     June 15–17, 1995      Canada     Jean Chrétien     Halifax, Nova Scotia
22nd     June 27–29, 1996      France     Jacques Chirac     Lyon         International organizations’ debut to G8 Summits periodically. The invited ones here were: United Nations, World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization.[12]
23rd     June 20–22, 1997      United States     Bill Clinton     Denver, Colorado     [1]     Russia joins the group, forming G8
24th     May 15–17, 1998      United Kingdom     Tony Blair     Birmingham, England     [2]
25th     June 18–20, 1999      Germany     Gerhard Schröder     Cologne, North Rhine-Westphalia     [3]     First Summit of the G-20 major economies at Berlin
26th     July 21–23, 2000      Japan     Yoshiro Mori     Nago, Okinawa     [4]     Formation of the G8+5 starts, when South Africa was invited. Since then, it has been invited to the Summit annually without interruption. Also, with permission from a G8 leader, other nations were invited to the Summit on a periodical basis for the first time. Nigeria, Algeria and Senegal accepted their invitations here. The World Health Organization was also invited for the first time, too.[12]
27th     July 20–22, 2001      Italy     Silvio Berlusconi     Genoa     [5]     Leaders from Bangladesh, Mali and El Salvador accepted their invitations here.[12] Demonstrator Carlo Giuliani is shot and killed by police.
28th     June 26–27, 2002      Canada     Jean Chrétien     Kananaskis, Alberta     [6]     Russia gains permission to officially host a G8 Summit.
29th     June 2–3, 2003      France     Jacques Chirac     Évian-les-Bains     [7]     The G8+5 was unofficially made, when China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa were invited to this Summit for the first time. Other first-time nations that were invited by the French president included: Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Switzerland.[12]
30th     June 8–10, 2004      United States     George W. Bush     Sea Island, Georgia     [8]     A record number of leaders from 12 different nations accepted their invitations here. Amongst a couple of veteran nations, the others were: Ghana, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Turkey, Yemen and Uganda.[12]
31st     July 6–8, 2005      United Kingdom     Tony Blair     Gleneagles, Scotland     [9]     The G8+5 was officially formed. On the second day of the meeting, suicide bombers killed over 50 people on the London Underground and a bus. Nations that were invited for the first time were Ethiopia and Tanzania. The African Union and the International Energy Agency made their debut here.[12]
32nd     July 15–17, 2006      Russia     Vladimir Putin     Strelna, St. Petersburg     [10]     First G8 Summit on Russian soil. Also, the International Atomic Energy Agency and UNESCO made their debut here.[12]
33rd     June 6–8, 2007      Germany     Angela Merkel     Heiligendamm, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern     [11]     A record seven different international organizations accepted their invitations to this Summit. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the Commonwealth of Independent States made their debut here.[12]
34th     July 7–9, 2008      Japan     Yasuo Fukuda     Toyako (Lake Toya), Hokkaido     [12]     Nations that accepted their G8 Summit invitations for the first time are: Australia, Indonesia and South Korea.[12]
35th     July 8-10, 2009      Italy     Silvio Berlusconi     L’Aquila     [13] [13]     This summit was originally planned to be in La Maddalena (Sardinia), but was moved to L’Aquila as a way of showing Prime Minister Berlusconi’s desire to help the region of L’Aquila after the earthquake that hit it on the 6 April 2009. Official website is now online.
36th     2010      Canada         Huntsville, Ontario     [14]
37th     2011      France         TBD
38th     2012      United States         TBD
39th     2013      United Kingdom
40th     2014      Russia
41st     2015      Germany
42nd     2016      Japan
43rd     2017      Italy
44th     2018      Canada

G8 member facts

Seven of the nine leading export countries are in the G8[14] (Germany, US, Japan, France, Italy, UK, Canada). The UK, the USA, Canada, France, and Germany have nominal per capita GDP over US$40,000 dollars.[15] Five of the seven largest stock exchanges by market value are in G8 countries[16] (US, Japan, UK, France, Canada). The G8 countries represent 7 of the 9 largest economies by nominal GDP[17] (Russia isn’t one of the 9 largest economies by nominal GDP but has the 7th largest real GDP; Canada was 8th in 2006 but in 2007 it lost 8th place to Spain, as it did in 2003,[17] prompting the previous government headed by José María Aznar to request Spain’s entrance in the G8).

The 2nd and 3rd largest oil producers (USA and Russia) and the country with the 2nd largest reserves (Canada) are in the G8.[18] Seven of the nine largest nuclear energy producers are in the G8[19] (USA, France, Japan, Russia, Germany, Canada, UK). The 7 largest donors to the UN budget are in the G8[20] (US, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Canada).

Cumulative influence of member nations

Together the eight countries making up the G8 represent about 14% of the world population, but they represent about 65% of the Gross World Product[21] as measured by gross domestic product, being all 8 nations within the top 12 countries according to the CIA World Factbook. (see the CIA World Factbook column in List of countries by GDP (nominal)), the majority of global military power (seven are in the top 8 nations for military expenditure[22]), and almost all of the world’s active nuclear weapons.[23] In 2007, the combined G8 military spending was US$850 billion. This is 72% of the world’s total military expenditures. (see List of countries and federations by military expenditures) Four of the G8 members United Kingdom, United States of America, France and Russia together account for 96-99% of the world’s nuclear weapons. (see List of states with nuclear weapons)

Criticism and demonstrations
Protesters try to stop members of the G8 from attending the summit during the 27th G8 summit in Genoa, Italy by burning vehicles on the main route to the summit

As the annual summits are extremely high profile, they are subject to extensive lobbying by advocacy groups and street demonstrations by activists.

The best-known criticisms centre on the assertion that members of G8 are responsible for global issues such as poverty in Africa and developing countries due to debt and trading policy, global warming due to carbon dioxide emission, the AIDS problem due to strict medicine patent policy and other issues related to globalization. During the 31st G8 summit in Scotland, 225,000 people took to the streets of Edinburgh as part of the Make Poverty History campaign calling for Trade Justice, Debt Relief and Better Aid. Numerous other demonstrations also took place challenging the legitimacy of the G8.[24]

Of the anti-globalization movement protests, one of the largest and most violent occurred for the 27th G8 summit [15]. Since that G8 Summit and the subsequent September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States occurred months apart in the same year, the G8 have gathered at some forms of remote locations every year since then. The 7 July 2005 London bombings were timed to coincide with the 31st G8 summit in Scotland.

The group has also been criticized for its membership, which critics argue has now become unrepresentative of the world’s most powerful economies since Canada was overtaken by China, India, Brazil, Spain, Mexico and South Korea by PPP adjusted GDP.[25] Furthermore, Russia was allowed into the group despite only being in 11th place in terms of nominal GDP.

See also

* 34th G8 summit
* Anti-globalization movement
* BRIC
* Developing 8 Countries
* Eight-Nation Alliance
* Forum for the Future
* Group of Three
* Group of Seven
* G8 Research Group
* G8+5
* Group of 11
* Group of 14
* G20 developing nations
* G-20 major economies
* Group of 33
* Junior 8
* List of countries by military expenditures
* List of countries by nominal gross domestic product
* List of G8 summit resorts
* Next Eleven
* Senior G8 leader
* World Social Forum

Notes, links, and references

External links
Further information: 34th G8 summit
Sister project     Wikimedia Commons has media related to: G8
Sister project     Wikinews has related news:
G8

* G8 Information Centre, G8 Research Group, University of Toronto
* G8: The World Can’t Wait ,  Oxfam International G8 Blog , oxfam.org
*  Special Report: G8 , Guardian Unlimited
*  Profile: G8 , BBC News
*  We are deeply concerned. Again , New Statesman, 4 July 2005, —G8 development concerns since 1977
*  G8 Dossier  by the Internationalist Review, —On-line dossier with analysis, photo series and links on G8 protests
* FACTBOX – Climate Change High on G8 Agenda In Japan (Planet Ark).
* G8 Reaches Tentative Climate Change Deal.
* Anti G8, Anti globalization Forum at http://www.3monkeyz.net
* Financial rescue plans from G7 and EU countries, 12 October 2008

Official G8 sites of member states (not summit specific)

* Canada
* United Kingdom
o History of the G8 —UK government site

Footnotes

1. ^ a b The EU has the privileges and obligations of membership but does not host/chair summits. It is represented by the Commission and Council Presidents. 967.  EU and the G8 . European Commission. http://www.deljpn.ec.europa.eu/union/showpage_en_union.external.g8.php. Retrieved on 2007-09-25.
2. ^ http://www.themedialine.org/news/news_detail.asp?NewsID=22988
3. ^ G8: The Most Exclusive Club in the World, Thomas S. Axworthy, The Canadian Encyclopedia, Historica Foundation of Canada, Toronto, Undated.Accessed07-12-2008.
4. ^  EU and the G8 . European Union. http://www.deljpn.ec.europa.eu/union/showpage_en_union.Harry.g8.php. Retrieved on 2006-07-17.
5. ^  Russia — Odd Man Out in the G-8 , Mark Medish, The Globalist, 02-24-2006.Accessed: 07-12-2008
6. ^ G8 to launch international pedophile database David Batty June 18, 2005 The Guardian
7. ^ G8 to pool data on terrorism Martin Wainwright June 18, 2005 The Guardian
8. ^ The International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation (IPEEC). June 8, 2008.
9. ^ CLIMATE-L.ORG: G8 Finance Ministers Support Climate Investment Funds
10. ^ a b Feldman, Adam.  What’s Wrong With The G-8,  Forbes (New York). July 7, 2008.
11. ^ Lee, Don.  On eve of summit, G-8’s relevance is unclear,  Los Angeles Times. July 6, 2008
12. ^ a b c d e f g h i Kirton, John. [http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/scholar/kirton-performance-080717.pdf  A Summit of Substantial Success: The Performance of the 2008 G8 ; page 88 and 89] G8 Information Centre — University of Toronto July 17, 2008.
13. ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/8014341.stm
14. ^  exports . cia factbook. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2078rank.html.
15. ^  nominal GDP per capita . cia factbook. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita.
16. ^  stock exchange . securities exchange commission. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stock_exchanges.
17. ^ a b  nominal gdp . imf, world bank, cia factbook. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_past_GDP_(nominal).
18. ^  oil reserves . US energy information administration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves#Proved_reserves.
19. ^  nuclear power . world nuclear power reactors 2007-08 and uranium requirements. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country.
20. ^  united nations . report of the committee on contributions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations.
21. ^ United Nations Development Programme
22. ^  World Wide Military Expenditures . GlobalSecurity.org. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm. Retrieved on 2007-12-10.
23. ^  The G8 and the Nuclear Industry . The Campaign for Nuclear Phaseout. June 2002. http://www.cnp.ca/resources/g8-and-nuclear.html. Retrieved on 2007-11-28.
24. ^ David Miller  Spinning the G8 , Zednet, May 13th 2005.
25. ^ http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GDP_PPP.pdf
v • d • e
Group of Eight (G8)
Members
Canada * France * Germany * Italy * Japan * Russia * United Kingdom * United States
Representative
European Union

v • d • e
G8 Leaders

Flag of Canada Harper * Flag of France Sarkozy * Flag of Germany Merkel * Flag of Italy Berlusconi * Flag of Japan Aso * Flag of Russia Medvedev * Flag of the United Kingdom Brown * Flag of the United States Obama

v • d • e
G8 Foreign Ministers

Flag of Canada Cannon * Flag of France Kouchner * Flag of Germany Steinmeier * Flag of Italy Frattini * Flag of Japan Nakasone * Flag of Russia Lavrov * Flag of the United Kingdom Miliband * Flag of the United States Clinton

v • d • e
G8 Finance Ministers

Flag of Canada Flaherty * Flag of France Lagarde * Flag of Germany Steinbrück * Flag of Italy Tremonti * Flag of Japan Yosano * Flag of Russia Kudrin * Flag of the United Kingdom Darling * Flag of the United States Geithner

v • d • e
G8 Defence Ministers

Flag of Canada MacKay * Flag of France Morin * Flag of Germany Jung * Flag of Italy La Russa * Flag of Japan Hamada * Flag of Russia Serdyukov * Flag of the United Kingdom Ainsworth * Flag of the United States Gates

v • d • e
G8 Justice Ministers

Flag of Canada Nicholson A Flag of France Alliot-Marie A Flag of Germany Zypries A Flag of Italy Alfano A Flag of Japan Mori A Flag of Russia Konovalov A Flag of the United Kingdom Straw A Flag of the United States Holder

v • d • e
G8 Interior Ministers

Flag of Canada Van Loan * Flag of France Hortefeux * Flag of Germany Schäuble * Flag of Italy Maroni * Flag of Japan Sato * Flag of Russia Nurgaliyev * Flag of the United Kingdom Johnson * Flag of the United States Napolitano

v • d • e
G8 summits

1970s

1975 1st G6 summit Rambouillet * 1976 2nd G7 summit San Juan * 1977 3rd G7 summit London * 1978 4th G7 summit Bonn * 1979 5th G7 summit Tokyo

1980s

1980 6th G7 summit Venice * 1981 7th G7 summit Montebello * 1982 8th G7 summit Versailles * 1983 9th G7 summit Williamsburg * 1984 10th G7 summit London * 1985 11th G7 summit Bonn * 1986 12th G7 summit Tokyo * 1987 13th G7 summit Venice * 1988 14th G7 summit Toronto * 1989 15th G7 summit Grande Arche
1990s

1990 16th G7 summit Houston * 1991 17th G7 summit London * 1992 18th G7 summit Munich * 1993 19th G7 summit Tokyo * 1994 20th G7 summit Naples * 1995 21st G7 summit Halifax * 1996 22nd G7 summit Lyon * 1997 23rd G8 summit Denver * 1998 24th G8 summit Birmingham * 1999 25th G8 summit Cologne
2000s

2000 26th G8 summit Okinawa * 2001 27th G8 summit Genoa * 2002 28th G8 summit Kananaskis * 2003 29th G8 summit Évian-les-Bains * 2004 30th G8 summit Sea Island * 2005 31st G8 summit Gleneagles * 2006 32nd G8 summit Saint Petersburg * 2007 33rd G8 summit Heiligendamm * 2008 34th G8 summit Toyako * 2009 35th G8 summit L’Aquila
2010s

2010 36th G8 summit Huntsville * 2011 37th G8 summit
In this context, G6=G7=G8 — each are construed as evolving iterations of the same entity.

v • d • e
Power in international relations
Types of power
Philosophical power * Soft power * Hard power * Smart power * Political power (Machtpolitik • Realpolitik)
Types of power status
Middle power * Regional power * Great power  * Superpower (Potential superpowers * Energy superpower) * Hyperpower
Geopolitics
British Century * American Century * Chinese Century * Asian Century
Theory and history
Balance of power * Historical powers * Polarity * Military power projection * Power transition theory * Second Superpower * Superpower collapse * Superpower disengagement
Organizations and groups
G2 (proposed)  * G7  * G8 * G8+5 * G10 * G15 * G20 (finance) * G20 (developing) * G33 (developing) * G77 (G24, chapter of G77) * BRIC * Next Eleven * SCO * ACD * NATO * CSTO  * ANZUS  * South American Defense Council * ASEAN  * APEC
Retrieved from  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G8
Categories: G8 | International organizations | Diplomatic conferences | Country classifications
* This page was last modified on 14 June 2009 at 17:40.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G8

***

35th G8 summit
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

35th G8 summit
35th G8 summit official logo
Summit details
Host country      Italy
Dates     July 8–10, 2009

The 35th G8 summit is to take place in the city of L’Aquila, Abruzzo, from July 8-10 2009. It has been moved from the Sardinian seaside resort of La Maddalena as part of an attempt to redistribute disaster funds after L’Aquila was struck by a devastating earthquake in April 2009. [1] The locations of previous summits to have been hosted by Italy include: Venice (1980); Venice (1987); Naples (1994) and Genoa (2001).[2] The G8 Summit has evolved beyond being a gathering of world political leaders. The event has become an occasion for a wide variety of non-governmental organizations, activists and civic groups to congregate and discuss a multitude of issues.[3]

Contents

* 1 Overview
* 2 Leaders at the summit
o 2.1 Permanent G8 participants
o 2.2 Invited leaders (partial participation)
+ 2.2.1 G8+5 leaders
+ 2.2.2 Other leaders
+ 2.2.3 Heads of international organizations
* 3 Priorities
* 4 Issues
o 4.1 Schedule and Agenda
o 4.2 Afghanistan pre-summit
o 4.3 Infrastructure Consortium for Africa
* 5 Issues
o 5.1 Africa
o 5.2 Climate change
* 6 Citizens’ responses and authorities’ counter-responses
o 6.1 Protesters and demonstrations
o 6.2 Citizen journalism
* 7 Accomplishments
* 8 Security
* 9 Budget
* 10 Business opportunity
* 11 See also
* 12 Notes
* 13 References
* 14 External links

Overview

The Group of Seven (G7) was an unofficial forum which brought together the heads of the richest industrialized countries: France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada starting in 1976. The G8, meeting for the first time in 1997, was formed with the addition of Russia.[4] In addition, the President of the European Commission has been formally invited to summits since 1981 and participates in all but political discussion and talks.[5] The summits were not meant to be linked formally with wider international institutions; and in fact, a mild rebellion against the stiff formality of other international meetings was a part of the genesis of cooperation between France’s President Giscard d’Estaing and Germany’s Chancellor Helmut Schmidt as they conceived the initial summit of the Group of Six (G6) in 1975.[6]

The G8 summits during the twenty-first century have inspired widespread debates, protests and demonstrations; and the two- or three-day event becomes more than the sum of its parts, elevating the participants, the issues and the venue as focal points for activist pressure.[7]

Leaders at the summit

Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi announced at the press conference at the end of the second day of the Hokkaido summit that the current number of participants will be maintained when the G8 leaders meet in 2009. Berlusconi also explained that a proposal to expand the G8 to include members of the Group of Five (G8+G5) emerging economies – China, India, Mexico, Brazil and South Africa – had not found sufficient support.[8]

France would like to see China become a full member by the time the 37th G8 summit in 2011 is organized.[9]

Political changes in the G8 member nations are likely to affect the composition of the 35th G8 summit.[10]

Permanent G8 participants

The 35th G8 summit will be the first for United States President Barack Obama and Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso.

Flag of Canada Canada
Stephen Harper, Prime Minister
122px-StephenHarper.jpg

Flag of France France
Nicolas Sarkozy, President
90px-Nicolas_Sarkozy_-_Sarkozy_meeting_in_Toulouse_for_the_2007_French_presidential_election_0299_2007-04-12_cropped_further.jpg

Flag of Germany Germany
Angela Merkel, Chancellor
81px-Angela_Merkel_24092007.jpg

Flag of Italy Italy
Silvio Berlusconi, Prime Minister
(Chairman)
81px-Silvio_Berlusconi_29-01-2008.jpg

Flag of Japan Japan
Taro Aso, Prime Minister
89px-Taro_Aso_cropped.jpg

Flag of Russia Russia
Dmitri Medvedev, President
86px-Dmitry_Medvedev_official_large_photo_-5.jpg

Flag of the United Kingdom United Kingdom
Gordon Brown, Prime Minister
91px-Gordon_Brown_Davos_Jan_08.jpg

Flag of the United States United States
Barack Obama, President
88px-Official_portrait_of_Barack_Obama.jpg

Invited leaders (partial participation)

A number of national leaders are traditionally invited to attend the summit and to participate in some, but not all, G8 summit activities.[9]

G8+5 leaders

The G8 plus the five largest emerging economies are known as G8+5,[9] including:

Flag of Brazil Brazil
Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, President
80px-Lula_-_foto_oficial05012007_edit.jpg

Flag of the People’s Republic of China People’s Republic of China
Hu Jintao, President
97px-President_Hu_Jintao.jpg

Flag of India India
Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister
78px-Manmohansingh04052007.jpg

Flag of Mexico Mexico
Felipe Calderón, President
84px-Felipe_Calderon_H.jpg

Flag of South Africa South Africa
Jacob Zuma, President
91px-JacobZuma.jpg

Other leaders

Previous G8 summits have invited other world leaders to participate;[9] and representatives from a number of countries are anticipated at this summit,[11] including:

* Algeria.[11]
* Australia.[11]
* Egypt, President Hosni Mubarak.[12]
* Indonesia.[11]
* Libya, Leader and Guide to the Revolution, Muammar al-Gaddafi.[13]
* Nigeria, President Umaru Yar’Adua.[14]
* Senegal, President Abdoulaye Wade[14]
* South Korea.[11]
* Sweden (participating in its role as President of European Council).[15]

Italy’s Berlusconi announced that his country is prepared to host leaders of the G20 on the third day of talks. The proposed purpose would be to work towards developing new rules to stop the phenomenon of excessive securitization in the financial system and the use of derivatives that led to the current financial crisis.[11] British Prime Minister Brown supports this proposal.[16]

The Italian presidency of the G8 varies the summit’s working methods and the numbers of participants depending on the subject under consideration. This  variable geometry structure  diverges from the traditional G8 format. The involvement of different actors at different stages goes further than the idea of a simple  G8+? . After an initial meeting of the  historic core  leaders of what is understood as the traditional G8), the agenda will broaden and the number of participants will be expanded accordingly. The leaders of G8 countries and G5 countries will be joined by a delegation from Egypt and a representative group of African countries.[17]

Some suggested that the G8’s annual meetings be broadened to include the heads of States or governments of the other countries represented in the governing bodies of the Bretton Woods institutions along with the heads of the main multilateral organisations. This would convert the G8 summits into an informal  global governance council.  [18]

Heads of international organizations

Leaders of major international organizations have also been invited to attend in the past; and this practice is expected to continue:

* African Union
* Commonwealth of Independent States
* International Atomic Energy Agency
* International Energy Agency
* United Nations
* UNESCO
* World Bank
* World Health Organization
* World Trade Organization
* European Union — Jose Manuel Barroso, President of EU Commission;[19]

Priorities

Traditionally, the host country of the G8 summit sets the agenda for negotiations, which take place primarily amongst multi-national civil servants in the weeks before the summit itself, leading to a joint declaration which all countries can agree to sign. This year, leaders of the G8 hoped to find common ground.

Issues

The summit was intended as a venue for resolving differences among its members. As a practical matter, the summit was also conceived as an opportunity for its members to give each other mutual encouragement in the face of difficult economic decisions.[6] From Italy’s perspective, the important thing is for the evolving G8 to avoid being to closely linked to serial emergency situations that there is no room for discussing broader issues.[17]

The Rambouillet summit in 1975 produced no easy answers to what was then the most serious recession since the 1930s; but the main themes of what is now considered the 1st G8 summit have persisted at the top of the the world’s agenda — avoiding protectionism, energy dependency and boosting growth.[20] However, the plausibly prescient British Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Peter Mandelson, speaking in 2009, expressed the opinion that  however long it might persist as a grouping, as a steering committee for the global economy, the era of the G8 is over. Mandelson’s comment comes during a trip to Sao Paulo, Brazil.[21]

Schedule and Agenda

Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi explained that the schedule of meetings would be very much like that of the Hokkaido summit,

My opinion is that it is best to keep together countries which share the same principles and I suggested that in 2009 the first day of the summit should see just the G8 meet. On the second day the table can be expanded in the morning to include the G5, with the G8+5 also discussing Africa, while the G8 would then meet alone in the afternoon to draw their conclusions. This program was unanimously accepted and will be used at the G8 summit in Italy. [8]

A tentative agenda for the 35th G8 summit will include some issues which remain unresolved from previous summits. The process of finalizing the agenda moved forward when Berlusconi’s began contacting his G8 counterparts shortly after Italy took over the rotating presidency on January 1, 2009. At this point, the Italian premier’s office announced that Italy, as G8 host country, was planning to focus its initiatives on the economy, energy issues, sustainable development and climate change. Other issues on the agenda might encompass disarmament, the fight against terrorism and peace efforts in world hot spots.[22] Global health issues and food were also proposed as suitable topics for discussion at the summit. Global health was first introduced as an agenda item nine years ago at the 26th G8 summit in 2000.[23]

On the G8 agenda:

* Climate change.[24]
* Energy; Nuclear energy.[24]
* Dialogue with emerging countries[25]
* Achievement of millennium development goals[25]
* Negotiations on climate change[25]
* Development of Africa — 4 issues (alimentation, global health, water, education)[25] or education, water, food and agriculture, peace support.[24]
* Intellectual property.[24]
* Heiligendamm Process.[25]
* Outreach and expansion.[25]

Afghanistan pre-summit

The Italian government announced plans to its presidency of the G8 as a opportunity to help search for a regional diplomatic solution to the Afghan conflict. A pre-summit conference in June is proposed, bringing together the G8 and major states in the region including Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Turkey. Concurrently, Italy became the first NATO member in Europe to answer Pres. Obama’s call for reinforcements in Afghanistan, increasing Italian troops in the western province of Herat to 2,800 this year.[26]

Iran announced that it had received an invitation to attend the pre-summit;[27] and the Iranian government is considering whether to attend.[28] Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini and Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. Special Envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, discussed Iran’s prospective participation in the proposed pre-summit.[29]

Infrastructure Consortium for Africa

The Infrastructure Consortium for Africa (ICA) was established at the 31st G8 summit at Gleneagles, Scotland in the United Kingdom in 2005. Since that time, the ICA’s annual meeting is traditionally hosted by the country holding the Presidency of the G8. The 2008 meeting was held in Tokyo in March 2008, and the 2009 meeting is planned for mid-March in Rome.[30]

Issues

Africa

The G8 leaders will discuss a range of issues relating to African development. Africa, which has been on the G8 agenda since 2000, has continues to lag behind on progress towards meeting Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).[31] In February 2009, Margaret Chan, head of the WHO, emphasized the importance of meeting the modest goals which were discussed and adopted in previous G8 summit discussions.[32]

Climate change

The G8 leaders will discuss a range of issues relating to climate in the context of a framework established at the 2007 United Nations Climate Change Conference held in Bali, Indonesia.[31]

Citizens’ responses and authorities’ counter-responses

Protesters and demonstrations

Protest groups and other activists are expected to make a showing at the summit. Forward planning for this and future G8 summits began in advance of the 2008 Hokkaido summit. Activist organizations anticipate that early planning can result in greater networking effectiveness for G8 summits. The 2009 summit will likely attract significant focus for development campaigners in G8 countries and elsewhere in Europe including the regional GCAP Europe. Collective campaigning ahead of the European Parliament elections is also anticipated to generate momentum on global issues ahead of July 2009.[7]

In 2008, a number of commemorative events were organized to mark the seventh anniversary of demonstrations at the Genoa G8 summit; and the occasion included a call for people to participate in preparations for protests at the 2009 G8 summit.[33]

Not all demonstrations are expected to be focused in opposition to some issue. At the 2005 Scotland summit, for the first time the tens of thousands of people protesting outside were actually supporting the summit’s agenda of African aid;[4] and some activists traveled to Hokkaido for the same purpose.[34]

Citizen journalism

Citizens’ groups are expected to organize citizen journalism centers to provide independent media coverage of the G8 summit and the expected protests. In a sense, this article will evolve as the work product of something like citizen journalism, growing through serial draft texts as part of  the first rough draft of history. [35]

Accomplishments

The G8 summit is an international event which is observed and reported by news media, but the G8’s continuing relevance after more than 30 years is somewhat unclear.[36] The G8 summit brings leaders together not so they can dream up quick fixes, but to talk and think about them together.[37]

Italy anticipates that the G8 of the future will serve a more significant strategic function supporting international organizations like the IMF, the World Bank, the WTO and the United Nations). The success of the L’Aquila summit will become measurable in the ways the G8 comes to resemble an initiative and pressure group working together to achieve global consensus.[17]

Security

In light of violent events at the Genoa summit, security will be one of the key indices for measuring the success of the L’Aquila summit. In a December 2008 press conference, President Berlusconi addressed this issue explicitly:  Given the traumatic experience of Genoa … for us the problem of security is a real one. The previous government picked La Maddalena thinking, I believe, that this location would be ideal to avoid a repeat of what happened in Genoa. [38]

Italian authorities anticipate 25,000 people attending the summit, including 4,500 delegates, 4,500 journalists and a large number of security forces. [38]

Budget

Although the Italian Government insists the summit’s moving will help restore normality and provide much-needed funding to devastated L’Aquila, it remains to be seen how it can justify the costs involved with preparing the original site for its years-in-the-making facelift.

Part of the cost of creating the original facilities for the 2009 summit were merged in the costs of transforming the former U.S. Navy submarine base at Punta Rossa into a tourist and vacation destination.[39] This harbor has been an Italian naval base since 1887; but the area was bombed extensively in World War II; and some of work involves restoration as well as renewal. The Arsenale marittimo (maritime arsenal) has been converted to a new use as a conference center; and the military hospital has been reconfigured for use as a hotel. From the beginning of the conversion’s design stage, planning focused on potential uses which could be anticipated after the end of the G8 summit.[40]

At the end of the 2009 summit, La Maddalena’s facilities and amenities were to be made available for tourist accommodations, and the conference spaces will be available for booking. The harbor’s reconstructed quays, moorings and amenities will become a new Mediterranean port of call just north of the exclusive Costa Smeralda of eastern Sardinia.[40]

The infrastructure investment which resurfaces and extends the length of the nearby airport’s runways will also upgrade the facility for increased tourism traffic after the summit leaders have left the island.[41]

Business opportunity


The MS Fantasia.

For some, the G8 summit becomes a profit-generating event; as for example, the G8 Summit magazines which have been published under the auspices of the host nations for distribution to all attendees since 1998.[42]

The Italian government has made arrangements to hire the 133,500-ton MS Fantasia cruise ship to anchor off La Maddalena to provide supplemental accommodation during the island summit. The Fantasia is the flagship of the Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), a privately-owned Italian shipping company. The ship is designed to carries up to 3,959 passengers and 1,325 crew.[43]

See also
Energy portal

* International Panel on Climate Change
* United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

Notes

1. ^  G8: ITALY WANTS TO MOVE SUMMIT TO L`AQUILA
2. ^ Smith, Diane.  2009 G8 Summit In La Maddalena, Italy,  eFluxMedia (New York). June 15, 2007; 35th summit website:  Italy in the G8.
3. ^ Zablonski, Lukasz and Philip Seaton.  The Hokkaido Summit as a Springboard for Grassroots Initiatives: The ‘Peace, Reconciliation & Civil Society’ Symposium,  The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus (e-journal). ID No. 2973.
4. ^ a b Saunders, Doug.  Weight of the world too heavy for G8 shoulders,  Globe and Mail (Toronto). July 5, 2008.
5. ^ Reuters:  Factbox: The Group of Eight: what is it? , July 3, 2008.
6. ^ a b Reinalda, Bob and Bertjan Verbeek. (1998). Autonomous Policy Making by International Organizations, p. 205.
7. ^ a b  Influencing Policy on International Development: G8,  BOND (British Overseas NGOs for Development). 2008.
8. ^ a b  G8: Summit format to be maintained, ] ANSA (Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata – Società Cooperativa). July 8, 2008.
9. ^ a b c d Welch, David.  Canada has an opportunity to remake world summitry,  Toronto Star. July 18, 2008.
10. ^ Canseco, Mario.  A Summit of Goodbyes,  Angus Reid Global Monitor. July 14, 2008.
11. ^ a b c d e f  Italy says to host G20 leaders at July G8 summit,  Reuters. March 9, 2009.
12. ^ Marchetti, Silvia and Yang Aiguo.  Italian G8 2009 presidency faces tough challenges,  Xinghua News Agency. January 3, 2009.
13. ^  Libya’s Gadhafi Accepts Italian Invitation TO G8 Meeting.  DowJones Business News. March 3, 2009.
14. ^ a b 35th summit website:  Nigeria and Senegal Officially Invited to This Year’s G8 Summit,  February 13, 2009.
15. ^ 35th summit website:  Four Delegations Visit Summit Venue in Third Week in February,  February 20, 2009.
16. ^  PM looks to G20 for economy deal,  No. 10 Downing Street. February 20, 2009.
17. ^ a b c Frattini, Franco.  Summits of the ‘big’ countries growing in importance but the G8 continues to play a strategic role,  Il Messaggero. April 2, 2009.
18. ^ Camdessus, Michel.  Africa: Open G8 to More Heads of Govt, Says Ex-IMF Chief,  Africa Progress Panel (Geneva). March 27, 2009.
19. ^  EU Promises Food Crisis Aid of 1 Billion Euros Before G8 Summit,  Deutsche Welle (Bonn). July 7, 2008.
20. ^ Stewart, Heather and Larry Elliott.  Hopes fading for salvation at the summit,  The Guardian (London). March 22, 2009.
21. ^ Norman, Laurence.  UK Mandelson:  Era Of The G8 Is Over,  Wall Street Journal (New York). March 25, 2009.
22. ^ Mu Xuequan.  Berlusconi, Merkel discuss financial crisis, gas row,  Xinhua (Beijing). January 10, 2009.
23. ^ Kurokawa, Kyoshi et al.  Italian G8 Summit: a critical juncture for global health,  The Lancet (British Medical Association). Vol. 373, Iss. 9663 (14 February 2009), pp. 526-527.
24. ^ a b c d University of Toronto, G8 study group: 2009 summit agenda
25. ^ a b c d e f Global Forum on NGO Governance (ON-NGO): 2009 summit agenda
26. ^ Borger, Julian.  Italy sends more troops to Afghanistan,  The Guardian (London). February 6, 2009.
27. ^  Iran says received invitation to G8 meeting on Afghanistan,  IranVNC (Iran Visual News Corps). February 23, 2009.
28. ^  Iran mulls attending G8 on Afghanistan,  PressTV (Iran). February 23, 2009.
29. ^  Frattini: Iran may aid G8 Afghan effort,  MarketWatch (Wall Street Journal digital network). February 23, 2009.
30. ^  Meeting to Discuss Crisis Impact in Africa’s Infrastructure Development,  Afrol News. March 2, 2009.
31. ^ a b The Japan G8 in 2008: a New Year’s Resolution for delivery on the big questions? , ODI Blog, published December 20, 2007-12-20, accessed 2008-01-02
32. ^ Chan, Maraget.  G8 has clout to shape development agenda,  Business Daily Africa. February 24, 2009/
33. ^  G8 Genoa: Police receive low sentences,  Gipfelsoli Infogroup. July 15, 2008.
34. ^  We’re not G8 protesters, says Nighy,  Star (Sheffield). July 8, 2008.
35. ^ Braiker, Brian.  History’s New First Draft,  Newsweek (New York). July 8, 2008; Keyes, Ralph. The Quote Verifier: Who Said What, Where, and when, p. 107.
36. ^ Lee, Don.  On eve of summit, G-8’s relevance is unclear,  Los Angeles Times. July 6, 2008.
37. ^ Feldman, Adam.  What’s Wrong With The G-8,  Forbes (New York). July 7, 2008.
38. ^ a b  Italy Hopes Island G8 Will Be Violence-Free,  Reuters. December 4, 2008.
39. ^ Wingfield, Brian.  U.S. to Shut Base in Italy That Aids Nuclear Subs,  New York Times. November 25, 2005.
40. ^ a b 35th summit website: Local redevelopment
41. ^ Regione Autonoma della Sardegna:  Il Governo blocca i fondi per le opere collaterali del G8.  February 6, 2009.
42. ^ Prestige Media:  official  G8 Summit magazine
43. ^ Honeywell, John.  All aboard for the G8 summit,  The Mirror (London). March 22, 2009; Golden, Fran.  G8 summit to be held on the MSC Fantasia,  USA Today (New York). March 2009.

References

* Architetto Frau:  Esperti Maddalena pronti a collaborare a lavori per vertice G8,  Italy Global Nation (IGN). July 21, 2008.
* Bayne, Nicholas and Robert D. Putnam. (2000). Hanging in There: The G7 and G8 Summit in Maturity and Renewal. Aldershot, Hampshire, England: Ashgate Publishing. 10-ISBN 0-754-61185-X; 13-ISBN 978-0-754-61185-1; OCLC 43186692
* Reinalda, Bob and Bertjan Verbeek. (1998). Autonomous Policy Making by International Organizations. London: Routledge. 10-ISBN 0-415-16486-9; 13-ISBN 978-0-415-16486-3

External links

* Official 35th G8 website: La Maddalena summit, 2009; n.b., no official website is created for any G7 summit prior to 1995 — see the 21st G7 summit.
* University of Toronto: G8 Research Group, G8 Information Centre
o G8 2009, pre-summit developments

Preceded by
34th G8 summit     35th G8 summit
2009
Italy     Succeeded by
36th G8 summit

v • d • e
G8 summits
1970s

1975 1st G6 summit Rambouillet A 1976 2nd G7 summit San Juan A 1977 3rd G7 summit London A 1978 4th G7 summit Bonn A 1979 5th G7 summit Tokyo
1980s

1980 6th G7 summit Venice A 1981 7th G7 summit Montebello A 1982 8th G7 summit Versailles A 1983 9th G7 summit Williamsburg A 1984 10th G7 summit London A 1985 11th G7 summit Bonn A 1986 12th G7 summit Tokyo A 1987 13th G7 summit Venice A 1988 14th G7 summit Toronto A 1989 15th G7 summit Grande Arche
1990s

1990 16th G7 summit Houston A 1991 17th G7 summit London A 1992 18th G7 summit Munich A 1993 19th G7 summit Tokyo A 1994 20th G7 summit Naples A 1995 21st G7 summit Halifax A 1996 22nd G7 summit Lyon A 1997 23rd G8 summit Denver A 1998 24th G8 summit Birmingham A 1999 25th G8 summit Cologne
2000s

2000 26th G8 summit Okinawa A 2001 27th G8 summit Genoa A 2002 28th G8 summit Kananaskis A 2003 29th G8 summit Évian-les-Bains A 2004 30th G8 summit Sea Island A 2005 31st G8 summit Gleneagles A 2006 32nd G8 summit Saint Petersburg A 2007 33rd G8 summit Heiligendamm A 2008 34th G8 summit Toyako A 2009 35th G8 summit L’Aquila
2010s

2010 36th G8 summit Huntsville A 2011 37th G8 summit
In this context, G6=G7=G8 — each are construed as evolving iterations of the same entity.

Retrieved from  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35th_G8_summit
Categories: G8 | 2009 in Italy

* This page was last modified on 21 June 2009 at 10:23.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35th_G8_summit

***

G8 ONLINE
an online university level course about the G8 and its annual summit

About the G8 Online Programs › » ›
Upcoming 2006 G8 Online Program
g8 live graphic

Student blog devoted to G8 summit
G8 Research Group will attend sessions, report
University of Toronto News Release >>>>

Previous G8 Online Programs (1999 + )

At the time of the annual G8 Summit, the G8 Research Group mounts programs in the host country and at the summit itself for documentation, media assistance, analysis, an academic symposium, a public policy conference, lectures, seminars, courses and related activities.

Before and during the summits, the G8 Information Centre assembles, verifies and posts documents on the meetings leading up to each summit, the available official documentation of all past summits and ministerial meetings (in all G8 languages), scholarly writings and policy analyses, research studies, scholarship information and links to related sites.

View all the Previous G8 Online Programs › » ›
Program Series Information

Privacy Policy
Terms and Conditions
Comments: g8@utoronto.ca
Previous G8 Online Programs
G8 Information Centre

G8 Online Logo        G8 Information Centre Logo

This Information System is provided by the Digitial Library and Web Services Group
of the University of Toronto Libraries and the
G8 Research Group at the University of Toronto.
All contents copyright © 1995-2006.
© University of Toronto. All rights reserved.

This page was last updated on

http://www.g8online.org/

**

http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/

G8 Research Group

G8 Information Centre

G8 Research Group

What’s New
in the G8

Statement of the chair of the G8 foreign ministers meeting, Trieste, June 26, 2009

G8 finance ministers statement with framework, June 13, 2009

G8 development ministers: chair’s summary, 12, 2009

Third G20 summit to be held in Pittsburgh, September 24-25, 2009

G8 energy ministers statements, including joint statements, May 25, 2009

G8 foreign ministers issue statement on Sri Lanka, April 25, 2009

G8 environment ministers summary and biodiversity charter, April 24, 2009, Siracusa

G7 finance ministers and central bankers statement, April 24, 2009, Washington

Statement by U.S. treasury secretary Tim Geithner, April 24, 2009, Washington

2009 G8 summit venue may change, April 23, 2009

G8 agriculture ministers’ final declaration, April 18-20, 2009, Treviso, Italy

G8 labour ministers statements, including Brazil, Mexico, India, South Africa and Egypt, Rome, March 28-31, 2009

G20 leaders’ communiqué and annexes, London, April 2, 2009

Statement of Brazilian, Chinese, Indian, Russian finance ministers, March 14, 2009

G20 finance communiqué and annex, March 14, 2009

G7 finance ministers and central bankers statement, Rome, February 14, 2009
More on the G8

Search | Help | Have a question?
• What is the G8? • What does the G stand for? •
Français | Russkiy | Deutsch | Italiano | Japanese | Espagnol | Chinese | Portuguese
• Give a gift to the G8 Research Group  •
See also G8 Live
Italian Summit, July 8-10, 2009
Prospective Agenda (G8 Research Group) | Road to L’Aquila Summit (formerly La Maddalena) | Official Italian website | G8 Live (G8 Research Group)
Summits, Meetings & Official Documents of G7 & G8
Summits: Communiqués, Statements, Documents and Delegations | Ministerial Meetings | Officials-Level Meetings | Issue Catalogues | Archives
Analysis, Reports & Conferences
Analytical and Compliance Studies | Conferences | Civil Society and Expanded Dialogue Unit | Data Sets | Fact Sheets | Oral History
G8-Related Publications
Bibliography of Scholary Works | Publications & Papers | Ashgate Series | Newsdesk | G8 Governance Working Papers
G8 Research Group
About Us | At Oxford University/LSE (UK) | At State University Higher School of Economics (Moscow) | Professional Advisory Council | Special Advisors | G8RG Analysts | G8RG Alumni | G7/G8 Research Library Collection | Global Governance and the G8 | Photos | Partner Institutions | News Releases | Annual Reports | MGIMO G8 Research Centre
G8 Teaching
G8 Online | Special Events | Teaching Program
Scholarships
The Catherwood Scholarship | Eligibility & Application Procedures | The Catherwood Scholars | The Robert H. Catherwood Lectures | Donate online
Links to Other G7/8-Relevant Sites
Governmental | International Organizations | Nongovernmental | Media
G20
G20 Information Centre | What is the G20? | Meetings & Official Documents | Plans and Prospects | Members | Analysis | Bibliography
G8-Affiliated Summits
Group of Five | Major Economies Meeting
G8 in the News
G8 Bulletin | G20 Bulletin | Financial Post
Sponsors
Munk Centre for International Studies | International Relations Program
Trinity College | EnviReform | University of Toronto Libraries | University of Toronto | Sponsorship | Donate online
Search the G8 Information Centre Help
G8 Information Centre
Top     This Information System is provided by the University of Toronto Library and the G8 Research Group at the University of Toronto.
Please send comments to: g8@utoronto.ca

All contents copyright © 2009. University of Toronto unless otherwise stated. All rights reserved.

What’s New
in G8 Research

Just published, from Newsdesk: G8 2009: From La Maddalena to L’Aquila

Plans and preparations for Italy’s 2009 summit (as of June 20/09)

Plans and prospects for the G20 Pittsburgh Summit (as of June 23/09)

G8 civil society outreach session with Canada’s G8 team, June 19, 2009

Pre-Summit Conferences in Rome, June 30, July 1, July 6, 2009

John Kirton: The Inconvenient Truth (about BRICs and Canada), CIC blog, May 28, 2009

John Kirton: Implications of the G20 London Summit for International Banking, April 27, 2009

John Kirton: Governing Global Trucks and Buses — The G8 and G20 Roles, May 12, 2009

John Kirton’s analysis of the G20 communiqué (Wall Street Journal)

Now available: The G20 London Summit: Growth, Stability, Jobs, edited by John Kirton and Madeline Koch

Summit of Historic Success: The Performance of the G20 in Washington in 2008, by John Kirton and Jenilee Guebert

Interim Compliance Report released, monitoring commitments made at the 2008 Hokkaido Summit

Interim O5 Compliance Report released

Plans and preparations for Canada’s 2010 Muskoka Summit (as of February 9/09)

More on the G8 Research Group

http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/

***

Chair’s Statement

Trieste, Italy, June 26, 2009

A growing variety of factors, both global and regional in nature, challenge the stability of the world. International security cannot be ensured without tackling also phenomena such as terrorism, organized crime, fragile institutions and many sorts of illegal trafficking which spill their effects over national borders. Devising effective responses is made more complicated by the inter-relations among those phenomena and their frequent link with dire human conditions.

The current economic situation, food crisis, lack of energy security and climate change have further proven that the world is more interconnected than ever.  For example, last year’s global food crisis plunged 100 million more people into extreme poverty and generated political instability in several countries.  We can decrease the risk of social destabilization due to food insecurity through long-term partnerships with developing countries that stimulate rural development and economic growth.  The global financial crisis increases the vulnerability of the world’s poor, and along with the other factors above, has the potential to magnify political tensions and foster social unrest.

The situation demands a comprehensive, coordinated and sustained commitment to mobilizing financial and diplomatic instruments that focus on our common interest in ensuring peace, resolving conflicts and creating conditions for sustainable development. We, the G8 Foreign Ministers, recognize our responsibility to stand together as one in countering old and new threats to peace and security and stress our commitment to transforming those challenges in opportunities for fostering effective international cooperation.

[back to top]
Non Proliferation, Disarmament Instruments and Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy

The proliferation of WMD and their means of delivery still constitute a major threat to international peace and security. We state our commitment to reinforce global non proliferation efforts by strengthening multilateral regimes. In that context we will strive for a successful outcome of the 2010 NPT Review Conference that strengthens the international nuclear non proliferation regime,  promotes the international consensus underlying the Treaty and advances each of its three pillars. We are all committed to seeking a safer world for all and to creating the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons, in accordance with the goals of the NPT.

We salute, in particular, the decision by the United States and the Russian Federation to negotiate an agreement to replace the START. We call upon all nuclear-weapon states to undertake further steps in nuclear disarmament. We will intensify our efforts to bring into force the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. We welcome the adoption by the Conference on Disarmament of a programme of work for its 2009 session. We strongly support the early commencement of negotiations on a Treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices that includes provisions for international verification.  We expressed appreciation for the Conference “Overcoming Nuclear Dangers”, organised by Italy, the Nuclear Threat Initiative and The World Political Forum in Rome on 16-17 April 2009. We look forward to other G8 states’ initiatives aiming at fostering the implementation of the NPT.

We keep on monitoring regional challenges to the non proliferation regime with a view to ensuring full compliance by all States with their non proliferation undertakings and relevant UNSC Resolutions. We call upon all states to fully implement UNSC Resolution 1540/2004. We support the 1540 Committee’s work and encourage all states to participate actively in the comprehensive review on the implementation of the Resolution. We will join in reinforcing IAEA safeguards and addressing serious violations of the NPT and IAEA safeguards. We reiterate our commitment to take appropriate steps for further implementation of the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism.

We recognise the growing interest in peaceful uses of nuclear energy that should be carried out under the best safety, security and non proliferation conditions. We support the development of multilateral approaches to the nuclear fuel cycle and appreciate ongoing initiatives in this regard. We stress the key role played by IAEA in promoting the highest standards of non proliferation, safety and security, as well as in fostering cooperation in peaceful uses of nuclear energy. We are ready to assist its member states in developing capacities that respect those standards.

[back to top]
Counter-terrorism

Terrorism continues to represent one of the greatest challenges to international peace, stability and security. We reiterate, in the strongest terms, our firm condemnation of this phenomenon in all its manifestations, particularly suicide bombing and kidnapping, and our commitment to counter violent extremism. All acts of terrorism – by whomever committed – are criminal, inhuman and unjustifiable, especially when they indiscriminately target and injure civilians.

We continue to be concerned about the growing links between terrorism and other criminal destabilizing factors – e.g. narco-trafficking, arms smuggling and corruption – which are of particular concern in states with fragile institutions. A proactive response is therefore required, including multifaceted short and long-term initiatives, within the framework provided by relevant UN conventions, protocols and Security Council Resolutions.

We reiterate our commitment to respecting and defending human rights obligations, which is fundamental to countering terrorism. The respect of international law and the promotion of the rule of law are irrenounceable pillars of our endeavour to eradicate terrorism.

Prevention and repression of terrorism financing are vital elements of any international strategy. We support the full implementation of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) recommendations and of the United Nations sanctions regime.  With special regard to the latter, we welcome the adoption of UNSC Resolutions 1730/2006 and 1822/2008, and call for their full implementation. Special attention should be paid to prevention of terrorism, i.e. to countering terrorist propaganda, incitement to terrorism and recruitment by terrorist organizations, as well as radicalization leading to violence. The use of cyber networks for terrorist purposes must be tackled as well.

The G8 continues to play a key role in supporting capacity building and technical assistance initiatives in third countries.  We commit ourselves to further strengthen our coordination in this field and, to this end, we welcome the progressive reinforcement of the activities of the “Roma/Lyon Group” and of the Counter Terrorism Action Group (CTAG), as well as their further enhancement by “ad hoc” outreach initiatives with other relevant partners and the increased emphasis given to regional dimension in their work.

[back to top]
Trans-national Organised Crime

International stability is directly affected by a number of activities of Trans-national Organised Crime, such as illicit trafficking in firearms, persons and drugs, cash smuggling, money laundering and corruption. In this context we are particularly concerned about the increasing penetration of organised criminal groups into the legal economy. We call for the universalisation and the full implementation of all relevant UN conventions, in particular the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime (Palermo, 15 December 2000) and its protocols, and the United Nations Convention against Corruption that – through a financial asset oriented approach – effectively attack the ultimate interest of criminal organizations.

We commit ourselves to supporting capacity building and providing technical assistance for strengthening criminal justice systems in third countries. We are fully engaged in further enhancing coordination amongst ourselves, as much as our cooperation with relevant UN bodies, in particular with the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).

[back to top]
Peace-keeping / Peace-building

Noting the progress in implementing commitments made at successive G8 Summits to enhance global capacity for peace support operations, we look forward to our experts’ report to Leaders on major achievements in this regard.  We will continue to pursue a comprehensive approach to peace support operations in crisis areas, in which security, stabilization, post-conflict reconstruction and rule of law go hand in hand. We welcome the UN Secretary General’s Report on Peacebuilding in the Immediate Aftermath of Conflict and encourage all relevant actors to consider its recommendations.

Recognizing the leading role of the United Nations in the field of peacekeeping, in particular the UN Peacebuilding Commission, we further commit to enhancing international coordination in order to ensure the best possible application of resources. We pledge to support capacity building programs worldwide, with special attention to the police and civilian components as an effective bridge on the road from crisis to stability. In that context we look in particular at Africa, where we shall continue to work with the African Union, sub-regional organizations and African States, in order to increase continental peacekeeping capacity and strengthen institutions, including through enhanced cooperation between Training Centres, in keeping with the principle of local ownership.

We stress as well the need for enhanced cooperation in sustaining the African Union-led peace support operations.

[back to top]
Piracy

We are seriously concerned about the increasing threat of piracy off the Gulf of Aden and the Eastern coast of Africa. We agree that dissuasion, prevention and suppression of acts of piracy are essential for maritime security and regional stability. We welcomed the ongoing international efforts to combat piracy through multilateral frameworks such as the Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia (CGPCS) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) – in particular the Djibouti Code of Conduct (DCC) – as well as individual and collective maritime operations. We are committed to enhancing coordination and information sharing among those actors as well as initiatives to reinforce their inclusiveness. Aiming at preventing pirates from achieving their goals, we recognize among others the need to cooperate at international level in order to ensure the development of adequate legal frameworks to fight piracy and other maritime-related crimes, to explore ways of tracking and freezing pirates’ assets, and to consider measures of shipping self protection.

We also agree on the need of a strengthened international commitment to target the root causes of piracy, by helping countries in the region meet a number of destabilizing domestic and external challenges (such as poverty, ongoing conflicts, lawlessness and the lack of a strong central authority).

Affected States have a significant role in prosecuting, and enabling the prosecution of, suspected pirates, in keeping with internationally accepted legal and human rights standards and practice. In parallel, and consistent with the orientations expressed at the Seoul High Level Meeting on Piracy off the Coasts of Somalia of 9-10 June 2009, we note the importance of strengthening maritime and legal capacities of countries in the region. The G8 commended the leadership role of Kenya in the prosecution and detention of pirates. It is urgent to assist regional states in building their own capacity of adequately controlling their borders, coasts and territorial waters. In the framework of the CGPCS and in cooperation with IMO, we shall help personnel from concerned States to take maximum advantage of training opportunities provided by the International Maritime Safety, Security and Environment Academy (IMSSEA), already operating in Genoa under an agreement with IMO, and the Regional Training Centre to be created in Djibouti. We shall consider offering concerned States, on a bilateral basis, further opportunities for coast guard and law enforcement agencies formation and training.

We agreed to follow-up, also through meetings in the region at Ambassadors and experts level, in order to ensure that the G8 members provide maximum support to the work of the CGPCS and the implementation of its guidelines.

[back to top]
Iran

We are concerned about the aftermath of Iranian Presidential elections. We fully respect the sovereignty of Iran. At the same time, we deplore post-electoral violence, which led to the loss of lives of Iranian civilians. We express our solidarity with those who have suffered repression while peacefully demonstrating and urge Iran to respect fundamental human rights, including freedom of expression, as ensured by the international treaties it has ratified. The crisis should be settled soon through democratic dialogue and peaceful means on the basis of the rule of law. We call on the Iranian government to guarantee that the will of the Iranian people is reflected in the electoral process.

We remain committed to finding a diplomatic solution to the issue of Iran’s nuclear program and support renewed efforts to that effect, such as the readiness of the U.S. to enter into direct talks and the invitation from China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States to Iran to restart negotiations, as well as the constructive involvement of other G8 partners in the process. We stress the need for unity of action on the basis of agreed policy. We sincerely hope that Iran will seize this opportunity to give diplomacy a chance to find a negotiated solution to the nuclear issue. At the same time we remain deeply concerned over proliferation risks posed by Iran’s nuclear programme. We recognise that Iran has the right to a civilian nuclear programme, but that comes with the responsibility to restore confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of its nuclear activities. We strongly urge Iran to cooperate fully with the IAEA and to comply with the relevant UNSC Resolutions.

Our meeting on the margin of the United Nations General Assembly opening week next September, will be an occasion for the G8 to take stock of the situation.

[back to top]
Afghanistan and Pakistan

We remain firmly committed to supporting the democratically elected governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan as they confront grave security, humanitarian, counter narcotics, terrorism and economic challenges and will help them strengthening institutional capacity and increasing the effectiveness of government. We recognise the central role of the UN in ensuring the effectiveness and coherence of our efforts in Afghanistan. We look forward to our engagement in Trieste with our colleagues from Afghanistan and Pakistan and other regional actors.  The outcomes of those discussions will be reported separately.

[back to top]
DPRK

We condemn in the strongest terms the nuclear test conducted on 25 May 2009 in violation of UNSC Resolution 1718/2006 and the launch using ballistic missile technology of 5 April 2009 which constitute a threat to regional peace and stability. We welcome the adoption of UNSC Resolution 1874/2009 and call upon the international community to fully and transparently implement their obligations pursuant to this Resolution, including the prevention of transfer of proliferation-related materials to and from the DPRK. We urge DPRK to fulfil its obligations under relevant UNSC Resolutions, to abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes as well as ballistic missile programmes, which affect international security, and to return to full compliance with its international obligations. We remain committed to the goal of the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula through the full implementation of the 19 September 2005 Joint Statement of the Six Party Talks. We demand DPRK not to conduct further destabilizing actions and resume its participation to the Six Party Talks. We recognise the need for all participants to take measures as agreed in this format. We also urge DPRK’s prompt action to address the concerns of the international community on humanitarian matters, including the abduction issue.

[back to top]
Middle East

We reiterate the G8’s full support for the two-state solution, with the establishment of an independent, democratic, viable and contiguous Palestinian State living in peace with Israel and its other neighbours within secure and recognised borders. We salute our Leaders’ personal commitment for a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. We maintain our firm commitment to continue providing assistance to the Palestinian people and to strengthen the Palestinian democratic institutions. We call on all parties to re-enter direct negotiations on all standing issues consistent with the Roadmap, the relevant UNSC Resolutions and the Madrid principles. We also call on both parties to fulfil their obligations under the Roadmap, including a freeze in settlement activity (as well their “natural growth”) and an unequivocal end to violence and terrorism. We emphasized the urgency of a durable solution to the Gaza crisis through the full implementation of UNSC Resolution 1860/2009, including an end to arms smuggling and the immediate opening of crossings for the flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods and persons. We remain committed to actively supporting the implementation of current and future peace agreements, and encourage others to do the same. Comprehensive peace in the Middle East requires a regional approach and we look forward to a comprehensive peace between Israel and its neighbours, also building upon the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative. We support the proposal of the Russian Federation to convene, in consultation with the Quartet and the Parties, an international conference on the Middle East peace process in Moscow in 2009.

We continue to support a secure and united Iraq and pledge our ongoing support for free and inclusive national elections in the year ahead.
We congratulate the Lebanese people for carrying out a peaceful national election on 7 June 2009 and express our continued support for a sovereign and independent Lebanon.
Myanmar

We are deeply concerned about the recent developments. A real process of dialogue and national reconciliation is needed, with the full participation of representatives of all political parties and ethnic groups, leading to transparent, fair and democratic multiparty elections. In this regard we call on the Government of Myanmar to release all political prisoners, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi whose continued detention would undermine the credibility of the elections planned for 2010.

We reaffirm our full support to the UN Secretary General’s good office mission and the initiatives aimed at fostering dialogue and democratic transition in Myanmar, demanding international community to do likewise. We call on the Government of Myanmar to fully cooperate with the UNSG Special Advisor, as well as with the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Myanmar. We remain prepared to respond positively to substantive political progress undertaken by Myanmar.


Sri Lanka

While we welcome the end of the military conflict, we deeply regret the mass civilian casualties during the final phase of the fighting. We also recognise the steps already undertaken by the Government of Sri Lanka to address the humanitarian situation of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), and its cooperation with relevant UN agencies, and encourage it to take further measures toward remaining significant challenges, including the civilian nature of the camps, freedom of movement and early return for IDPs. While we acknowledge security concerns, unhindered access for humanitarian aid agencies should be ensured by the Government of Sri Lanka. We welcome the recent agreement between the UN Secretary General and the Government of Sri Lanka underlining the importance of an accountability process for addressing violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. We also welcome the government of Sri Lanka’s agreement to take measures to address those grievances. Further efforts are needed to ensure steady progress in the political process towards national reconciliation. Long-term security, post-conflict reconstruction and prosperity in the country can only be achieved through a process that addresses the legitimate concerns of all communities.
Yemen

We recognise the strategic importance of enhancing international support to Yemen, whose integrity and effective control of the territory and borders are crucial for fighting against piracy and terrorism, as well as for security and stability in the Middle East, the Gulf and the Horn of Africa. We support a strengthened international cooperation aimed at helping the country in meeting domestic and external challenges. We will consider concerted and coordinated assistance, building upon the existing Consultative Group process. Increased integration of Yemen in regional cooperation would also be beneficial.
BMENA

We reiterate full support to the G8 – BMENA Partnership as a crucial platform of dialogue and cooperation among Partner Governments, international organisations and the civil society in view of home-grown reforms in political, economic and social spheres. We look forward to the sixth “Forum for the Future”, scheduled next fall under the co-chairmanship of Italy and Morocco, in order to review the various initiatives undertaken since 2004 and strengthen the Partnership.


Africa

We shall work in order to create the conditions for transforming present problems in Africa into new opportunities for cooperation and development. We look forward to engaging African countries as partners on equal footing. We saluted recent efforts by African partners in strengthening governance in Africa, in building the capacities of continental and sub-regional organizations and in addressing situations of armed conflict. The G8 welcomed: recent free and fair elections in the region; the continuing implementation of the African Peer Review Mechanism and other initiatives associated with the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and its integration with the activities of the African Union; and historically-high levels of regional economic growth in recent years.

These examples underscore the positive results that can be achieved when progressive national leadership is supported by sustained international engagement.  Nevertheless, and notwithstanding these important successes, we expressed deep concern about the persistence of undemocratic transfers of power in Africa and commended the principled opposition of African partners, particularly the African Union, Southern African Development Community (SADC), and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to these extra-constitutional changes of government.  We call on the regimes which have taken power by such means to allow the restoration of constitutional order through free, fair and transparent elections as soon as possible.

We remain conscious of the political and economic challenges still confronting Africa – especially in the context of the food and economic crisis – and underscore the need for continued international cooperation in addressing them. We shall devote a special attention to protection of human rights, particularly on the most vulnerable such as children and women.

We remain seized of a number of specific situations.

Somalia – Sharing a deep concern over long-standing instability and the humanitarian crisis in Somalia, we reiterated our strong support to the Transitional Federal Government and its efforts aimed at securing an inclusive process of national reconciliation and sustainable peace. We recognise the need for enhanced and sustained humanitarian assistance and development efforts in Somalia, which we are willing to support. We welcomed the outcome of the International Conference in support of the Somali Security Institutions and the African Union Mission in Somalia, held in Brussels on 22-23 April 2009, and recognised the role played by the International Contact Group on Somalia, which lastly convened in Rome on 10-11 June 2009 with the participation of the Somali Prime Minister. We encourage African nations to join Burundi and Uganda in providing troops and support to AMISOM, while urging the whole international community to further engage in coordinated security and recovery efforts involving the United Nations, the African Union, the European Union and other relevant organizations, with a focus on building capacity for the TFG to deliver basic government services. In this regard, we are ready to consider financial assistance for training as well as other support for Somali security forces.

Sudan – We highlighted the importance of the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, as the foundation for a sustainable peace, and welcomed the recent CPA Forum hosted by the United States in Washington on 23 June 2009. We call on the international community to work together to secure full implementation of the Agreement. We urge all parties to commit in good faith to the Darfur peace negotiations.  We salute the efforts of the AU-UN Joint Chief Mediator and Qatar in this regard and encourage regional players to support the process. UNAMID’s role is crucial in enhancing security in Darfur and we emphasise the importance of its full and effective deployment. We call on the Government of Sudan to work effectively with humanitarian organizations in order to facilitate humanitarian access and assistance, and demand all parties to comply fully with their obligations under international humanitarian law, human rights and refugee law. We also call on all parties to abide by their obligations under relevant UNSC Resolutions. In particular, we reaffirm the obligation for Sudan to abide by UNSC Resolution 1593/2005, as lasting peace cannot be achieved without justice and reconciliation.

Great Lakes – We acknowledged that stability in the Democratic Republic of Congo is paramount to security in the Great Lakes Region and in all of Africa.  We applauded the recent cooperation between the governments of the DRC and Rwanda, which has created new opportunities for a concerted and sustainable solution to the crisis in eastern DRC. We encourage renewed cooperation among the countries of the region, including in regional fora, on all political, security and economic aspects that are underlying causes of the crisis. We encourage the disarmament and reintegration of all organised armed groups as necessary steps towards a lasting solution. We express our grave concerns about the prevalence of sexual and gender-based violence in the DRC and the Great Lakes Region, and emphasise the need to effectively punish its perpetrators and to address its root causes. It is essential that all parties protect civilians and facilitate full, safe and unhindered access for humanitarian workers providing assistance.

Zimbabwe – Progress has been made towards national reconciliation. We support the people of Zimbabwe and the transition government as they work to bring peace, stability, prosperity and democracy back to their country. We encourage a full application of the Global Political Agreement, which can positively respond to concerns for rule of law, economic governance and land issues.  Illegal and violent farm seizures, repression of human rights, and restrictions on media and journalists must cease. We will work with the transition government as it builds the institutions necessary for free and fair elections in a timely manner.  We look forward to a meaningful dialogue with Zimbabwe, leading to a full normalization of political and economic relations, contingent upon progress towards full respect of human rights, democracy, and re-establishment of effective rule of law in the country.

West Africa – Several states of West Africa are emerging from conflict and political stabilization processes in some parts of the region remain fragile. Rule of law continues to be a primary challenge for a number of states concerned, as demonstrated by a series of recent non-constitutional transfers of power.  As one consequence, we are witnessing an increase in worrying phenomena such as terrorism, maritime insecurity and illegal activities (trafficking in drugs, small weapons and human beings, and kidnappings for ransom).  In that regard, we are particularly concerned about the actions of Al Qaida in the Sahel region, including hostage taking of foreigners, and totally condemn the recent assassination of a British hostage.  Trans-national organised crime is also striving to infiltrate and weaken institutions. At the same time, we acknowledge the effectiveness of peace and security initiatives undertaken through ECOWAS. We encourage and will continue to support states of the region in their common effort to build the capacity to effectively meeting these challenges, including by addressing their root causes.
Caucasus

We expressed our commitment for achieving regional stabilization. We state our support to efforts carried out to that effect with the active involvement of the UN, the OSCE and the EU. We encourage all actors in the region to work towards the peaceful settlement of unresolved conflicts and to support humanitarian aid programs.

We strongly encourage the development of regional cooperation. In this framework, we welcome the efforts of Armenia and Turkey to normalise their relations and the efforts of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs to seek a peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The Caucasus region has the potential to become an area of peace and prosperity for all populations.

Source: Italy’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs

This Information System is provided by the University of Toronto Library and the G8 Research Group at the University of Toronto.
Please send comments to: g8@utoronto.ca
This page was last updated June 26, 2009.

http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/foreign/formin090626.html

***

http://www.g8italia2009.it/G8/G8-G8_Layout_locale-1199882116809_Home.htm

The New G8 Logo
The new G8 logo: From La Maddalena to L’Aquila – G8 Summit 2009

In the wake of the decision to move the Summit initially scheduled for La Maddalena to L’Aquila, as a token of consideration and support for the communities hit by the earthquake on 6 April, the turtles remain in the Summit’s new symbol as a reminder of this G8’s “migrant” nature, accompanied by the wording: “G8 Summit 2009 – From La Maddalena to L’Aquila”.

Past Summits:

*  Hokkaido Toyako, July 7-9 2008 (Japan)
*  Heiligendamm, June 6-8 2007 (Germany)
*  St Petersburg, July 15-17 2006 (Russia)
*  Gleneagles, July 6-8 2005 (United Kingdom) – Website currently not available
*  Sea Island, June 8-10 2004 (United States) – Website currently not available
*  Evian, June 1-3 2003 (France)
*  Kananaskis, June 26-27 2002 (Canada)
*  Genoa, July 20-22 2001 (Italy) – Website currently not available

http://www.g8italia2009.it/G8/Home/G8-G8_Layout_locale-1199882116809_Links.htm

***

University of Toronto G8 Information Centre
Summits | Meetings | Publications | Research | G8-Related | Search | Home

Newsdesk Publications

The G8 2009:
From La Maddalena to L’Aquila

Edited by John Kirton and Madeline Koch
Published by Newsdesk Media Group and the G8 Research Group, 2009

Download an electronic edition here.
http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/scholar/G8-2009.pdf

Please note that it is 7 MB and may take a moment to load.

To order a printed copy, please click here.
mailto:g8@utoronto.ca?subject=Please send me a copy of The G8 2009: From La Maddalena to L’Aquila

Contents
Forewords

* De La Maddalena a L’Aquila (in Italian and English)
Silvio Berlusconi, prime minister, Italy
* For better global governance
Taro Aso, prime minister, Japan
* The 2010 Muskoka Summit
Stephen Harper, prime minister, Canada
* The G8: complementing the G20
Lee Myung-bak, president, Korea

Introduction

* Prospects for the 2009 L’Aquila G8 Summit
John Kirton, director, G8 Research Group

From G20 to G8: joint action

* Recovery and Reform
Daniel M. Price, partner at Sidley Austin LLP and former assistant to the US president for international economic affairs and former G8 and G20 sherpa

Economics, finance and trade

* Call to action
Angel Gurrìa, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Economic Development
* Restoring Growth
Robert Fauver, former US under secretary of state for economic affairs and former G7 sherpa
* Mapping the route to recovery
Paola Subacchi, Chatham House


* Regulation and Reform
Jim O’Neill, Goldman Sachs

* Under pressure
Domenico Lombardi, Oxford Institute for Economic Policy and the Brookings Institution
* The common purse
Pietro Alessandrini, Università Politecnica della Marche, and Michele Fratianni, Indiana University and Università Politecnica della Marche
* Facing up to respondibility
Kimon Valaskakis, New School of Athens

Environment and climate change
* The environment-health axis
Achim Steiner, United Nations and United Nations Environment Programme
* Securing the future
Tobias Feakin, National Security and Resilience, Royal United Services Institute
* Trading our way out of climate change
Henry Derwent, International Emissions Trading Association
* Toward Copenhagen
Bjorn Stigson, World Business Council for Sustainable Development
* On thin ice
Christopher Wright, Grantham Institute on Climate Change, London School of Econonmics, and Centre for Development and Environment, University of Oslo

Energy

* The energy challenge
Nobuo Tanaka, International Energy Agency
* Renewing efforts
Sergey Koblov and Victoria Panova, International Sustainable Energy Development Centre

Health

* The global health challenge
Margaret Chan, World Health Organization
* Finding the cure
Michel Kazatchkine, Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
* Delivering on promises?
* James Orbinski, St. Michael’s Hospital, and Jenilee M. Guebert, Program on Global Health Governance, University of Toronto

Water, food and agriculture

* Out of our depth
Loïc Fauchon, World Water Council
* A roadmap for global food security
Jacques Diouf, Food and Agriculture Organization
* A green revolution
Kanayo f. Nwanze, International Fund for Agriculture and Development
* The food and energy challenge
C. Ford Runge, University of Minnesota

Development, investment and emerging economies

* The war on want
Kamalesh Sharma, Commonwealthsecretary general
* Opportunity out of crisis
Lars H. Thunell, International Finance Corporation
* Asia’s paradox
Haruhiko Kuroda, Assian Development Bank
* Rediscovering the Americas
Alicia Bárcena, United Nationsl Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
* The hour of need
Donald Kaberuka, African Development Bank
* Restructuring development
Diéry Seck, Centre for Research on Political Economy
* Looking east
Hisham El-Sherif, Nile Capital

IT and telecommunications

* Only connect
Hamadoun Touré, International Telecommunications Union
* A better Web for a better society
Tim Berners-Lee, Steve Bratt and Daniel Dardailler, World Wide Web Foundation and World Wide Web Consortium

Global governance and the growing G8

* Down but not out
Andrew F. Cooper, The Centre for International Governance Innovation
* A civil society
Peter I. Hajnal and Jenilee M. Guebert, G8 Research Group

Appendices

* Profiles
* G8 Research Group’s 2008 Interim Compliance Report

G8 Centre
Top     This Information System is provided by the University of Toronto Library and the G8 Research Group at the University of Toronto.
Please send comments to: g8@utoronto.ca
This page was last updated June 24, 2009.

2009. University of Toronto unless otherwise stated.

***

http://www.g8live.org/

G8 calls for immediate halt to Iran violence
26 June 2009

* Author: Carole Landry
* Source: Agence France Presse

The Group of Eight called on Iran Friday to immediately halt post-election violence but refrained from calling into question the legitimacy of President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad’s re-election.

The leading powers were divided over how to respond to the crisis in Iran with Russia warning against isolating Tehran with a toughly-worded condemnation that risked derailing talks on its nuclear drive. (more…)

****

The Guardia di Finanza School in L’Aquila, Stronghold of the Institutions and the G8

The entrance of the non-Commissioned Officers School in Coppito, L’Aquila The Italian Government has decided to move the G8 Summit venue from La Maddalena to L’Aquila, the city symbolising the earthquake that hit Abruzzo on 6 April.

The Guardia di Finanza Non-Commissioned Officers’ School is the venue for an austere G8 increasingly alive to the issues of natural calamity-related risk prevention, aversion and management.

The School complex, already dubbed “Guardia di Finanza City” is located on the outskirts of L’Aquila, in the Coppito district, and since 6 April, after verifying its safety, it houses the Civil Protection Department’s Di.coma.c, or Direzione di Comando e Controllo of the Civil Protection System, which is coordinating emergency work in the wake of the earthquake. Since mid-April, the college also houses the institutions that lost their premises on account of the earthquake.

The college takes in 3,500 non-Commissioned officer cadets every two years. Building began in 1986, the first lot, comprising about 700,000 cubic metres, being completed over the subsequent six years.

The college’s perimeter wall, which is over 2 km long, encloses about 45 hectares of hilly ground, where the headquarters offices, the parade ground, the auditorium, the sports facilities, the cadets’ quarters and the multi-purpose unit are laid out. The classrooms and mess are located behind the cadets’ quarters, linked by raised walkways with arched glass roofs. The upper part is home to the permanent staff’s quarters, the infirmary, the vehicle fleet and the technology control rooms. Last but not least, the top of the hill features a helipad equipped for both day-and night-time take-off and landing.

Other facilities for the college’s exclusive use are located outside the perimeter wall, as is a car park capable of accommodating a thousand or so vehicles in an area of about 4,000 square metres.

Since the Cabinet meeting held on 23 April, which set the seal on the G8 Summit’s move right there in the college command room, officials and technical experts have been at work to ensure that the Guardia di Finanza campus will be able to play host to the foreign delegations from 8 to 10 July.

http://www.g8italia2009.it/G8/Home/G8-G8_Layout_locale-1199882116809_LaNuovaSede.htm
From – Official Italian G8 Summit Website – 2009

***

Bank failure list tops 45
The FDIC says banks in Georgia, Minnesota and California were shuttered by state regulators.

By Ben Rooney, CNNMoney.com staff writer
Last Updated: June 26, 2009: 10:38 PM ET

Map
Where the banks are failing

Bank failures and foreclosures keep mounting
View map

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — Local banks in Georgia, Minnesota and California were closed Friday by state regulators, bringing the total number of failed banks this year to 45, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

The financial crisis has taken a heavy toll on small banks across the nation as losses in the housing market mount and unemployment dents household wealth. Analysts expect the trend to continue even as larger banks stabilize and the overall economy begins to recover.

Community Bank of West Georgia, which operated one branch in Villa Rica and another in Kennesaw, had total assets of $199.4 million and total deposits of $182.5 million, according to the FDIC.

The failed bank had roughly $1.1 million in deposits that exceeded the FDIC’s $250,000 insurance limit for individual accounts. However, this amount is expected to change as the agency obtains more information from uninsured customers, the FDIC said.

The FDIC will mail checks to insured depositors of the failed bank on Monday morning. Direct deposits from the federal government, such as Social Security and Veterans’ payments, will be transferred to United Community Bank of Blairsville, Ga.

Georgia regulators also shuttered the four branches of Neighborhood Community Bank, which is based in Newnan.

The FDIC said CharterBank of West Point will assume all of the failed bank’s $191.3 million deposits and the majority of its $221.6 million assets.

So far this year, nine banks in Georgia have failed.

In Minnesota, Horizon Bank of Pine City was closed and will be taken over by Stearns Bank, NA of St. Cloud. It was the first bank to fail in the Gopher State this year.

The failed bank, which operated two locations, had total assets of $87.6 million and total deposits of about $69.4 million. Stearns Bank paid a premium for all of Horizon Bank’s deposits and agreed to acquire $84.4 million of its assets. The remaining assets will be sold by the FDIC later.

Meanwhile, the sole branch of Irvine, Calif.-based MetroPacific Bank was closed Friday and Sunwest Bank, of Tustin, Calif., agreed to assume all of its non-brokered deposits.

MetroPacific had total deposits of approximately $73 million. Sunwest Bank will purchase nearly all of the failed bank’s $80 million worth of assets, the FDIC said.

The FDIC said it would pay about $6 million directly to brokers for deposits held in MetroPacific brokered accounts.

Later Friday, the FDIC said Mirae Bank of Los Angeles was closed. The bank’s five offices will reopen Monday as branches of Wilshire State Bank. Mirae Bank had total assets of $456 million and total deposits of approximately $362 million.

Wilshire State Bank will buy about $449 million of the failed bank’s assets. The FDIC will hold the remaining assets to dispose of later.

California has had six banks fail so far this year.

The FDIC said it entered a loss-share agreement with the acquiring banks for a portion of the failed banks’ assets. The agreement is intended to maximize returns on the assets and minimize disruptions for loan customers, the FDIC said.

The total cost of Friday’s bank failures to the FDIC is $264.2 million, bringing the total for this year to $11.94 billion. That compares with $17.6 billion in all of 2008.

The number of bank failures so far this year has already exceeded last year’s total of 25, with an average of 7 failures per month.

Over the next 5 years, the FDIC expects roughly $70 billion in losses due to the failures of insured institutions.

The FDIC, which is funded primarily by fees paid by banks, insures individual deposits up to $250,000. The amount was increased from $100,000 late last year in response to concerns about the stability of the nation’s banks. To top of page
First Published: June 26, 2009: 6:18 PM ET

http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/26/news/companies/bank_failure/index.htm?postversion=2009062622

***

***

http://www.bea.gov/
US Bureau of Economic Analysis

http://www.census.gov/econ/www/
Bureau of Economic Statistics US

http://www.dol.gov/
US Department of Labor

***

accounting principles, bailouts, banking, bankruptcy, banks, bondholders, bonds, budget deficits, Bush economics, Business, collateralized debt obligations, Creating Solutions for America, credit crunch crisis, credit default swaps, credit derivatives, Cricket D, cricket diane, Cricket Diane C Phillips, Cricket Diane C Sparky Phillips, Cricket Diane Designs, Cricket House Studios, cricketdiane, CricketHouseStudios, currencies, currency values, Current Economic Info Sources, Democracy, depression, diane c phillips, Economic depression, economic statistics and analysis, Economics, Economy, Federal government, financial derivatives, foreclosures, global economic crisis, government corruption, Inventing Solutions For America, invest in America, investing, investment banking, investments, macro-economic future forecasting, macro-economics, Macro-economics future forecasting, macroeconomics, Money, Principles of Economics, Reality-based Analysis, recession, Senate, shareholders, Solutions, solvency, statistics, stimulus bill, stimulus package, structured investment vehicles, US currency, US dollar, US economic bailout, US economic crisis, US Government, US government policy, mark-to-market,

***
FASB Will Vote Tomorrow on Relaxing Mark-to-Market Accounting

The Financial Accounting Standards Board is set to debate proposals to change mark-to-market accounting.

FASB Will Vote Tomorrow on Relaxing Mark-to-Market Accounting

The Financial Accounting Standards Board is set to debate proposals to change mark-to-market accounting.

To read more about the proposed changes, click here.

[or see FASB info below.]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=atGP3JkZcwVE

***

My note –
I have a lot of paintings that I’ve done over the years. If I went to a bank or investor and asked to use them as collateral for a loan – what value would they give them? Do you really think it would be $3,000 – $4,000 dollars a piece when I might only get $25 dollars each for them if I’m lucky and catch the right person to talk them into it? That banker would tell me that as collateral, they are worthless.

And, if I had a recent track record of receiving $25 each, then that is the value that a banker, corporate investment manager, investor, “financial engineer” or business person would give them as a value, not what my costs were to create them, and not what they would be worth if the market was more favorable and not what they would be worth in comparison to other items selling in the marketplace.
It wouldn’t take a banker or accountant five minutes to say that to me and refuse a loan to me for a business based on those paintings or anything else. So, why do they get to value things as they see fit and why would our government let them do it after all the harms that have been caused by doing it that way?

– cricketdiane, 04-02-09

**

Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Council
MEMBERS AS OF JANUARY 2009
Mr. Dennis H. Chookaszian
Chairman
Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Council

Ms. Joan L. Amble
Executive Vice President and Corporate Comptroller
American Express Company

Dr. Ray Ball
Sidney Davidson Professor of Accounting
Graduate School of Business
The University of Chicago

Mr. David Bianco
Managing Director and Head of U.S. Equity Strategy,
Valuation and Accounting
UBS Investment Research

Mr. Mark M. Bielstein
Partner
KPMG LLP

Dr. James L. Bothwell
Founder and President
Financial Market Strategies LLC

Mr. Peter Bridgman
Senior Vice President and Controller
PepsiCo, Inc.

Mr. Robert L. Bunting
Chair International Services Group
Moss Adams LLP

Mr. Curtis L. Buser
Managing Director and Chief Accounting Officer
The Carlyle Group

Dr. Carolyn M. Callahan
Professor
Doris M. Cook Chair in Accounting
Sam Walton School of Business
University of Arkansas-Fayetteville

Mr. Michael P. Cangemi
Director of Various Boards and President & Chief Executive Officer
Cangemi Company LLC

Mr. William G. Clark
Director
State of New Jersey
Division of Investment

Mr. Vincent P. Colman
U.S. National Office Professional Practice Leader
PricewaterhouseCoopers

Mr. Stephen J. Cosgrove
Vice President, Corporate Controller
Johnson & Johnson

Mr. Timothy J. Curt
Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer
Warburg Pincus LLC

Mr. Jerry M. de St. Paer
Executive Chairman
GNAIE—Group of North American Insurance Enterprises

Mr. Richard K. Dinkel
Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer
Koch Industries, Inc.

Mr. Lewis Dulitz
Vice President of Accounting Policies & Research
Covidien

Mr. Ralph C. Ferrara
Managing Partner
Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP

Mr. Leonard F. Griehs
Vice President, Investor Relations
Campbell Soup Company

Ms. Marie N. Hollein
President and Chief Executive Officer
Financial Executives Institute

Mr. Gary R. Kabureck
Vice President & Chief Accounting Officer
Xerox Corporation

Dr. Mark H. Lang
Thomas W. Hudson, Jr./Deloitte and Touche L.L.P.
Distinguished Professor
Kenan-Flagler Business School
University of North Carolina

Mr. Richard D. Levy
Executive Vice President & Controller
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Mr. Feilong Li
Controller
CNOOC Limited

Mr. John B. Morse, Jr.
Vice President—Finance, Chief Financial Officer
The Washington Post Company

Mr. George Muñoz
Principal
Muñoz Investment Banking Group

Mr. Joel S. Osnoss
Partner
Global IFRS and Offering Services
Deloitte & Touche LLP

Mr. Lawrence K. Probus
Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President
World Vision U.S.

Mr. Steven A. Rogers
President and Chief Administrative Officer
Dominion Resources Services, Inc.

Mr. David E. Runkle
Director of Quantitative Research
Trilogy Global Advisors

Ms. Arleen R. Thomas
Senior Vice President, Member Competency and Development
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants

Mr. Randy J. Vest
Vice President and Controller; Chief Accounting Officer
Kimberly-Clark Corporation

Dr. Terry D. Warfield
Robert and Monica Beyer Professor of Accounting
Wisconsin School of Business

Ms. Shannon S. Warren
Managing Director,
Corporate Accounting Policies Group
JP Morgan Chase

Mr. William Widdowson
Head Group Accounting Policy
UBS AG

Mr. Brent A. Woodford
Senior Vice President, Planning and Control
The Walt Disney Company

Mr. Jed Wrigley
Director & Fund Manager
Fidelity International Ltd.

Mr. William L. Yeates
National Director of Audit and Accounting
Hein & Associates LLP

http://www.fasb.org/fasac/fasacmem.shtml

***

Private Company Financial Reporting Committee

The Committee consists of a chair plus twelve members and includes four CPA practitioners, four financial statement preparers, and four users of private company financial statements. The founding members of the PCFRC are:

Judith H. O’Dell, Chair
President
O’Dell Valuation Consulting, LLC

Charles Bramley
Partner
Briggs Bunting & Dougherty

Daryl Buck
Vice President and CFO
Reasor’s, Inc

John R. Burzenski
President
Burzenski & Company

Michael Cain
Senior Executive Vice President
Frost Bank

Thomas J. Groskopf
Director
Barnes Dennig

Mary Ann Lawrence
Senior Vice President
Key Corporation

David Lomax
Area Underwriting Manager
Liberty Mutual Surety

Jerry Murphy
CFO
Todd and Sargent Inc

Chris A. Rogers
Vice President of Finance and Administration
Infragistics, Inc.
Steven A. Shelton
Partner
Way, Ray, Shelton and Company

James K. Smith
Vice President and CFO
Phonon Corporation

James Stevenson
CFO
ABS Capital Partners

http://www.fasb.org/private_company_financial_reporting_committee/pcfrc_members.shtml

***
Financial Crisis Advisory Group (FCAG)
CO-CHAIRS

Harvey J. Goldschmid
Former Commissioner, United States Securities and Exchange Commission
United States

Hans Hoogervorst
Chairman, AFM (the Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets)
Europe
MEMBERS

John Bogle
Founder, Vanguard
United States

Jerry Corrigan
Goldman Sachs and Former President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank
United States

Fermin del Valle
Former President, International Federations of Accountants
Argentina

Jane Diplock
Chairman, International Organization of Securities CommissionsExecutive Committee
New Zealand

Raudline Etienne
Chief Investment Officer, New York State Common Retirement Fund
United States

Stephen Haddrill
Director General, Association of British Insurers
United Kingdom

Toru Hashimoto
Former Chairman, Deutsche Securities Limited
Japan

Nobuo Inaba
Former Executive Director, Bank of Japan
Japan

Gene Ludwig
Former Comptroller of the Currency
United States

Yezdi Malegam
Board Member, National Reserve Bank of India
India

Klaus-Peter Müller
Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Commerzbank
Germany

Don Nicolaisen
Former Chief Accountant, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
United States

Wiseman Nkuhlu
Chairman of the Audit Committee, AngloGold Ashanti; Former Economic Advisor to the President of the Republic of South Africa
South Africa

Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa
Former Finance Minister
Italy

Lucas Papademos
Vice-President, European Central Bank
Europe

Michel Prada
Former Chairman, Autorité des marchés financiers
France

OBSERVERS:

Basel Committee of Banking Supervisors

Committee of European Securities Regulators

Financial Stability Forum

International Association of Insurance Supervisors

Japan Financial Services Agency

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Nelson Carvalho, IASB Standards Advisory Council Chairman, Brazil

Dennis Chookaszian, Chairman, Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Council, United States

http://www.fasb.org/fcag/fcag_members.shtml

***
Investor Task Force (ITF)

In September of 2005, the FASB announced the launch of its Investor Task Force (ITF). The ITF is an advisory resource that provides the Board with sector specific insight and expertise from the professional investment community on relevant accounting issues.

The ITF is comprised of the nation’s largest institutional asset managers, each of which provides the FASB with an institutional contact point—typically the Director of Research—who identifies industry specific analysts at their respective firms that match the sector requirements of each standard setting initiative.

For example, if an issue on the FASB’s agenda relates to the oil industry, the ITF, as appropriate, would appoint an oil and gas analyst to advise the Board and staff from at least one of the ITF member firms.

ITF Member Firms and their affiliates maintain more than $3 trillion in assets under management. They include:

* The Capital Group Companies

* Fidelity Investments

* General Electric Asset Management

* Mellon Financial Corporation

* Putnam Investments

* T. Rowe Price

* Wellington Management

http://www.fasb.org/investor_task_force/

***

Financial Accounting Standards Board
Investors Technical Advisory Committee Members
Members As Of January 2009

Neri Bukspan
Chief Accountant
Standard & Poor’s

Jack Ciesielski
President
R.G. Associates, Inc.

Michael C. Gyure
Accounting Research Analyst
FTN Midwest Securities

Adam Hurwich
Managing Member
Calcine Management, LLC

Mark C. LaMonte
Senior Vice President—Head of Enhanced Analytics Group
Moody’s Investors Service

Jeffrey P. Mahoney
General Counsel
Council of Institutional Investors

Rebecca McEnally
CFA Centre for Financial Market Integrity
CFA Institute

Elizabeth Mooney
Accounting Analyst
The Capital Group Companies

Michael A. Moran
Vice President
Global Markets Institute
Goldman, Sachs & Co.

Mary Hartman Morris
Investment Officer
Corporate Governance—Global Equities
California Public Employees’ Retirement System

Dane Mott, CFA, CPA
U.S. Accounting and Valuation Equity Research
J.P. Morgan Securities Inc.

Janet Pegg
Accounting & Tax Analyst
Encima Global LLC

Lynn E. Turner
Private Investor and Member, Board of Trustees, AARP Funds,
and Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association

http://www.fasb.org/investors_technical_advisory_committee/itac_members.shtml

***

Small Business Advisory Committee Members

Mr. P. Glenn Bradley
Partner
Chilton & Medley PLC

Mr. Gary M. Cademartori
Partner
Wall Street Technology Group, LLC

Mr. Robert A. Dyson
Managing Director
RSM McGladrey

Mr. Mark Ellis
Chief Financial Officer
Michael C. Fina

Mr. Richard E. Forrestel, Jr.
Treasurer
Cold Spring Construction Company, Inc.

Mr. Richard H. Gesseck
Partner
UHY LLP

Mr. William G. Hall
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
William G. Hall & Company

Mr. Gregory P. Hanson
Managing Director
First Cornerstone

Mr. Dennis R. Hein, CPA
Partner
Seim, Johnson, Sestak & Quist, LLP

Mr. W. Stephen Holmes
General Partner
InterWest Partners

Mr. A. Donald Janezic
Senior Vice President, Finance & Administration, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer
Bigelow Tea Co.

Mr. Albert G. Pastino
Managing Director
Amper Investment Banking, LLC

Mr. Neal A. Petrovich
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Hampton Roads Bankshares

Mr. Richard L. Reed
Executive Managing Director, Chief Financial Officer
National Cooperative Bank (NCB)

Mr. Leonard Steinberg
Principal
Steinberg Enterprises, LLC
Mr. Troy D. Templeton
Partner & Chief Operating Officer
Trivest Partners

Mr. E. Anson Thrower
Partner
NaviscentGroup

Mr. Scott M. Waite
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Patelco Credit Union

Ms. Deborah Anne Wilson
Chief Financial Officer
Utility Service Co., Inc.

Mr. Samuel E. Wilson, CPA
Senior Vice President/Chief Financial Officer
Bonneville International Corporation

Ms. Candace Wright
Audit Director
Postlethwaite & Netterville

http://www.fasb.org/small_business_advisory_committee/sbac_members.shtml

***
Financial Accounting Standards Board
User Advisory Council Members

Ms. Jane Adams
Managing Director
Maverick Capital, Ltd.

Mr. Robert Axel
Vice President
Prudential Financial

Mr. Jeremy Bean
Vice President
Morgan Stanley

Mr. Neri Bukspan
Chief Accountant
Standard & Poor’s
Ms. Julie Burke
Managing Director
Fitch Ratings

Ms. Ann Duignan
J.P. Morgan Securities

Mr. Robert Ehudin
Managing Director,
Credit Risk Management Advisory Group
Goldman, Sachs & Co.

Ms. Alison Emmerich
Senior Credit Analyst
Dreyfus Corporation

Mr. Robert E. Friedman
Private Investor
Premier International Corp.

Mr. James Goff
Director of Research
Janus Capital Group

Mr. Neville Grusd
Executive Vice President
Merchant Financial Corp.

Mr. Trevor Harris
Vice Chairman
Morgan Stanley

Mr. Charles Hill
Veritasetlux

Mr. Gregory J. Jonas
Managing Director
Moody’s Investors Service

Mr. Joe Joseph
Managing Director
Putnam Investments

Ms. Elizabeth F. Mooney
Accounting Analyst
The Capital Group Companies

Mr. Sudhir Nanda
Vice President
T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc.

Mr. F. Barry Nelson
Senior Vice President
Director of Research
Advent Capital Management LLC

Mr. Mark Newsome
Director
ING Capital LLC

Ms. Janet Pegg

Mr. Stephen Percoco
Security Analyst
Lark Research Inc.

Mr. Adam Quinton
First Vice President
Merrill Lynch

Mr. Hal Schroeder
Portfolio Manager
Carlson Research/Connecticut, Inc.

Mr. Rick Sherlund
Portfolio Manager
Galleon Group

Mr. Damon Silvers
Associate General Counsel
AFL-CIO

Ms. Rita Spitz
Principal
William Blair & Company, LLC

Mr. James Wei
Private Investor

Ms. Christianna (Christy) Wood
Chief Executive Officer
Capital Z Asset Management

http://www.fasb.org/user_advisory_council/uac_members.shtml

***
Valuation Resource Group
Last Updated: March 16, 2009 (Updated sections are indicated with an asterisk *)

The staff has prepared this summary of Board decisions for information purposes only. Those Board decisions are tentative and do not change current accounting. Official positions of the FASB are determined only after extensive due process and deliberations.

*Objective
*Issues Discussed to Date
*Valuation Resource Group Members
*History and Background
*Contact Information

*Objective

In step with its mission to improve and enhance the quality, consistency, and comparability of financial statements, the FASB continues to assess whether and to what extent additional and more specific valuation guidance is needed for financial reporting purposes beyond the guidance provided in FASB Statement No. 157, Fair Value Measurements. The Board seeks to solicit the views of its constituents through the formation of a resource group tasked with assisting the Board in matters involving valuation for financial reporting purposes.

The Valuation Resource Group (VRG) will provide the FASB staff with information on the existing implementation issues surrounding fair value measurements used for financial statement reporting purposes and the alternative viewpoints associated with those implementation issues. The VRG’s meetings are closed to the public and minutes are not distributed. The meetings are closed since this group does not make any authoritative decisions. Any authoritative decisions are subject to the FASB’s normal open due process, including open deliberation by the Board.

The next meeting of the VRG is scheduled for April 7, 2009. The VRG will hold a session with the FASB Board from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. that is open to the public. Constituents also may listen to that session via webcast.

*Issues Discussed to Date

The issues discussed at the February 5, 2009 meeting include:

The SEC Study on Mark-to-Market Accounting

Proposed FASB Staff Position (FSP) FAS 157-c, Measuring Liabilities under Statement No. 157

The AICPA Draft Issues Paper, FASB Statement No. 157 Valuation Considerations for Interests in Alternative Investments

Goodwill Impairment Considerations

The issues discussed at the September 23, 2008 meeting include:

The IASB Expert Advisory Panel White Paper: “Measuring and disclosing the fair value of financial instruments in markets that are no longer active”

Fair Value Disclosures

Observable vs. Unobservable Inputs

Fair Value Measurement of Liabilities under FAS 157

Allocation of In-Use Valuation to Individual Unit of Account
rued Liabilities

Identification and Allocation of Market Participant Synergies

Fair Value of a Noncontrolling Interest and a Previously Held Equity Interest

The issues discussed at the May 8, 2008 meeting include:

Observable vs. Unobservable Fair Value Measurements in the Current Credit Environment

Determining Whether a Discount should be Applied for a Restriction on Sale

Employee Benefit Plans

Contingent Liabilities

The issues discussed at the February 1, 2008 meeting include:

Accounting for assets that the acquirer does not intend to use or intends to use in a way other than its highest and best use

Overlapping customer relationships

Valuation of intangible assets using  current replacement cost

Meaning of  legally permissible  in assessing highest and best use

Allocation of portfolio based credit adjustments for hedge effectiveness testing

The issues discussed at the November 9, 2007 meeting include:

Deferral of the effective date of FASB Statement No. 157, Fair Value Measurement

Development of market participant assumptions and use of an entity’s own data (similar to issue discussed at October 1, 2007 meeting)

Unit of valuation and exit markets, whether unit of valuation can be more disaggregated than the unit of account (similar to issue discussed at October 1, 2007 meeting)

Measurement of liabilities

Applicability of Statement 157 to plan assets of pensions and other postretirement benefit plans (similar to issue discussed at October 1, 2007 meeting)

Use of NAV to measure investments in fund of fund or certain investments with restrictions (similar to issue discussed at October 1, 2007 meeting)

Determining the fair value of a liability with a third-party guarantee

Highest and best use – land example

Definition of significant in determining the level in the fair value hierarchy

Accounting for Transaction Costs in Determining the Fair Value of an Investment

The issues discussed at the October 1, 2007 meeting include:

Determining the fair value of an asset in which the entity intends to transform the asset from its current form into a different form upon sale (such as whether to value a mortgage loan in the whole loan market vs. the securitization market)

Definition of an active market

Determination of the principal market when the majority of an entity’s trading activity occurs in a different market than where the majority of market participants’ trading occurs.

Highest and Best Use: Accounting for an asset that an entity does not intend to use or intends to use defensively

Determination of market participants (such as assets or entities acquired in an auction)
Assets and liabilities without markets

Pension plan disclosures

Use of net asset value to measure certain investments, such as in private equity.

The FASB staff will evaluate which, if any, of these issues to present to the Board for their consideration to add to its technical agenda. Based on the discussions and information provided by the VRG, the FASB has added several projects to its agenda to provide additional guidance to constituents. These projects address:

Determining when a market for an asset or a liability is active or inactive;

Determining when a transaction is distressed;

Applying fair value to interests in alternative investments, such as hedge funds and private equity funds; and,

Improving disclosures about fair value measurements will consider requiring additional disclosures on such matters as sensitivities of measurements to key inputs and transfers of items between the fair value measurement levels.

*Valuation Resource Group Members

Don Charles (accounting/valuation)

Ernst & Young

Frank Ciccotto

Standard and Poor’s

Brenna Wist (accounting/valuation)

KPMG

Greg Forsythe (accounting/valuation)

Deloitte

Andreas Ohl (accounting/valuation)

PricewaterhouseCoopers

Anita Ford (accounting/valuation)

Clifton Gunderson

Jolene Hart (accounting/valuation)

McGladry & Pullen

Jerry Mehm (valuation)

American Appraisal

Paul Barnes (valuation)

Duff & Phelps

Michael DeLuke (valuation)

Houlihan , Lokey, Howard & Zukin

Michael Mard (valuation)

The Financial Valuation Group

Chris Thorne (professional standard setting)

International Valuation Standards Committee

Carla Glass (valuation)

Hill, Schwartz, Spilker, Keller LLC

Amy Ripepi (accounting specialist)

Financial Reporting Advisors

Greg Ramsey (preparer)

Fannie Mae

Gina Weaver (preparer)

Pfizer

David Larsen (preparer – private equity)

Duff & Phelps

Gordon Goodman (preparer)

Occidental Petroleum

Wally Enman (user)

Moodys Investors Service

Shelley Luisi (observer)

SEC

Greg Scates (observer)

PCAOB

Hillary Eastman (observer)

IASB

Laurie Fitzpatrick Priest (observer)

Federal Reserve Board of Governors

Dan Noll (observer)

AICPA

*History and Background

In January 2007, the FASB issued an Invitation to Comment seeking views from constituents on (a) the need, if any, for valuation guidance related to the use of fair value measurements in financial reporting, (b) who should be involved in developing any such valuation guidance, and (c) the process and form of any such guidance-setting activities. Over 80 comment letters were received and posted to the FASB website. Additionally, the Board held a Public Roundtable on April 30, 2007 to enable constituents to elaborate on and discuss the issues raised in the Invitation to Comment. The Board issued a press release on June 21, 2007 announcing the formation of a resource group to address issues relating to valuation for financial reporting. The resource group has met on October 1, 2007, November 9, 2007, February 1, 2008, May 8, 2008, September 23, 2008, and February 5, 2009 to discuss issues surrounding the implementation of FASB Statement No. 157, Fair Value Measurements.

Contact Information

Kristofer Anderson
Valuation Fellow
keanderson@fasb.org

Meghan Clark
Postgraduate Technical Assistant
mmclark@fasb.org

http://www.fasb.org/project/valuation_resource_group.shtml
***
My note –

So, while Sarkozy and Merkel are insisting on intelligent redesign of the regulations and transparency that will fix this mess which was directly caused by the lack of them, our Congressional and business leaders have succeeded in making a mockery of them and the entire G20 efforts by having the mark-to-market rule changed back to fantasy accounting.

On This Morning – 04-02-09, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, (FASB) will be changing the mark-to-market rule into something that no longer resembles reality once again by allowing bankers and others to use their own “significant judgment” in determining values for accounting purposes.

https://cricketdiane.wordpress.com/2009/04/02/financial-stability-forum-and-us-congress-business-leaders-are-making-folly-of-president-obama-sarkozy-merkel-and-world-leaders-at-the-g20-by-changing-to-mark-to-make-believe-accounting-to-underm/

***
Mark-to-Market Accounting To be changed back to fantasy accounting or mark to make believe – Thursday, April 2, 2009 – while G20 meets the Financial Accounting Standards Board are stabbing them in the back by irresponsible current actions

***
****

Facts about FASB
Board Members
Robert H. Herz
Chairman

Robert H. Herz was appointed chairman of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), effective July 1, 2002, and was reappointed to a second term effective July 1, 2007. Previously, he was a senior partner with PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Prior to joining the FASB, Mr. Herz was PricewaterhouseCoopers North America Theater Leader of Professional, Technical, Risk & Quality and a member of the firm’s Global and U.S. Boards. He also served as a part-time member of the International Accounting Standards Board. Mr. Herz is both a certified public accountant and a chartered accountant.

Mr. Herz joined Price Waterhouse in 1974 upon graduating from the University of Manchester in England with a B.A. degree in economics. He later joined Coopers & Lybrand becoming its senior technical partner in 1996 and assumed a similar position with the merged firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers in 1998.

During his distinguished career, Mr. Herz has authored numerous publications on a variety of accounting, auditing, and business subjects. Included among those contributions is the recent book, The Value Reporting Revolution: Moving Beyond the Earnings Game, which he co-authored.

Among Mr. Herz’s other activities, he chaired the AICPA SEC Regulations Committee and the Transnational Auditors Committee of the International Federation of Accountants, and served as a member of the Emerging Issues Task Force, the FASB Financial Instruments Task Force, the American Accounting Association’s Financial Accounting Standards Committee, and the SEC Practice Section Executive Committee of the AICPA.

rhherz@fasb.org

http://www.fasb.org/facts/factsrhh.shtml

***

FASB Chairman Robert H. Herz Testifies on Mark-to-Market Accounting

Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:19am EDT

NORWALK, Conn.–(Business Wire)–
Robert H. Herz, Chairman of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), testified about mark to market accounting today before the  U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises.

Herz appeared at a hearing convened by Congressman and Committee Chairman Paul E. Kanjorski (D-PA) on  Mark-to-Market Accounting: Practices and Implications.

Many investors have made it clear that, in their view, fair value accounting
allows companies to report amounts that are more relevant, timely, and
comparable than amounts that would be reported under alternative accounting approaches, even during extreme market conditions,  said Chairman Herz.

Herz underscored the importance of neutral, independent standard setting to
capital market investors, and noted that after gathering extensive input about
fair value from a diversity of capital market participants, the prevailing view
urged the FASB not to suspend or weaken mark to market accounting rules.

While bending the rules to favor a particular outcome may seem attractive to some in the short run, in the long run, a biased accounting standard is harmful to investors, creditors and the U.S. economy,  said Herz.

Addressing misconceptions that mark to market is a broadly applied rule, Herz explained that so called  mark to market  accounting generally only applies to trading accounts and derivatives that don’t qualify as hedges.

Additionally, Herz clarified that the use of fair value for measurement depends on both the nature of a financial asset and its intended use by an institution. Herz added that current financial reporting in the U.S. and elsewhere across the world included the use of both fair value and historical cost.

In response to the current challenging market conditions and feedback from a
wide array of investors and constituents-including the SEC– the FASB recently announced projects intended to improve the application guidance used to determine fair values as well as improving disclosures in financial reports. (http://www.fasb.org/news/nr021809.shtml ). Earlier in the crisis, the FASB and SEC jointly issued new guidance on the application of fair value in illiquid markets. (http://www.fasb.org/news/2008-FairValue.pdf )

The fact that fair value measures have been difficult to determine for some illiquid instruments is not a cause of current problems but rather a symptom of the many problems that have contributed to the global crisis– including lax and fraudulent lending, excess leverage, the creation of complex and risky investments through securitization and derivatives, the global distribution of such investments across rapidly growing unregulated and opaque markets lacking a proper infrastructure for clearing mechanisms and price discovery, faulty ratings, and the absence of appropriate risk management and valuation processes at many financial institutions,  Herz said.

Given the challenging economic environment, Herz underscored the FASB`s
commitment to continue working actively with regulators and constituents to
provide guidance on reporting issues emanating from the financial crisis and
continue its project with the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) to improve, simplify and converge the accounting standards for financial instruments .

The full text of Chairman Herz`s testimony is located at http://www.fasb.org.

About the Financial Accounting Standards Board

Since 1973, the Financial Accounting Standards Board has been the designated organization in the private sector for establishing standards of financial accounting and reporting. Those standards govern the preparation of financial reports and are officially recognized as authoritative by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
Such standards are essential to the efficient functioning of the economy because investors, creditors, auditors, and others rely on credible, transparent, and comparable financial information.

For more information about the FASB, visit our
website at www.fasb.org.

Financial Accounting Standards Board
Neal McGarity, 203-956-5347

Business Wire 2009
Thomson Reuters 2009

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS170540+12-Mar-2009+BW20090312

**

***
Robert H. Herz, Chairman of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB),
testified about mark to market accounting today before the  U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises.

Herz appeared at a hearing convened by Congressman and Committee Chairman Paul E. Kanjorski (D-PA) on  Mark-to-Market Accounting: Practices and Implications.

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS170540+12-Mar-2009+BW20090312

***

Paul E. Kanjorski has been a Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives, representing Pennsylvania’s 11th Congressional district, since 1985. The district includes Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, and most of the Poconos. (map)
Contents

* 1 Record and controversies
o 1.1 Iraq War
o 1.2 Environmental record
o 1.3 Heart bypass surgery
* 2 Bio
o 2.1 Congressional career
+ 2.1.1 2006 elections
* 3 Money in politics
* 4 Committees and Affiliations
o 4.1 Committees
+ 4.1.1 Committee assignments in the 109th Congress (2005-2006)
* 5 More Background Data
* 6 Contact
o 6.1 Campaign Contact Information
* 7 Articles and Resources
o 7.1 Local blogs and discussion sites

Record and controversies
General information about important bills and votes for can be found in Congresspedia’s articles on legislation. You can add information you find on how Paul Kanjorski voted by clicking the  [edit]  link to the right and typing it in. Remember to cite your sources

Iraq War

Kanjorski voted for the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 that started the Iraq War.[1]
For more information see the chart of U.S. House of Representatives votes on the Iraq War.
Environmental record

For more information on environmental legislation, see the Energy and Environment Policy Portal

Heart bypass surgery

On March 19, 2007, Kanjorski underwent heart bypass surgery at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston. His office announced that the surgery was to operate on three blood vessels surrounding his heart, and not caused by a heart attack.

Bio

Kanjorski was born April 7, 1937 in Nanticoke, Pennsylvania. He was educated at Temple University and the Dickinson School of Law. He also served in the United States Army. Before his election to Congress, Kanjorski was a trial attorney in Northeastern Pennsylvania. During that time, he served as a worker’s compensation administrative law judge and served as solicitor to several communities.

Congressional career

Kanjorski ran four times for Congress in the early 1980s. On the fourth try, in 1984, he was finally elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.

Kanjorkski has had a mixed voting record – liberal on economics and moderate on social issues. Kanjorski usually plays behind-the-scenes roles in the advocacy or defeat of legislation and steers appropriations money toward improving the infrastructure and economic needs of Northeastern Pennsylvania.

2006 elections

In 2006, Republicans nominated Joseph F. Leonardi to face Kanjorski in his November 2006 bid for reelection. (See U.S. congressional elections in 2006) [1] Kanjorski retained his seat.

Money in politics

This section contains links to – and feeds from – money in politics databases. For specific controversies, see this article’s record and controversies section.

Top Contributors to Paul E. Kanjorski (D) during the 2006 Election Cycle
Rank    Donor    Amount (US Dollars)
1    SLM Corp    $ 18,950
2    New Century Financial Corp    $ 17,000
3    National Assn of Realtors    $ 11,000
4    Natl Assn/Insurance & Financial Advisors    $ 10,000
4    Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance    $ 10,000
4    United Food & Commercial Workers Union    $ 10,000
4    National Assn of Home Builders    $ 10,000
4    American Assn for Justice    $ 10,000
4    American Institute of CPAs    $ 10,000
4    Liberty Mutual Insurance    $ 10,000
4    Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union    $ 10,000
4    Credit Union National Assn    $ 10,000
4    UBS AG    $ 10,000
4    Mortgage Bankers Assn    $ 10,000
4    National Air Traffic Controllers Assn    $ 10,000
4    National Assn of Federal Credit Unions    $ 10,000
4    New York Stock Exchange    $ 10,000
Source: The Center for Responsive Politics’ http://www.OpenSecrets.org site.

Note: Contributions are not from the organizations themselves, but are rather from
the organization’s PAC, employees or owners. Totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

Links to more campaign contribution information for Paul Kanjorski
from the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org site.
Fundraising profile:     2006 election cycle     Career totals
Top contributors by organization/corporation:     2006 election cycle     Career totals
Top contributors by industry:     2006 election cycle     Career totals

* Revolving door profile for Paul Kanjorski from the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org website.
* 2006 privately funded travel profile for Paul Kanjorski from the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org website.
* Personal finance profile for Paul Kanjorski from the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org website.

Committees and Affiliations

Committees

* House Committee on Financial Services
o Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises -Chair
o Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology
o Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
* House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
o Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement
o Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives
* House Committee on Science and Technology
o Subcommittee on Environment and Energy

Committee assignments in the 109th Congress (2005-2006)

* House Committee on Financial Services
o Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
o Subcommittee on Capital Markets Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises – Ranking Minority Member
o Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy Trade and Technology
* House Committee on Government Reform
o Subcommittee on Federalism and the Census
o Subcommittee on Government Management Finance and Accountability

More Background Data

* Background information on Paul Kanjorski from Project Vote Smart

* Interest group scorecard ratings for Paul Kanjorski from Project Vote Smart

* Voting record for Paul Kanjorski from the Washington Post database

* Information on Paul Kanjorski from Congress Merge

Wikipedia also has an article on Paul Kanjorski. This article may use content from the Wikipedia article under the terms of the GFDL.

Contact

DC Office:
2188 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-3811
Phone: 202-225-6511
TollFree: 1-800-222-2346
Fax: 202-225-0764
Web Email
Website

District Office- Mount Pocono:
102 Pocono Boulevard
Mount Pocono, PA 18344-1412
Phone: 570-895-4176
Fax:
District Office- Scranton:
546 Spruce Street
Scranton, PA 18503
Phone: 570-496-1011
Fax: 570-496-6439

District Office- Wilkes-Barre:
The Stegmaier Building
7 North Wilkes-Barre Boulevard, Suite 400 M
Wilkes-Barre, PA 18702-5283
Phone: 570-825-2200
TollFree: 1-800-222-2346
Fax: 570-825-8685

Campaign Contact Information

Official Kanjorski for Congress Web site

Pennsylvanians For Kanjorski
126 South Franklin Street
Wilkes-Barre, PA 18701

Telephone: (570) 825-6070

vote@kanjorski.org

Articles and Resources

* Official website
* Campaign website
* Open Secrets – 2006 congressional races database
*  Kanjorski has surgery  Roll Call

Local blogs and discussion sites

* Gort 42
* The All-Spin Zone

Corresponding article on Wikipedia and Cause Caller. (If Cause Caller link does not work, pick from its list of senators and representatives.)
Current Office: U.S. House of Representatives
111th Congress
Leadership Position:
Committees Chaired:
Committees,
Ranking Member On:
Caucuses:
Committees:
110th Congress
Leadership Position:
None     Committees Chaired:
Committees,
Ranking Member On:
Caucuses:
Committees: House Committee on Financial Services, House Committee on Financial Services/Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, House Committee on Financial Services/Subcommittee on Capital Markets Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises, House Committee on Financial Services/Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy Trade and Technology, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform/Subcommittee on Information Policy Census and National Archives, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform/Subcommittee on Government Management Organization and Procurement, House Committee on Science and Technology, House Committee on Science and Technology/Subcommittee on Energy and Environment
Congressional Career
First Elected to Current Office:
November 6, 1984     First Took Current Office:
January 3, 1985     Next Election:
November 2, 2010     Term Ends:
Freshman Member?
No     Previous Political Work?
None or not available     Other Party Membership:
District Offices:

1. 102 Pocono Boulevard, Mount Pocono, PA 18344-1412
Phone: 570-895-4176 / Fax:
2. 546 Spruce Street, Scranton, PA 18503
Phone: 570-496-1011 / Fax: 570-496-6439
3. The Stegmaier Building, 7 North Wilkes-Barre Boulevard, Suite 400 M, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18702-5283
Phone: 570-825-2200 / Fax: 570-825-8685

Campaign Contact:

Website: Official Kanjorski for Congress Web site
Webform Email: vote@kanjorski.org / Email: vote@kanjorski.org

Campaign Offices:

1. Pennsylvanians For Kanjorski, 126 South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18701
Phone: 570-825-6070 / Fax:

Zip Code Affiliations:
Misc:

Date of Birth: April 2, 1937

Retrieved from  http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Paul_Kanjorski

Categories: Pennsylvania and the U.S. Congress | Members of the U.S. Congress from Pennsylvania | Members of the U.S. House of Representatives – temp | Congresspedia | Members of U.S. House of Representatives | Democratic Party (USA) | Congresspedia pages missing a  District Office 1 Fax  field

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Paul_Kanjorski

***
http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=27047&type=category&category=11&go.x=6&go.y=15

Paul E. Kanjorski – Voting Record (ratings)

Business and Consumers

2007-2008  Based on a point system, with points assigned for actions in support of or in opposition to American Forest and Paper Association’s position, Representative Kanjorski received a rating of 50 percent.

2007-2008  Representative Kanjorski supported the interests of the Associated General Contractors of America 75 percent in 2007-2008.

2007-2008  In 2007-2008 National Federation of Independent Business gave Representative Kanjorski a rating of 60 in its 110th (2007-2008) Pre-Election Congressional Report.

2007-2008  Based on a point system, with points assigned for actions in support of or in opposition to National Restaurant Association’s position, Representative Kanjorski received a rating of 60.

2007-2008  Based on a point system, with points assigned for actions in support of or in opposition to National Retail Federation’s position, Representative Kanjorski received a rating of 40 percent.

2007  Representative Kanjorski supported the interests of the Business-Industry Political Action Committee 7 percent in 2007.

2007  Representative Kanjorski supported the interests of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce 45 percent in 2007.

2006  Representative Kanjorski supported the interests of the Business-Industry Political Action Committee 35 percent in 2006.

2006  Representative Kanjorski supported the interests of the National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association 41 percent in 2006.

2006  Representative Kanjorski supported the interests of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce 43 percent in 2006.

2005-2006  Representative Kanjorski supported the interests of the American Forest and Paper Association 36 percent in 2005-2006.

2005-2006  Representative Kanjorski supported the interests of the Associated General Contractors of America 40 percent in 2005-2006.

(And more)

***
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00001509

REPRESENTATIVE (D – PA)
Paul E. Kanjorski

Choose your cycle:
First Elected: 1984
Next Election: 2008
Committee Assignments:

* Financial Services
* Oversight and Government Reform
* Science

Leadership PAC: Citizens for Action
Cycle Fundraising, 2007 – 2008
Raised:     $2,517,285
Spent:     $3,153,006
Cash on Hand:     $340,023
Debts:     $0
Last Report:     Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Top 5 Contributors, 2007-2008
AXA    $33,000
SLM Corp    $26,150
PMA Group    $20,250
FMR Corp    $16,500
Federated Investors Inc    $16,000
Top 5 Industries, 2007-2008
Insurance    $345,548
Securities & Investment    $312,049
Lawyers/Law Firms    $201,697
Real Estate    $178,550
Finance/Credit Companies    $92,516
Total Raised vs. Average Raised, 2007-2008
2007-2008 Fundraising
Cycle Source of Funds, 2007-2008
legend    Individual Contributions    $881,518    (35%)
legend    PAC Contributions    $1,531,728    (61%)
legend    Candidate self-financing    $0    (0%)
legend    Other    $104,039    (4%)

NOTE: All the numbers on this page are for the 2007-2008 election cycle and based on Federal Election Commission data available electronically on April 01, 2009. ( Help  The numbers don’t add up… )

Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics. For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center.

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00001509

***

Paul E. Kanjorski

Paul E. Kanjorski personal relations:
Nancy Kanjorski – sister-in-law, spouse
Peter Kanjorski – brother

Other current Paul E. Kanjorski relationships:
Citizens for Action – PAC
House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform – member
House Science and Technology Committee – member
K&K Real Estate – co-owner
U.S. House of Representatives – member

Paul E. Kanjorski past relationships:
Financial markets bailout bill (House -9/29/08) – voted for
Financial markets bailout bill (House -10/3/08) – voted for
Paul E. Kanjorski connections, once removed:
Paul E. Kanjorski is connected to …
Peter Kanjorski >> through K&K Real Estate   >> Map it
Note: This may be a partial list. Click on the map above to explore more connections.

Congressional & campaign info:
Paul E. Kanjorski is a Democrat from PA
representing congressional district 11

Contact info and committee assignments
Campaign contributors (from the Center for Responsive Politics)
Power ranking (by Knowlegis)

http://www.muckety.com/Paul-E-Kanjorski/1236.muckety

***

House Committee on Financial Services/Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises
From OpenCongress Wiki
< House Committee on Financial Services

This is a subcommittee of the House Committee on Financial Services.
Membership
Member  ?    Party  ?    State  ?
Paul Kanjorski    D    PA
Gary Ackerman    D    NY
Brad Sherman    D    CA
Michael Capuano    D    MA
Ruben Hinojosa    D    TX
Carolyn McCarthy    D    NY
Joe Baca    D    CA
Stephen Lynch    D    MA
Brad Miller    D    NC
David Scott    D    GA
Nydia Velazquez    D    NY
Carolyn Maloney    D    NY
Melissa Bean    D    IL
Gwen Moore    D    WI
Paul Hodes    D    NH
Ron Klein    D    FL
Ed Perlmutter    D    CO
Joe Donnelly    D    IN
Andre Carson    D    IN
Jackie Speier    D    CA
Travis Childers    D    MS
Charles Wilson    D    OH
Bill Foster    D    IL
Walt Minnick    D    ID
John Adler    D    NJ
Mary Jo Kilroy    D    OH
Suzanne Kosmas    D    FL
Alan Grayson    D    FL
Jim Himes    D    CT
Gary Peters    D    MI
Scott Garrett    R    NJ
Tom Price    R    GA
Mike Castle    R    DE
Peter King    R    NY
Frank Lucas    R    OK
Donald Manzullo    R    IL
Ed Royce    R    CA
Judy Biggert    R    IL
Shelley Moore Capito    R    WV
Jeb Hensarling    R    TX
Adam Putnam    R    FL
Gresham Barrett    R    SC
Jim Gerlach    R    PA
John Campbell    R    CA
Michele M. Bachmann    R    MN
Thaddeus McCotter    R    MI
Randy Neugebauer    R    TX
Kevin McCarthy    R    CA
Bill Posey    R    FL
Lynn Jenkins    R    KS

Previous memberships
110th Congress
Members of the
Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises,
110th Congress
Democrats:     Republicans:

* Paul Kanjorski (Pa.), Chairman
* Gary Ackerman (N.Y.)
* Brad Sherman (Calif.)
* Greg Meeks (N.Y.)
* Dennis Moore (Kan.)
* Michael Capuano (Mass.)
* Ruben Hinojosa (Texas)
* Carolyn McCarthy (N.Y.)
* Joe Baca (Calif.)
* Stephen Lynch (Mass.)
* Brad Miller (N.C.)
* David Scott (Ga.)
* Nydia Velazquez (N.Y.)
* Melissa Bean (Ill.)
* Gwen Moore (Wis.)
* Lincoln Davis (Tenn.)
* Albio Sires (N.J.)
* Paul Hodes (N.H.)
* Ron Klein (Fla.)
* Tim Mahoney (Fla.)
* Ed Perlmutter (Colo.)
* Chris Murphy (Conn.)
* Joe Donnelly (Ind.)
* Robert Wexler (Fla.)
* Jim Marshall (Ga.)
* Dan Boren (Okla.)

* Deborah Pryce (Ohio), Ranking Member
* Rick Renzi (Ariz.)
* Richard Baker (La.)
* Chris Shays (Conn.)
* Paul Gillmor (Ohio)
* Mike Castle (Del.)
* Peter King (N.Y.)
* Frank Lucas (Okla.)
* Donald Manzullo (Ill.)
* Ed Royce (Calif.)
* Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.)
* Adam Putnam (Fla.)
* Gresham Barrett (S.C.)
* Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.)
* Ginny Brown Waite (Fla.)
* Tom Feeney (Fla.)
* Scott Garrett (N.J.)
* Jim Gerlach (Pa.)
* Jeb Hensarling (Texas)
* Geoff Davis (Ky.)
* John Campbell (Calif.)
* Michele M. Bachmann (Minn.)
* Peter Roskam (Ill.)

http://www.opencongress.org/wiki/House_Committee_on_Financial_Services/Subcommittee_on_Capital_Markets,_Insurance,_and_Government_Sponsored_Enterprises

***
PACs
Congressman Paul E. Kanjorski 2007 – 2008

Campaign Finance Cycle:

Total PAC Money for 2008:                        $1,521,095
Number of Contributions: 829

Sectors

Agribusiness                                             $2,000
Communications/Electronics                 $18,600
Construction                                                     $29,000
Defense                                                    $32,500
Energy & Natural Resources                          $19,000
Finance, Insurance & Real Estate             $937,495
Health                                                               $13,500
Lawyers & Lobbyists                                       $61,750
Transportation                                         $4,000
Misc Business                                       $36,000
Labor                                                            $251,000
Ideological/Single-Issue                              $113,250
Other                                                                 $2,000
Unknown                                                    $1,000

Based on Federal Election Commission data available electronically on Monday, March 02, 2009.

2007 – 2008 Cycle PAC Contribution Breakdown
Business                            $1,153,845.0         (76%)
Labor                                     $251,000    (17%)
Ideological/Single Issue    $113,250    (7%)

Based on Federal Election Commission data available electronically on Monday, March 02, 2009.

NOTE: All the numbers on this page are for the 2007-2008 election cycle. ( Help  The numbers don’t add up… )

Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics. For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center.

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/pacs.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00001509

***
****
[ SLM gave over $18,000 to Congressman Paul E. Kanjorski who just demanded FASB to hearing in front of his committee and pressured the change away from mark-to-market accounting. 04-09]

SLM – Corporate board

Anthony P. Terracciano is Chairman of the Board of Directors. Mr. Terracciano joined the board in January 2008 following the failed sale of Sallie Mae to J.C. Flowers.

Mr. Terracciano was formerly President of First Union Corporation (now Wachovia), Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of First Fidelity Bank Corporation, President and Chief Operating Officer of Mellon Bank, Vice Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, and non-executive Chairman of both The Dime Bank and Riggs National Corporation.

Al Lord currently holds the positions of Vice Chairman and CEO. Mr. Lord joined Sallie Mae in 1981, took over as CEO in 1995, and led the company’s privatization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sallie_Mae

***
Anthony P. Terracciano
Chairman of the Board/Director
SLM Corporation
Reston ,  VA

Sector: FINANCIAL  /  Credit Services

68 Years Old
Anthony P. Terracciano, Chairman, SLM Corporation-January 2008 to present; Chairman, Riggs National Corporation-2004 to 2005; Vice Chairman, American Water Works Company Inc.-1998 to 2003; Chairman, Dime Bancorp-2000 to 2002; President, First Union Corporation (now Wachovia); Chairman and CEO, First Fidelity Bancorp; President Mellon Bank Corp.; Vice Chairman and Chief Financial officer, Chase Manhattan Bank. Directorships of Other Public Companies: IKON Office Solutions. Other Activities: Director, Avaya, Inc. Trustee, Monmouth Medical Center, University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey, New Jersey State Investment Council.
Director Compensation (Knoll, Incorporated) for 2007
Fees earned or paid in cash     $43,750.00
Stock awards     $0.00
Option awards (in $)     $15,463.00
Non-equity incentive plan compensation     $0.00
Change in pension value and nondisqualified compensation earnings     $0.00
All other compensation     $0.00
Total Compensation     $59,213.00
Director Compensation (Knoll, Incorporated) for 2006
Fees earned or paid in cash     $32,500.00
Stock awards     $0.00
Option awards (in $)     $25,290.00
Non-equity incentive plan compensation     $0.00
Change in pension value and nondisqualified compensation earnings     $0.00
All other compensation     $0.00
Total Compensation     $57,790.00

http://people.forbes.com/profile/anthony-p-terracciano/42867

Top Executives at SLM Corporation

Albert L. Lord     Director/CEO/Vice Chairman
John J. Hewes     Chief Credit Officer/Executive VP
Robert S. Autor     Executive VP/Chief Information Officer
John (Jack) F. Remondi     CFO/Vice Chairman/Chief Accounting Officer
Anthony P. Terracciano     Chairman of the Board/Director
Robert S. Lavet     Senior VP/General Counsel
Michael E. Sheehan     General Counsel/Senior VP
Earl A. Goode     Director
Ann Torre Bates     Director
J. Lance Franke     Executive VP, Divisional
See All Executives and Directors at SLM Corporation

http://people.forbes.com/profile/anthony-p-terracciano/42867

***

Anthony P. Terracciano

Anthony P. Terracciano current relationships:
SLM Corporation – chairman

Anthony P. Terracciano past relationships:
American Water Works Company Inc. – vice chairman
Avaya Inc. – director
Dime Bancorp. – chairman
IKON Office Solutions Inc. – director
Knoll Inc. – director
Riggs National Corporation – chairman

Anthony P. Terracciano connections, once removed:
Anthony P. Terracciano is connected to …

http://www.muckety.com/Anthony-P-Terracciano/18502.muckety

***
Riggs National Corporation

PNC Financial Services Group acquired Riggs National in 2005.

Riggs National Corporation past relationships:
Joe L. Allbritton – CEO
Robert L. Allbritton – chairman & CEO
Lawrence I. Hebert – CEO
PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. – acquirer
Anthony P. Terracciano – chairman

http://www.muckety.com/Riggs-National-Corporation/5025860.muckety

***
SLM Corporation

SLM Corporation is based in Reston, VA

Business sector:
personal credit institutions

SLM Corporation financial information:
Securities and Exchange Commission filings
Stock quote and chart

People related to SLM Corporation:
Ann Torre Bates – director
William M. Diefenderfer III – director
Diane Suitt Gilleland – director
Earl A. Goode – director
Ronald F. Hunt – director
Albert L. Lord – CEO & vice chairman
Michael E. Martin – director
Barry A. Munitz – director
Howard H. Newman – director
A. Alexander Porter Jr. – director
Frank C. Puleo – director
John F. Remondi – vice chairman & CFO
Wolfgang Schoellkopf – director
Steven L. Shapiro – director
Anthony P. Terracciano – chairman
Barry L. Williams – director
Barry Lawson Williams – director
Other current SLM Corporation relationships:
Clark & Weinstock, Inc. – lobby firm
Downey McGrath Group – lobby firm
Sallie Mae – parent corporation
Van Scoyoc Associates – lobby firm

SLM Corporation past relationships:
Charles L. Daley – director
Thomas J. Fitzpatrick – CEO & vice chairman
Benjamin J. Lambert III – director

http://www.muckety.com/SLM-Corporation/5007580.muckety

***
Sallie Mae

People related to Sallie Mae:
Charles Elliott Andrews – president
Robert S. Autor – EVP & CIO
Charles Elliott Fitzpatrick – EVP & CFO
June M. McCormack – EVP

Other current Sallie Mae relationships:
Global USA – lobby firm
ML Strategies LLC – lobby firm
Patton Boggs LLP – lobby firm
Sallie Mae PAC – PAC
SLM Corporation – parent corporation
Student Loan Marketing Association – division

Sallie Mae past relationships:
John B. Breaux – lobbyist
Thomas J. Fitzpatrick – CEO

http://www.muckety.com/Sallie-Mae/5008837.muckety

While in the Senate, Breaux was a beacon of insight on energy issues. He served as co-chair of the Oil and Gas Caucus and was a conferee on energy legislation that was eventually written into the 2005 Energy Bill. He was active in advancing legislation to promote domestic oil and gas production, and was a cosponsor of the Marginal Well Preservation Act, a tax incentive program that encouraged oil production from marginal oil wells. He was also a principal author of the Outer Continental Shelf Land Act.

***

ML Strategies LLC

People related to ML Strategies LLC:
David J. Leiter – VP

Other current ML Strategies LLC relationships:
American Science and Engineering, Inc. – lobby firm
Astellas Pharma US – lobby firm
Business Software Alliance – lobby firm
Cablevision Systems Corporation – lobby firm
Contractors International Group on Nuclear Liability – lobby firm
Direct Carbon Technologies – lobby firm
Distributed Energy Systems, Inc. – lobby firm
eBay Inc. – lobby firm
Exxon Mobil Corp. – lobby firm
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. – lobby firm

Harvard Pilgrim Health Care – lobby firm
Inland Northwest Research Alliance – lobby firm
Israel Policy Forum – lobby firm
Madison Square Garden – lobby firm
Minuteclinic, Inc. – lobby firm
National Automobile Dealers Association – lobby firm
National Cable & Telecommunications Association – lobby firm
New Energy Capital – lobby firm
NPower NY – lobby firm
Sallie Mae – lobby firm
Station Casinos Inc. – lobby firm
Tenneco, Inc. – lobby firm
Trigen Cos. – lobby firm

http://www.muckety.com/ML-Strategies-LLC/5007881.muckety

***
SLM Corporation

SLM Corporation is based in Reston, VA
Business sector:
personal credit institutions

SLM Corporation financial information:
Securities and Exchange Commission filings
Stock quote and chart

People related to SLM Corporation:
Ann Torre Bates – director
William M. Diefenderfer III – director
Diane Suitt Gilleland – director
Earl A. Goode – director
Ronald F. Hunt – director
Albert L. Lord – CEO & vice chairman
Michael E. Martin – director
Barry A. Munitz – director
Howard H. Newman – director
A. Alexander Porter Jr. – director
Frank C. Puleo – director
John F. Remondi – vice chairman & CFO
Wolfgang Schoellkopf – director
Steven L. Shapiro – director
Anthony P. Terracciano – chairman
Barry L. Williams – director
Barry Lawson Williams – director

Other current SLM Corporation relationships:
Clark & Weinstock, Inc. – lobby firm
Downey McGrath Group – lobby firm
Sallie Mae – parent corporation
Van Scoyoc Associates – lobby firm

SLM Corporation past relationships:
Charles L. Daley – director
Thomas J. Fitzpatrick – CEO & vice chairman
Benjamin J. Lambert III – director

http://www.muckety.com/SLM-Corporation/5007580.muckety

**
William M. Diefenderfer III

William M. Diefenderfer III current relationships:
Diefenderfer, Hoover & Wood – partner
SLM Corporation – director
U-Store-It Trust – chairman

William M. Diefenderfer III past relationships:
U.S. Office of Management and Budget – deputy director

[Ford and Bush administrations – various appointments]

http://www.muckety.com/William-M-Diefenderfer-III/82025.muckety
***

EXECUTIVE PROFILE*
William M. Diefenderfer III    Return to SLM Corp.
Chairman, U-Store-It Trust

This person is connected to 25 board members in 2 different organizations across 2 different industries.

See Board Relationships

Age:  62    —
BACKGROUND*

William M. Diefenderfer, III has been a Partner in the law firm of Diefenderfer, Hoover, Boyle & Wood, Pittsburgh, PA since 1991. Mr. Diefenderfer Co-founded Enumerate Solutions Inc., in 1998 and served as its Chief Executive Officer and President from 2000 to 2002. Mr. Diefenderfer’s accomplished career spans three fields – law, business, and public service.

Mr. Diefenderfer Founded USA Education, Inc. (Sallie Mae) and Chart House Enterprises, Inc.

He served as Deputy … Director of the Office of Management and Budget from 1989 to 1991. From 1992 to 1996, he served as Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of Icarus Aircraft, Inc.

He has held senior leadership positions on the staffs of members of Congress, and in the White House for President Gerald Ford and George H. Bush. In October 2006, he served with the Commission on the Future of American Veterans, the purpose of which is to formulate a clear plan to guide the U.S. Department of Veteran’s Affairs for the next twenty years.

He has been the Chairman of U-Store-It Trust since February 14, 2007. Mr. Diefenderfer has been Vice-Chairman of the Board of Enumerate Solutions Inc. since 2000.

He has been an Independent Director of SLM Corp., since May 20, 1997. He serves as a Director of The Student Loan Marketing Association Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of SLM Corporation. He serves as Director of USA Education, Inc. (Sallie Mae) and Chart House Enterprises, Inc.

He has been an Independent Trustee of U-Store-It Trust since October 2004.

He served as a Member of Standing Advisory Group of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Boards from 2004 to 2005. He served as Chief of Staff of two U.S. Senate Committees: the Committee on Finance and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Mr. Diefenderfer holds degrees from Dickinson College (B.A.), Duquesne University School of Law (J.D.), and Kings College, University of London (L.L.M.). .

CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS*
460 East Swedesford Road
Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087

United States

Phone: 610-293-5700
Fax: —
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEMBERSHIPS*
2007-Present
Chairman
U-Store-It Trust
1997-Present
Independent Director, Chairman of Audit Committee, Member of Nominations & Governance Committee and Member of Executive Committee
SLM Corp.
EDUCATION*
BA
Dickinson College
JD
Duquesne University School of Law
OTHER AFFILIATIONS*
AM-CH, Inc.
SLM Corp.
enumerate Solutions Incorporated
Dickinson College
Duquesne University School of Law

ANNUAL COMPENSATION*
There is no Annual Compensation data available.
STOCK OPTIONS*
There is no Stock Options data available.
TOTAL COMPENSATION*
Total Annual Cash Compensation    $54,914
Total Calculated Compensation        $103,000

http://investing.businessweek.com/businessweek/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=558341&capId=4485863&previousCapId=301714&previousTitle=SLM%20Corp

***
William M. Diefenderfer
Trustee/Chairman of the Board
U-Store-It Trust
Cleveland ,  OH
Sector: FINANCIAL  /  REIT – Industrial

Director ,  SLM Corporation
Reston ,  VA
Sector: FINANCIAL  /  Credit Services

62 Years Old
William M. Diefenderfer III, 62, has served as our Chairman of the Board since February 2007 and as a trustee since our initial public offering in October 2004. Mr. Diefenderfer has been a partner in the law firm of Diefenderfer, Hoover, Boyle & Wood since 1991. He served as Chief Executive Officer and President of Enumerate Solutions Inc., a privately-owned technology company that he co-founded, from 2000 to 2002. From 1992 to 1996, Mr. Diefenderfer served as Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of Icarus Aircraft, Inc., a privately-owned aviation technology company. Mr. Diefenderfer served a two-year term on the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board’s Standing Advisory Group from 2004 through 2005. In October 2006, he accepted appointment to the Commission on the Future of American Veterans, the purpose of which is to formulate a clear plan to guide the U.S. Department of Veteran’s Affairs for the next twenty years. Mr. Diefenderfer serves as Vice-Chairman of the Board of Directors of Enumerate Solutions Inc., as well as chairman of its Audit Committee. He currently serves on the board of SLM Corporation, a publicly-traded company more commonly known as Sallie Mae, a leading provider of student loans and administrator of college savings plans.

Director Compensation (U-Store-It Trust) for 2007
Fees earned or paid in cash     $54,914.00
Stock awards     $41,158.00
Option awards (in $)     $0.00
Non-equity incentive plan compensation     $0.00
Change in pension value and nondisqualified compensation earnings     $0.00
All other compensation     $6,928.00
Total Compensation     $103,000.00
Director Compensation (SLM Corporation) for 2007
Fees earned or paid in cash     $92,000.00
Stock awards     $0.00
Option awards (in $)     $114,889.00
Non-equity incentive plan compensation     $0.00
Change in pension value and nondisqualified compensation earnings     $0.00
All other compensation     $100,057.00
Total Compensation     $306,946.00
Director Compensation (SLM Corporation) for 2006
Fees earned or paid in cash     $0.00
Stock awards     $0.00
Option awards (in $)     $292,946.00
Non-equity incentive plan compensation     $0.00
Change in pension value and nondisqualified compensation earnings     $0.00
All other compensation     $70,081.00
Total Compensation     $363,027.00
Director Compensation (U-Store-It Trust) for 2006
Fees earned or paid in cash     $58,000.00
Stock awards     $0.00
Option awards (in $)     $0.00
Non-equity incentive plan compensation     $0.00
Change in pension value and nondisqualified compensation earnings     $0.00
All other compensation     $3,073.00
Total Compensation     $61,073.00

http://people.forbes.com/profile/william-m-diefenderfer/72461

***

SLM Corporation and its subsidiaries are not sponsored by or agencies of the United States of America.

[SEE CHART on this page]

http://www.salliemae.com/about/corp_leadership/corp_str/corp_str.htm

***
United Student Aid Funds or USA Funds is a nonprofit corporation that works to enhance postsecondary-education preparedness, access and success by providing and supporting financial and other valued services. USA Funds links colleges, universities, proprietary schools, private lenders, students and parents to promote financial access to higher learning.

Established in Indianapolis in 1960 to help families finance rising college costs, USA Funds has grown to become the nation’s largest guarantor of loans made under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP), the largest federal source of financial aid for higher education. During the past 44 years, the USA Funds guarantee has supported a total of nearly $115.5 billion in financial aid for higher education. USA Funds has served more than 13.6 million students and parents. SMS Hawaii, the nonprofit student-loan secondary market for Hawaii, is an affiliate of USA Funds. Another USA Funds affiliate, Northwest Education Loan Association, is a nonprofit guarantor that serves the Pacific Northwest. NELA is the designated guarantor for the states of Idaho and Washington. USA Funds guarantees education loans for students and parents throughout the nation. In addition, USA Funds serves as the designated guarantor of federal education loans in eight states: Arizona, Hawaii and the Pacific Islands, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada and Wyoming.

Affiliation with Sallie Mae

USA Funds contracts with affiliates of Sallie Mae, the leading guarantor-servicing organization, to deliver some of the services necessary to support USA Funds’ guarantee.

Before July 31, 2000, USA Funds was an affiliate of USA Group. USA Funds contracted with other USA Group affiliates to these lenders contract with Sallie Mae for servicing and loan acquisition; others have no contractual relationships with Sallie Mae. Postsecondary institutions, their students, and parents are free to choose the lenders with which they wish to work while using the USA Funds guarantee.

External links

* USA Funds website

Retrieved from  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Student_Aid_Funds
Categories: Financial aid | Education finance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_Funds

***

SLM Corp

Sallie Mae – Private Student Loans, Federal Student Loans, Private …
SLM Corporation and its subsidiaries are not sponsored by or agencies of the United States of America. Resources for tuition in tough times …
Show stock quote for SLM
http://www.salliemae.com/

SLM Corp. debt offerings
Commercial paper: SLM Corp. generally issues its commercial paper on a daily basis through various commercial paper dealers. Maturities for our commercial …
www.salliemae.com/about/investors/debtasset/slmcorp/

***

News results for SLM Corp
Fitch Affirms 230 Classes from 51 SLM FFELP Student Loan Transactions – Mar 31, 2009
The loans are originated by SLM Corp. SLM is rated ‘BBB/F3’ on Rating Watch Negative by Fitch. The loans are serviced by Sallie Mae, Inc. which is rated …
FOXBusiness

***

SLM Corporation Debt Offerings

Debt Offerings

Medium Term Notes Program: Prospectus and Prospectus Supplements, Pricing Supplements

EdNotes® Medium Term Notes Program: Prospectus and Prospectus Supplements, Pricing Supplements

Senior Notes: Prospectus and Prospectus Supplements

Commercial paper: SLM Corp. generally issues its commercial paper on a daily basis through various commercial paper dealers. Maturities for our commercial paper range from 1 day to 270 days. There is no additional information related to SLM Corp.’s commercial paper on this website.

Information on SLM Corporation Debt

Search for information on a particular SLM Corp. debt offering by CUSIP number.

Rate/payment/general information for all SLM Corp. debt offerings.

http://www.salliemae.com/about/investors/debtasset/slmcorp/

***
Corporate overview

SLM Corporation, commonly known as Sallie Mae, is the parent company of a number of college savings, education lending, debt collection, and other subsidiaries.

The corporate structure chart shows how Sallie Mae’s business is organized.

http://www.salliemae.com/about/corp_leadership/

***
.
Sallie Mae
* Home |
* About us |
* Contact us |
* Scholarships

Find
Corporate structure
About us

* Careers at Sallie Mae
* News and information
* Investors
* Corporate overview
o Corporate structure
+ Sallie Mae, Inc.
+ Academic Management Services
+ Arrow Financial Services
+ General Revenue Corporation
+ GRP Financial Services
+ Nellie Mae Corporation
+ Pioneer Credit Recovery, Inc.
+ Sallie Mae Bank
+ Sallie Mae Education Trust
+ SLM Financial Corporation
+ Southwest Student Services Corporation
+ Student Assistance Corporation
+ Student Loan Finance Association
+ Student Loan Funding Resources LLC
o Senior management
* Philanthropy at Sallie Mae
* The Sallie Mae Fund

Corporate structure

Sallie Mae business organization
SLM Corporation®

Corporate structure

1995–2009 Sallie Mae, Inc.

SLM Corporation and its subsidiaries are not sponsored by or agencies of the United States of America.

[SEE CHART on this page]

http://www.salliemae.com/about/corp_leadership/corp_str/corp_str.htm

***

Market Winners & Losers: SLM Corp., AIG – FOXBusiness.com
Mar 26, 2009 … The market fought off the bad economic numbers again to close the session up 2.8% on average. While all three of the indices finishing in …
www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/market-winners–losers-slm-corp-aig/

***
SLM Corporation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Sallie Mae)

SLM Corporation
Type     Public (NYSE: SLM)
Founded     1972
Headquarters     Reston, VA, USA
Key people     Anthony P. Terracciano, Chairman
Al Lord, Vice Chairman and CEO
Industry     Education finance
Products     Government guaranteed student loans
Private student loans
K-12 loans
College savings plans
Employees     12,000 (2007)
Website     SallieMae.com

CollegeAnswer.com

Be Debt Savvy
Upromise.com

SLM Corporation NYSE: SLM, commonly known as Sallie Mae, is the United States’ largest college student loan company, managing more than $126.9 billion in debt for more than 10 million borrowers, and employing 12,000 individuals at offices nationwide.

The company primarily provides federally guaranteed student loans originated under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) and offers resources to assist students, parents, and guidance professionals with the financial aid process.
Contents

* 1 History
* 2 Corporate information
* 3 Corporate board
* 4 Social Responsibility
* 5 Controversies
* 6 Subsidiaries
* 7 References
* 8 See also
* 9 External links

History

The Student Loan Marketing Association was originally created in 1972 as a government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) and began privatizing its operations in 1997, a process it completed at the end of 2004 when Congress terminated its federal charter, ending its ties to the government. The company remains the country’s largest originator of federally insured student loans. Through its specialized subsidiaries and divisions, Sallie Mae also provides debt management services as well as business and technical products to a range of business clients, including colleges, universities and loan guarantors.

In 2005, Sallie Mae was among 53 entities that contributed the maximum of $250,000 to the second inauguration of President George W. Bush.[1] [2] [3]

In August 2006, Sallie Mae acquired Upromise, a company which provides rebates to buyers of certain brands, which can be applied to college savings accounts. Sallie Mae and Upromise plan to market comprehensive financial packages to parents and students, including investment plans, financial aid information, and student loans.

On April 16, 2007, Sallie Mae announced that an investor group led by J.C. Flowers & Co. signed an agreement to purchase Sallie Mae for approximately $25 billion (USD). Had the transaction completed, J.C. Flowers along with private-equity firm Friedman Fleischer & Lowe would have owned 50.2 percent of Sallie Mae, and Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase would each have owned 24.9 percent. Sallie Mae would have ceased to be a publicly traded company.[4] The deal fell through in September 2007, with the buyers blaming adverse changes to the business’s outlook as a result of the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 and the tightening of global credit markets following the 2007 subprime mortgage financial crisis[5]. Sallie Mae subsequently began legal action, only to drop it in January 2008 upon completion of a $31 billion funding round, including funding from Bank of America[6].

Corporate information

Sallie Mae operates servicing centers in Gilbert, Arizona; Panama City, Florida; Indianapolis, Indiana; Mount Laurel, New Jersey; Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania; Killeen, Texas, and Whitewater, Wisconsin, as well as 71 other offices in the United States.
Sallie Mae is listed on both the Fortune 500 and the Forbes Global 2000. The company has been recognized as one of the 100 Best Corporate Citizens according to Business Ethics magazine and one of the top 30 companies for executive women by the National Association of Female Executives.

Corporate board

Anthony P. Terracciano is Chairman of the Board of Directors. Mr. Terracciano joined the board in January 2008 following the failed sale of Sallie Mae to J.C. Flowers. Mr. Terracciano was formerly President of First Union Corporation (now Wachovia), Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of First Fidelity Bank Corporation, President and Chief Operating Officer of Mellon Bank, Vice Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, and non-executive Chairman of both The Dime Bank and Riggs National Corporation. Al Lord currently holds the positions of Vice Chairman and CEO. Mr. Lord joined Sallie Mae in 1981, took over as CEO in 1995, and led the company’s privatization.

Social Responsibility

Corporate Responsibility Officer has named Sallie Mae one of America’s  100 Best Corporate Citizens  five times. Corporations (over 1,100 are evaluated) are selected according to community, governance, diversity, and environmental best business practices.

Sallie Mae sponsors The Sallie Mae Fund, a charitable organization with a mission to increase access to higher education for America’s students by supporting and starting programs and initiatives that help open doors to higher education. The Sallie Mae Fund prepares families and students for college and provides scholarship funding that focuses on minority, low-income, and  first in the family  students. Since 2001, The Sallie Mae Fund has awarded $10 million in scholarships to help 4,000 students enroll in college. That is $1 donated for every $12,690 under their management.

Through The Fund’s work, Sallie Mae was named among BusinessWeek’s Top 15 Corporate Philanthropists in 2004. The Washington Business Journal identified the company as the top local corporate philanthropist in 2005.[1]

Sallie Mae won the Ron Brown Award for Corporate Leadership in 2006. It was honored for three college-access programs developed by The Sallie Mae Fund: Latino College Access Campaign, Project Access: DC, and The Sallie Mae Fund Scholarship Programs.

The Sallie Mae Fund earned the 2007 Insight Award for Customer Advocacy in Financial Services (from Insight Forums, LLC). The award recognizes financial communications initiatives that proactively enable customers to make fully-informed choices.

Controversies

On November 9, 2005, former Sallie Mae employee Michael Zahara filed a federal lawsuit against the company, alleging that it had a pattern and practice of granting forbearance in a purposeful effort to increase total student loan debt. That lawsuit is still ongoing.[7] On October 29, 2008, permission was granted to his legal counsel to withdraw from the case, citing  From counsel’s perspective, a breakdown in trust has resulted from the discovery that Relator has been arrested for extortion, the circumstances surrounding that arrest, and Relator’s failure to disclose the arrest to counsel. [8][9]

A 60 Minutes segment (originally aired May 7, 2006) examined Sallie Mae, including its business practices.[2] A professor of law at Harvard Law School, Elizabeth Warren, who is also an expert on bankruptcy and an outspoken critic of consumer lenders, questions Sallie Mae’s dual role as both lender and collector.[3]

In February, 2007, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo launched an investigation into alleged deceptive lending practices by student loan providers, including The College Board, EduCap, Nelnet, Citibank, and Sallie Mae.[4]

On April 11, 2007, Cuomo ended his investigation of Sallie Mae and announced that Sallie Mae had voluntarily agreed to change its lending standards to satisfy a new code of conduct for student loan practices established by Cuomo, and to donate $2 million (USD) to a fund devoted to educating college-bound students about their loan options. [5]

On October 10, 2007, documents surfaced showing that Sallie Mae was attempting to use the Freedom of Information Act to force colleges to turn over students’ personal information.[10] The university involved, the State University of New York system, is expected to decline the request and be forced to defend its position in court.

On December 19, 2007, Chairman Al Lord acted out in frustration during an earnings call with analysts, he ended the call with  There are no more questions. Let’s get the fuck out of here.  Sallie Mae’s stock price fell 21% that day.[11]

Subsidiaries

* Academic Management Services Corp. (Acquired 2003)
* Arrow Financial Services (Acquired Majority Interest September 2004)
* First Trust Financial
* General Revenue Corporation (Acquired January 2002)
* GRP Financial Services (Acquired August 2005)
* Nellie Mae (Acquired July 1999)
* Pioneer Credit Recovery Inc.
* Sallie Mae Bank
* Sallie Mae Home Loans
* Sallie Mae Inc.
* SLM Financial Corporation
* Southwest Student Services Corporation (Acquired October 2004)
* Student Assistance Corporation
* Student Loan Finance Association (Acquired November 2004)
* Student Loan Funding (Acquired July 7, 2000)
* Upromise (Acquired August 23, 2006)

References

1. ^ Drinkard, Jim (2005-01-17).  Donors get good seats, great access this week . USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-01-16-inauguration-donors_x.htm. Retrieved on 2008-05-25.
2. ^  Financing the inauguration . USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-01-16-inaugural-donors_x.htm. Retrieved on 2008-05-25.
3. ^  Some question inaugural’s multi-million price tag . USA Today. 2005-01-14. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-01-14-price_x.htm. Retrieved on 2008-05-25.
4. ^ Investor group to buy Sallie Mae for $25 billion. http://www.salliemae.com/about/news_info/newsreleases/04162007.htm.
5. ^ JC Flowers team drops Sallie Mae bid
6. ^ Sallie Mae drops takeover lawsuit
7. ^  Sallie Mae Reports $159-Million Loss and More Delinquencies by Borrowers . Chronicle of Higher Education. 2008-10-23. http://chronicle.com/news/article/5382/sallie-mae-reports-159-million-loss-and-more-delinquencies-by-borrowers. Retrieved on 2008-11-17.
8. ^ http://studentloanstories.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/motiontowithdraw.pdf
9. ^ http://www.lvrj.com/news/25845924.html?imw=Y
10. ^ Stephen Burd (2007-10-09).  Sallie Mae Demands SUNY Colleges Turn Over Students’ Personal Data . New America Foundation. http://www.newamerica.net/blogs/education_policy/2007/10/news_scoop_sallie_mae_demands_suny_schools_turn_over_personal_data_their_students. Retrieved on 2008-11-17.
11. ^ Ron Lieber (2007-12-20).  The Potty Mouth of a Student Lender’s CEO . FiLife (The Wall Street Journal). http://blog.filife.com/the-potty-mouth-of-a-student-lenders-ceo/. Retrieved on 2008-01-07.

See also

* Fannie Mae
* Farmer Mac
* Freddie Mac
* Ginnie Mae
* USA Funds

External links

* SallieMae.com
* The Sallie Mae Fund

Retrieved from  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLM_Corporation
Categories: Companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange | Companies based in Reston, Virginia | Companies established in 1972 | Education finance | Financial aid | Financial services companies of the United States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sallie_Mae

***
***

Note – WHAT HAPPENED to the $35 Billion dollar loan made through the Dept. Of Energy last fall for the re-tooling of these plants to create fuel efficient and alternative fuel cars’ production?

****
Today, the financial accounting standards board is voting to suspend mark-to-market accounting rules. And, why?

I had noticed that the financial accounting standards board (FASB) chairman (and others) had been called to a Congressional committee to a hearing about mark-to-market. At that point, he was pressured to change this accounting standard and to suspend it.

Going back to a fantasy based accounting system has been demanded by Republicans heavier and heavier every day, but it seemed odd that this Financial Committee Chairman who called the hearing was Democrat, Paul E. Kanjorski. So I looked it up and it turns out that $937,495 dollars in campaign contributions had come to him in 2008 from finance, industry and real estate PACs, along with those who will benefit directly.

He also received over $18,000 in 2008 from SLM – so who is that and what do they do? (See chart below)

Oh, my God – can we say  twisted  and  illegal conflicts of interest ?

cricketdiane, 04-02-09

(Posted on Facebook – 5:25 a.m., 04-02-09)

****
The circle of influence in Washington around the Congressional Halls must be pay to play – The interesting connections between the FASB change to the Mark to Market rule and Paul Kanjorski (Pa.), Chairman of House Committee on Financial Services/Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises who has forced the suspension of mark-to-market to be made

***
iasb@iasb.org

International Accounting Standards Board

search :

* Subscribe to the IASB.Org RSS feed

* Home
* About Us
* Projects
* Open to Comment
* Meetings
* News

Current Location in website:

* About Us
* Contact Us

* About the IASB
* About the IASC Foundation
* About the Trustees
* About the IFRIC
* About the SAC
* About Working Groups
* About the Financial Crisis Advisory Group
* How we are structured
* How we develop standards
* How we develop Interpretations
* Glossary
* Frequently Asked Questions
* Contact Us
* Vacancies

Contact Us

The Board, Technical, Operations, Translation and Publications Staff are located in our principal offices in central London.

You may contact the IASC Foundation at:

First Floor
30 Cannon Street
London, EC4M 6XH
United Kingdom

Phone: +44 (0)20 7246 6410
Fax: +44 (0)20 7246 6411
Email: iasb@iasb.org
Directions

From Heathrow Airport take the Heathrow Express to Paddington, and either a taxi to 30 Cannon Street or the Circle Line train to Mansion House station.

From Gatwick Airport take the Gatwick Express to London Victoria station, and either a taxi to 30 Cannon Street or the Circle or District Line train to Mansion House station.

Technical Activities

The IASB welcomes comments from the public as part of its commitment to developing accounting standards through a full, open and public due process.

30 Cannon Street, London

* View a larger map.
* Download a London Underground map.

You may contact either Board or Technical Staff on:

Phone: +44 (0)20 7246 6410
Fax: +44 (0)20 7246 6411
Email: iasb@iasb.org

* Read our guidelines on technical enquiries.
* Individual Technical Staff contact information can be found on each of our IASB and IFRIC Projects pages.
* Submit a comment on any of our current publications that are open to comment.
* Propose an agenda item for consideration by the IFRIC.

Publications

Please send comments or questions about IASB publications and subscriptions to:

IASCF Publications
30 Cannon Street
London EC4M 6XH
United Kingdom

Phone: +44 (0)20 7332 2730
Fax: +44 (0)20 7332 2749
Email: publications@iasb.org

For issues relating to adoption or reproduction/copyright, please contact:

* Ken Creighton, Senior Manager – Publications
Phone: +44 (0)20 7332 2740
Email: kcreighton@iasb.org

* Visit eIFRS.
* Purchase a product .
* Check typical delivery times for ordered products.

Education

Please send comments or questions to:

Phone: +44 (0)20 7246 6438
Fax: +44 (0)20 7246 6411
Email: mwells@iasb.org

* Upcoming conferences and workshops.
* Seeking an IASCF/IASB speaker for your event?
Communications and External Relations

Please send press enquiries to:

* Mark Byatt, Director of Corporate Communications
Phone: +44 (0)20 7246 6472
Email: mbyatt@iasb.org
* Sonja Horn, Communications Advisor
Phone: +44 (0)20 7246 6463
Email: shorn@iasb.org

If you have feedback regarding this Website, please email publications@iasb.org with your comments.

XBRL

Please send comments or questions to:

Phone: +44 (0)20 7246 6410
Fax: +44 (0)20 7246 6411
Email: xbrl@iasb.org

Copyright – International Accounting Standards Committee Foundation.

http://www.iasb.org/About+Us/Contact+Us.htm

****

***
Members of the International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee

The International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee (IFRIC) comprises 14 voting members drawn from a variety of countries and professional backgrounds.

They are appointed by the Trustees of the IASC Foundation and are selected for their ability to maintain an awareness of current issues as they arise and the technical ability to resolve them.

* Joanna Perry
* Luca Cencioni
* Jean Paré
* Guido Fladt
* Bernd Hacker
* Sara York Kenny
* Jean-Louis Lebrun
* Takatsugu Ochi
* Ruth Picker
* Margaret Smyth
* Scott Taub
* Darrel Scott
* Ken Wild
* Andrew Vials
Observers

* International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO)
* European Commission

Director of Implementation Activities

* Tricia O’Malley
Email: ifric@iasb.org

http://www.iasb.org/About+Us/About+the+IFRIC/IFRIC+members.htm

***
Financial Instruments Working Group

The Financial Instruments Working Group will help the IASB take a fresh look at the accounting standard IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement by examining and questioning the fundamentals of the standard within the context of the IASB’s Framework.

The review will therefore focus on improving, simplifying and ultimately replacing IAS 39 and will examine broader questions of the application and extent of fair value accounting, a topic on which the IASB has not reached any conclusion.

Although any major revision of IAS 39 may take several years to complete, the IASB is willing to revise the standard in the short term if any immediate solutions emerge from the working group’s discussions.
Members

* Melissa Allen, European Head of New Business and Technical Accounting Support Credit Suisse First Boston, United Kingdom
* Joseph Boateng, Chief Investment Officer, Casey Family Programs, United States
* Philippe Bordenave, Group Chief Financial Officer, BNP, France
* Gunther Gebhardt, Professor, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Germany
* Mark Kirkland, Vice President, Corporate Treasury, Philips, The Netherlands
* Leanne Leong, General Manager, Capital Management & Securitisation, Commonwealth Bank, Australia
* François Masquelier, Head of Corporate Finance and Treasury, RTL, France
* Esther Mills, Managing Director, Accounting Standards and Controls, Morgan Stanley, United States
* Ralph Odermatt, Managing Director, Head of Group Accounting Policies and Support, UBS, Switzerland
* Russell Picot, Group Chief Accounting Officer, HSBC, United Kingdom
* Kristian Pullola, Director, Treasury Finance & Control, Nokia Corporation, Switzerland
* Francis Ruijgt, ING Group Corporate Insurance Risk Management, Deputy Chief Insurance Risk Officer International Actuarial Association/ING Group, The Netherlands
* Yoshio Sato, Partner in Financial Industries Group, Deloitte, Japan
* Elisabeth Schmalfuss, Head of Accounting and Controlling Policies, Siemens, Germany
* Sadaki Takagi, Senior Director for Bank Accounting, Japanese Bankers Association, Japan
* Bob Uhl, Managing Director, Accounting Policy, Goldman, Sachs & Co., United States
* Pauline Wallace, Partner in IFRS Services, PwC, United Kingdom

Observers

* Basel Committee on Banking Supervision
* European Central Bank
* European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG)
* International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS)
* International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO)
* Representative from the Insurance Working Group

http://www.iasb.org/About+Us/About+Working+Groups/Financial+Instruments+Working+Group.htm

***
email@bis.org

http://www.bis.org/about/contact.htm

Registered offices of the BIS

The BIS maintains no office, branch, or affiliate other than those listed below.

Location:     Centralbahnplatz 2
Basel
Switzerland
View map
Postal Address:     CH-4002 Basel
Telephone:     (+41 61) 280 8080
Fax:     (+41 61) 280 9100 and
(+41 61) 280 8100
Telex:     962 487 biz ch
SWIFT address:     BISBCHBB
Website:     www.bis.org

Representative Office for Asia and the Pacific

Location:     78th floor, Two International Finance Centre
8 Finance Street, Central
Hong Kong
Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China
View map
Telephone:     (+852) 2878 7100
Fax:     (+852) 2878 7123

Representative Office for the Americas

Location:     Torre Chapultepec
Rubén Darío 281 – 17th floor
Col. Bosque de Chapultepec
Del. Miguel Hidalgo
11580 México, D.F.
México
Telephone:     (+52) 55 91380290
Fax:     (+52) 55 91380299

E-mail us

BIS e-mail address:     email@bis.org
Website comments and questions:
webmaster@bis.org
Order publications:     publications@bis.org
Contact individual BIS staff members using e-mail format:
firstname.lastname@bis.org

Journalist/media enquiries

Press & Communications, the BIS’s press office in Basel, is staffed Monday to Friday, 0900 to 1800 Central European Time. Outside of these times, please e-mail or leave a message at the telephone number below.
Press officers are Margaret Critchlow and Lisa Weekes.
E-mail:     press.service@bis.org
Telephone:     (+41 61) 280 8188
Fax:     (+41 61) 280 9100 or (+41 61) 280 8100

* History of the Committee
* Fact sheet
* Press releases
* Speeches
* Events
* Joint Forum
o History
o Mandate
* Working papers
* Newsletters
* Comments by BCBS

Publications

* All Joint Forum

Publications by category

* Money laundering and terrorist financing
* Operational risk
* Other risks
* Risk management
* Transparency and disclosure

* BIS home
* Monetary & financial stability
* Basel Committee on Banking Supervision
* Joint Forum

Joint Forum
The Joint Forum was established in 1996 under the aegis of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and the International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS) to deal with issues common to the banking, securities and insurance sectors, including the regulation of financial conglomerates. The Joint Forum is comprised of an equal number of senior bank, insurance and securities supervisors representing each supervisory constituency.

Chairman
Current:     John C Dugan, Comptroller of the Currency, United States
Previous:     Dirk Witteveen, de Nederlandsche Bank (2006-September 2007)
Ian Johnston, Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (June-December 2005)
Gay Huey Evans, UK Financial Services Authority (2004-June 2005)
José María Roldán, Bank of Spain (2002-2003)
Jarl Symreng, Finansinspektionen – Sweden (2000-2001)
Alan Cameron, Australian Securities and Investments Commission (1998-1999)
Tom de Swaan, de Nederlandsche Bank (1996-1997)

Membership

The Joint Forum is comprised of an equal number of senior bank, insurance and securities supervisors representing each supervisory constituency.

Country

Banking

Insurance

Securities

Australia:

Australian Prudential Regulation Authority

Australian Securities and Investments Commission

Belgium:

Banking, Finance and Insurance Commission

Canada:

Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions

Autorité des marchés financiers (Québec) 1

Denmark:

Danish Financial Supervisory Authority

France:

Commission Bancaire

Commission de Contrôle des Assurances

Autorité des marchés financiers

Germany:

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungs-
aufsicht

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungs-
aufsicht

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungs-
aufsicht

Italy:

Banca d’Italia

Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa

Japan:

Bank of Japan

Financial Services Agency

Financial Services Agency

Netherlands:

De Nederlandsche Bank

Spain:

Comision Nacional del Mercado de Valores

Switzerland:

Eidg. Bankenkommission

United Kingdom:

Financial Services Authority

Financial Services Authority

Financial Services Authority

United States:

Federal Reserve Board

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

National Association of Insurance Commissioners

Securities and Exchange Commission

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision

International Association of Insurance Supervisors

International Organization of Securities Commission

European Commission (Observer)

Secretariat:

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision

Frequency of meetings

The Joint Forum usually meets three times per year.

Main subgroups

# Risk Assessment and Capital;
# Conglomerate Supervision;
# Customer Suitability.

1 Effective August 2005, the Ontario Securities Commission and the Autorité des marchés financiers (Québec)(AMF)share this seat on a 2-year rotational basis.

The AMF’s first meeting was in November 2005

http://www.bis.org/bcbs/jointforum.htm

***

The Bank for International Settlements

* About BIS
o Overview
o Organisation
o Activities
o History
o Legal information
o Representative offices
o Recruitment
o Contact
* Central bank hub
o Overview
o Central bank websites
o Central bankers speeches
o International Journal of Central Banking
o Regulatory authorities
o Research hub
* Monetary & financial stability
o Overview
o Basel II
o Basel Committee on Banking Supervision
o Committee on the Global Financial System
o Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems
o Irving Fisher Committee
o Financial Stability Institute
o Other BIS-hosted organisations
* Banking services
o Bank for central banks
o Products and services
o Balance sheet
* Publications & research
o Research at BIS
o Annual Report
o Quarterly Review
o BIS Papers
o Working Papers
o Committee publications
o Conferences
o Other publications
o Asian research programme
* Statistics
o About BIS statistics
o Banking
o Securities
o Derivatives
o Effective exchange rates
o Foreign exchange
o External debt
o Payment systems
* Press & speeches
o Overview
o Press releases
o BIS management speeches
o Central bankers speeches
o BIS photo gallery
o Embargo area
o News archive

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision

* History of the Committee
* Fact sheet
* Press releases
* Speeches
* Events
* Joint Forum
o History
o Mandate
* Working papers
* Newsletters
* Comments by BCBS

Publications by year
Publications by category

* Accounting and auditing
* Banking problems
* Basel Committee history and membership
* Basel I and Market Risk Amendment
* Basel II implementation
* Basel II new framework
* Concordat and cross-border issues
* Core Principles
* Credit risk and securitisation
* Liquidity risk
* Money laundering and terrorist financing
* Operational risk
* Other risks
* Risk management
* Transparency and disclosure

* BIS home
* Monetary & financial stability
* Basel Committee on Banking Supervision

About the Basel Committee

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision provides a forum for regular cooperation on banking supervisory matters. Its objective is to enhance understanding of key supervisory issues and improve the quality of banking supervision worldwide. It seeks to do so by exchanging information on national supervisory issues, approaches and techniques, with a view to promoting common understanding. At times, the Committee uses this common understanding to develop guidelines and supervisory standards in areas where they are considered desirable. In this regard, the Committee is best known for its international standards on capital adequacy; the Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision; and the Concordat on cross-border banking supervision.

The Committee’s members come from Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States. The present Chairman of the Committee is Mr Nout Wellink, President of the Netherlands Bank.

The Committee encourages contacts and cooperation among its members and other banking supervisory authorities. It circulates to supervisors throughout the world both published and unpublished papers providing guidance on banking supervisory matters. Contacts have been further strengthened by an International Conference of Banking Supervisors (ICBS) which takes place every two years.

The Committee’s Secretariat is located at the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, and is staffed mainly by professional supervisors on temporary secondment from member institutions. In addition to undertaking the secretarial work for the Committee and its many expert sub-committees, it stands ready to give advice to supervisory authorities in all countries. Mr Stefan Walter is the Secretary General of the Basel Committee.

Main Expert Sub-Committees

The Committee’s work is organised under four main sub-committees (organisation chart):

* The Standards Implementation Group
* The Policy Development Group
* The Accounting Task Force
* The International Liaison Group

More information on each sub-committee is provided below.

The Standards Implementation Group (SIG) was originally established to share information and promote consistency in implementation of the Basel II Framework. In January 2009, its mandate was broadened to concentrate on implementation of Basel Committee guidance and standards more generally. It is chaired by Mr José María Roldán, Director General of Banking Regulation at the Bank of Spain.

Currently the SIG has two subgroups that share information and discuss specific issues related to Basel II implementation. The Validation Subgroup explores issues related to the validation of systems used to generate the ratings and parameters that serve as inputs into the internal ratings-based approaches to credit risk. The group is chaired by Mr Maarten Gelderman, Head of Quantitative Risk Management at the Netherlands Bank.

The Operational Risk Subgroup addresses issues related primarily to banks’ implementation of advanced measurement approaches for operational risk. Mr Kevin Bailey, Deputy Comptroller, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, United States, chairs the group.

The primary objective of the Policy Development Group (PDG) is to support the Committee by identifying and reviewing emerging supervisory issues and, where appropriate, proposing and developing policies that promote a sound banking system and high supervisory standards. The group is chaired by Mr Stefan Walter, Secretary General of the Basel Committee.

Seven working groups report to the PDG: the Risk Management and Modelling Group (RMMG), the Research Task Force (RTF), the Working Group on Liquidity, the Definition of Capital Subgroup, a Basel II Capital Monitoring Group, the Trading Book Group (TBG) and the Cross-border Bank Resolution Group.

The Risk Management and Modelling Group serves as the Committee’s point of contact with the industry on the latest advances in risk measurement and management, and is chaired by Mr Klaas Knot, Director of Supervisory Policy at the Netherlands Bank. It focuses on assessing the range of industry risk management practices and the development of supervisory guidance to promote enhanced risk management practices.

The Research Task Force serves as a forum for research economists from member institutions to exchange information and engage in research projects on supervisory and financial stability issues. It also acts as a mechanism for facilitating communication between economists at member institutions and in the academic sector. It is co-chaired by Mr Myron Kwast, Senior Associate Director of the Division of Research and Statistics at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, United States, and Mr Peter Praet, Executive Director at the National Bank of Belgium and member of the Management Committee of the Banking, Finance and Insurance Commission, Belgium.

The Trading Book Group adresses issues relating to the application of Basel II to certain exposures arising from trading activities. A current focus of this group is the appropriate capital treatment of event risk in the trading book. It is co-chaired by Ms Norah Barger, Associate Director, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, United States, and Mr Thomas McGowan, Assistant Director, Securities and Exchange Commission, United States.

The Working Group on Liquidity serves as a forum for information exchange on national approaches to liquidity risk regulation and supervision. In September 2008, the Working Group issued Principles for Sound Liquidity Risk Management and Supervision, the global standards for liquidity risk management and supervision. The Working Group is also examining the scope for additional steps to promote more robust and internationally consistent liquidity approaches for cross-border banks. The group is co-chaired by Mr Nigel Jenkinson, Executive Director for Financial Stability at the Bank of England, and Mr Marc Saidenberg, Senior Vice President in the Banking Supervision Group of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, United States.

The Definition of Capital Subgroup explores emerging trends in eligible capital instruments in member jurisdictions. It currently is reviewing issues related to the quality, consistency and transparency of capital with a particular focus on Tier 1 capital. The group is co-chaired by Mr Hirotaka Hideshima, Director, Deputy Head of the International Affairs Section at the Bank of Japan, and Mr Richard Thorpe, Head of Capital Adequacy Policy Department and Accounting and Audit Sector Leader at the Financial Services Authority, United Kingdom.

In the course of implementation of Basel II, national supervisors are monitoring capital requirements to ensure that banks in their jurisdiction maintain a solid capital base throughout the economic cycle. The Basel Committee has established a Basel II Capital Monitoring Group that will from time to time share national experiences in monitoring capital requirements. This group is chaired by Mr Thilo Liebig, Head of Banking Supervision Research at the Deutsche Bundesbank.

Cross-border Bank Resolution Group: the CBRG is comparing the national policies, legal frameworks and the allocation of responsibilities for the resolution of banks with significant cross-border operations. It is co-chaired by Ms Eva Hüpkes, Head of Regulation, Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA), and Mr Michael H Krimminger, Special Advisor for Policy to the Chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

The Accounting Task Force (ATF)  works to help ensure that international accounting and auditing standards and practices promote sound risk management at financial institutions, support market discipline through transparency, and reinforce the safety and soundness of the banking system. To fulfil this mission, the task force develops prudential reporting guidance and takes an active role in the development of international accounting and auditing standards. Ms Sylvie Mathérat, Director of Financial Stability, Bank of France, chairs the ATF.

Three working groups report to the ATF: the Conceptual Framework Issues Subgroup, the Financial Instruments Practices Subgroup, and the Audit Subgroup. The Conceptual Framework Issues Subgroup monitors and responds to the conceptual accounting framework project of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the Financial Accounting Standards Board in the United States. The Subgroup is co-chaired by Mr Jerry Edwards, ATF member and Senior Advisor on Accounting and Auditing Policy, Bank for International Settlements, Switzerland, and Mr Patrick Amis, Head of Accounting Affairs, Commission Bancaire, France.

The Financial Instruments Practices Subgroup assesses implementation of international accounting standards related to financial instruments, and the links between accounting practices in this area and prudential supervision. The Subgroup is chaired by Mr Ian Michael, Technical Specialist, Accounting and Auditing Policy, Financial Services Authority, United Kingdom.

The Audit Subgroup promotes reliable financial information by exploring key audit issues from a banking supervision perspective. It focuses on responding to international audit standards-setting proposals, other issuances of the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants, and audit quality issues. The Subgroup is chaired by Mr Marc Pickeur, Advisor for Supervisory Policy at the Banking, Finance and Insurance Commission, Belgium.

The newly established International Liaison Group (ILG)  provides a forum for deepening the Committee’s engagement with supervisors around the world on a broader range of issues. It gathers senior representatives from eight Committee member countries (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States), 16 supervisory authorities that are not members of the Committee (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, China, the Czech Republic, Hong Kong, India, Korea, Mexico, Poland, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, and the West African Monetary Union), the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Financial Stability Institute , the Association of Supervisors of Banks of the Americas and the Islamic Financial Services Board. The ILG is chaired by Mr Giovanni Carosio, Deputy General Director, Bank of Italy.

Two working groups report to the ILG: the ILG working group on Capital (ILGC) and the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Expert Group (AML/CFT EG).

The ILGC is working together with the AIG on Basel II implementation issues and both groups regularly hold joint meetings. The ILGC is chaired by Mr Karl Cordewener, Deputy Secretary General of the Basel Committee.

The AML/CFT EG is responsible for monitoring AML/CFT issues that have a bearing on banking supervision. It is co-chaired by Mr Errol Kruger, Registrar of Banks and Executive General Manager, South African Reserve Bank, and Mr Edouard Fernandez-Bollo, Director of Legal Services, Commission Bancaire, France.

Coordination with other standard setters

Formal channels for coordinating with supervisors of non-bank financial institutions include the Joint Forum, for which the Basel Committee Secretariat provides the secretariat function, and the Coordination Group.

The Joint Forum was established in 1996 to address issues common to the banking, securities and insurance sectors, including the regulation of financial conglomerates. The Coordination Group is a senior group of supervisory standard setters comprising the Chairmen and Secretaries General of the Committee, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and the International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS), as well as the Joint Forum Chairman and Secretariat. The Coordination Group meets twice annually to exchange views on the priorities and key issues of interest to supervisory standard setters. The position of chairman and the secretariat function for the Coordination Group rotate among the member representatives of the three standard setters every two years.

Related information

* Basel II

http://www.bis.org/bcbs/

***
Principles for Sound Liquidity Risk Management and Supervision
September 2008

Liquidity is the ability of a bank to fund increases in assets and meet obligations as they come due, without incurring unacceptable losses. The fundamental role of banks in the maturity transformation of short-term deposits into long-term loans makes banks inherently vulnerable to liquidity risk, both of an institution-specific nature and that which affects markets as a whole. Virtually every financial transaction or commitment has implications for a bank’s liquidity. Effective liquidity risk management helps ensure a bank’s ability to meet cash flow obligations, which are uncertain as they are affected by external events and other agents’ behaviour. Liquidity risk management is of paramount importance because a liquidity shortfall at a single institution can have system-wide repercussions. Financial market developments in the past decade have increased the complexity of liquidity risk and its management.

The market turmoil that began in mid-2007 re-emphasised the importance of liquidity to the functioning of financial markets and the banking sector. In advance of the turmoil, asset markets were buoyant and funding was readily available at low cost. The reversal in market conditions illustrated how quickly liquidity can evaporate and that illiquidity can last for an extended period of time. The banking system came under severe stress, which necessitated central bank action to support both the functioning of money markets and, in a few cases, individual institutions.

In February 2008 the Basel Committee on Banking supervision published Liquidity Risk Management and Supervisory Challenges. The difficulties outlined in that paper highlighted that many banks had failed to take account of a number of basic principles of liquidity risk management when liquidity was plentiful.

Many of the most exposed banks did not have an adequate framework that satisfactorily accounted for the liquidity risks posed by individual products and business lines, and therefore incentives at the business level were misaligned with the overall risk tolerance of the bank. Many banks had not considered the amount of liquidity they might need to satisfy contingent obligations, either contractual or non-contractual, as they viewed funding of these obligations to be highly unlikely. Many firms viewed severe and prolonged liquidity disruptions as implausible and did not conduct stress tests that factored in the possibility of market wide strain or the severity or duration of the disruptions. Contingency funding plans (CFPs) were not always appropriately linked to stress test results and sometimes failed to take account of the potential closure of some funding sources.

In order to account for financial market developments as well as lessons learned from the turmoil, the Basel Committee has conducted a fundamental review of its 2000 Sound Practices for Managing Liquidity in Banking Organisations. Guidance has been significantly expanded in a number of key areas. In particular, more detailed guidance is provided on:

* the importance of establishing a liquidity risk tolerance;
* the maintenance of an adequate level of liquidity, including through a cushion of
liquid assets;
* the necessity of allocating liquidity costs, benefits and risks to all significant business
activities;
* the identification and measurement of the full range of liquidity risks, including
contingent liquidity risks;
* the design and use of severe stress test scenarios;
* the need for a robust and operational contingency funding plan;
* the management of intraday liquidity risk and collateral; and
* public disclosure in promoting market discipline

Guidance for supervisors also has been augmented substantially. The guidance emphasises the importance of supervisors assessing the adequacy of a bank’s liquidity risk management framework and its level of liquidity, and suggests steps that supervisors should take if these are deemed inadequate. The principles also stress the importance of effective cooperation between supervisors and other key stakeholders, such as central banks, especially in times of stress.

This guidance focuses on liquidity risk management at medium and large complex banks, but the sound principles have broad applicability to all types of banks. The implementation of the sound principles by both banks and supervisors should be tailored to the size, nature of business and complexity of a bank’s activities. A bank and its supervisors also should consider the bank’s role in the financial sectors of the jurisdictions in which it operates and the bank’s systemic importance in those financial sectors. The Basel Committee fully expects banks and national supervisors to implement the revised principles promptly and thoroughly and the Committee will actively review progress in implementation.

This guidance is arranged around seventeen principles for managing and supervising liquidity risk.

http://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs144.htm

***
Mark to market rules weren’t intended to make companies look bad – this rule intends to provide a realistic view of assets and their liquidity such that appropriate capitalization can be set up to insure viability and long-term survival for corporations, banks and financial institutions – and it works.

My note –

Where does it say to make up values for assets as companies damn well please to make it look like assets are liquid and available which are not?

– cricketdiane, 04-02-09

* ***
http://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs144.pdf?noframes=1

Principles for Sound
Liquidity Risk
Management and
Supervision

September 2008

***

Financial Instruments Working Group

The Financial Instruments Working Group will help the IASB take a fresh look at the accounting standard IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement by examining and questioning the fundamentals of the standard within the context of the IASB’s Framework.

The review will therefore focus on improving, simplifying and ultimately replacing IAS 39 and will examine broader questions of the application and extent of fair value accounting, a topic on which the IASB has not reached any conclusion.

Although any major revision of IAS 39 may take several years to complete, the IASB is willing to revise the standard in the short term if any immediate solutions emerge from the working group’s discussions.
Members

* Melissa Allen, European Head of New Business and Technical Accounting Support Credit Suisse First Boston, United Kingdom
* Joseph Boateng, Chief Investment Officer, Casey Family Programs, United States
* Philippe Bordenave, Group Chief Financial Officer, BNP, France
* Gunther Gebhardt, Professor, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Germany
* Mark Kirkland, Vice President, Corporate Treasury, Philips, The Netherlands
* Leanne Leong, General Manager, Capital Management & Securitisation, Commonwealth Bank, Australia
* François Masquelier, Head of Corporate Finance and Treasury, RTL, France
* Esther Mills, Managing Director, Accounting Standards and Controls, Morgan Stanley, United States
* Ralph Odermatt, Managing Director, Head of Group Accounting Policies and Support, UBS, Switzerland
* Russell Picot, Group Chief Accounting Officer, HSBC, United Kingdom
* Kristian Pullola, Director, Treasury Finance & Control, Nokia Corporation, Switzerland
* Francis Ruijgt, ING Group Corporate Insurance Risk Management, Deputy Chief Insurance Risk Officer International Actuarial Association/ING Group, The Netherlands
* Yoshio Sato, Partner in Financial Industries Group, Deloitte, Japan
* Elisabeth Schmalfuss, Head of Accounting and Controlling Policies, Siemens, Germany
* Sadaki Takagi, Senior Director for Bank Accounting, Japanese Bankers Association, Japan
* Bob Uhl, Managing Director, Accounting Policy, Goldman, Sachs & Co., United States
* Pauline Wallace, Partner in IFRS Services, PwC, United Kingdom

Observers

* Basel Committee on Banking Supervision
* European Central Bank
* European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG)
* International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS)
* International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO)
* Representative from the Insurance Working Group

Also participating

Staff of the US FASB.

http://www.iasb.org/About+Us/About+Working+Groups/Financial+Instruments+Working+Group.htm

***
A map of how the mark to market rule suspension being voted today is being bought and will deepen the US and Global Economic Crisis just to make poorly run insolvent business gamblers look good temporarily

https://cricketdiane.wordpress.com/2009/04/02/a-map-of-how-the-mark-to-market-rule-suspension-being-voted-today-is-being-bought-and-will-deepen-the-us-and-global-economic-crisis-just-to-make-poorly-run-insolvent-business-gamblers-look-good-temp/

***
Swiss Insurer To Slash 1,000 Jobs Worldwide

12:10pm UK, Thursday April 02, 2009

Worlds largest reinsurer Swiss Re outgoing Chairman Peter Forstmoser (R) and designated Chairman Walter Kielholz shake hands at the end of the annual general meeting of the company in Zurich March 13, 2009. Troubled reinsurer Swiss Re should be able to generate enough funds to buy back convertible bonds issued to Warren Buffetts Berkshire. (Picture caption)

Swiss Re, the world’s second-largest reinsurer, is to cut almost 1,000 jobs worldwide.

The company said it was reducing its workforce by about 10%.

The Zurich-based company said as well as cutting costs, it wanted to centralise its operations.

Swiss Re intends to reduce its current global headcount of 11,560 by approximately 10% over the next 12 months,  a company statement said.

Analysts said the cut was expected.

It is not unexpected, the company had already announced it wanted to cut costs and now we know where the savings will come from,  said ZKB analyst Georg Marti.

The company wants to centralise its business more so the impact on sales will hopefully be limited.

The job cuts are expected to focus mainly on back office and similar functions rather than on the company’s relationship managers.

Swiss Re shares are set to opened 2% higher on the news.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/Swiss-Re-Insurer-To-Cut-1000-Jobs-Worldwide-Because-Of-Recession/Article/200904115254060?lpos=Business_Third_Home_Page_Article_Teaser_Region__5&lid=ARTICLE_15254060_Swiss_Re_Insurer_To_Cut_1%2C000_Jobs_Worldwide_Because_Of_Recession

***
Hundreds Of Jobs Go At Aircraft Maker

2:30pm UK, Thursday April 02, 2009
Nearly 1,000 jobs are being axed at aircraft maker Bombardier in Belfast, Sky sources have said.

The figure is on top of 300 jobs that were axed earlier this year, taking the job total toll to just under 1,300 for 2009.

Canadian-owned Bombardier produces planes for a worldwide market.

The firm, which is struggling with £27m of debts, specialises in small and medium-sized aircraft for regional markets, and is best known for its Learjet executive plane.

It has appointed Begbies Traynor as administrators of the business.

Three directors – Rupert Lowe, Andrew Cowen and Michael Wilde – have resigned with immediate effect.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/Bombardier-Aircraft-Maker-In-Belfast-Axes-Hundreds-Of-Jobs-Because-Of-Recession/Article/200904115254304?lpos=Business_Second_Home_Page_Article_Teaser_Region_4&lid=ARTICLE_15254304_Bombardier_Aircraft_Maker_In_Belfast_Axes_Hundreds_Of_Jobs_Because_Of_Recession

***

Mar 30,2009

Job Cuts Mount In Financial Sector

10:18am UK, Monday March 30, 2009
Workers in the financial services industry are losing their jobs at the fastest rate since 1993.

A survey by business lobby group CBI and PricewaterhouseCoopers found that the number of people employed in financial services fell dramatically in the three months to early March.

And staff turnover fell for the fourth quarter in a row due to nervousness about switching jobs and a shortage of vacancies.

The survey revealed a sixth successive heavy quarterly decline in business volumes, with only 9% of financial services firms saying volumes had risen and 56% reporting a drop.

The CBI also reported steep falls in profitability, while investment plans have been scaled back.

Among major job reduction announcements in the period, RSA Insurance said it would axe 1,200 UK jobs by the middle of next year, while RBS also announced it planned to cull 2,300 jobs.

January saw Barclays slash 2,130 positions in investment banking and investment management, and announce it was in consultations over a further 2,100 cuts in retail, commercial banking and credit card divisions.

Ian McCafferty, CBI chief economic adviser, said:  Conditions remain exceptionally tough in the financial services sector, and have not been helped by equity markets having fallen further since our last survey in December.

Sharp drops in revenues and profitability are causing continued suffering, while business volumes remain very weak.

Firms are making heavy cuts to staff numbers and investment plans to make savings and reflect weak demand.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/CBI-PricewaterhouseCoopers-Survey-Finds-Workers-In-Finance-Losing-Jobs-At-Fastest-Rate-Since-1993/Article/200903415251653?lpos=Business_Article_Related_Content_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15251653_CBI-PricewaterhouseCoopers_Survey_Finds_Workers_In_Finance_Losing_Jobs_At_Fastest_Rate_Since_1993

***

Insurance Giant Aviva Axes 1,700 Jobs

3:50pm UK, Thursday April 02, 2009
Insurance giant Aviva has confirmed it is to axe 1,700 jobs.

Aviva is carrying out a review of its operations

The company said the positions would go at York, Sheffield and Norwich.

Norwich Union Life, which is owned by Aviva, said 1,100 permanent jobs by the end of the year, while a further 590 contract positions would end in the next few months.

The company said 349 permanent and 222 contract jobs would be cut in York, 226 permanent and 254 contract jobs in Norwich, 54 permanent and 43 contract jobs in Sheffield and 35 permanent and 68 contract posts in Eastleigh, Hampshire.

Most of the job cuts are in  business change  and IT, with the rest spread across other areas of the company.

Derek Simpson, the union’s joint leader, said:  The announcement by Aviva to cut 1,100 staff will cause alarm across the insurance industry.

Today we see a scenario where a company that is continuing to deliver positive results is slashing the staff that have enabled them to weather the current financial storm.

Unite is angry that Aviva is repeating what appears to be an annual exercise of cutting thousands of staff.

He added: It is unacceptable that once again shareholders received their full dividends, while the workers who brought the company this success are rewarded with job losses.

The Aviva workforce is continuing to live under constant uncertainty about their future.

Unite has been told that these job losses are unrelated to the economic downturn.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/Insurance-Giant-Aviva-Axes-1700-Jobs-Because-Of-Recession/Article/200904115254555?lpos=Business_First_Home_Article_Teaser_Region_6&lid=ARTICLE_15254555_Insurance_Giant_Aviva_Axes_1%2C700_Jobs_Because_Of_Recession

***

New Accounting Rules for Mortgage-Backed Securities
By FLOYD NORRIS 1 minute ago

The new guidelines could reduce the losses banks have been forced to report as the values of their securities have crumbled.

By FLOYD NORRIS
Published: April 2, 2009

A once-obscure accounting rule that infuriated banks, who blamed it for worsening the financial crisis, was changed Thursday to give banks more discretion in reporting the value of mortgage securities.

The change seems likely to allow banks to report higher profits by assuming that the securities are worth more than anyone is now willing to pay for them. But critics objected that the change could further damage the credibility of financial institutions by enabling them to avoid recognizing losses from bad loans they have made.

Critics also said that since the rules were changed under heavy political pressure, the move compromised the independence of the organization that did it, the Financial Accounting Standards Board.

During the financial crisis, the market prices of many securities, particularly those backed by subprime home mortgages, have plunged to fractions of their original prices. That has forced banks to report hundreds of billions of dollars in losses over the last year, because some of those securities must be reported at market value each three months, with the bank showing a profit or loss based on the change.

Bankers bitterly complained that the current market prices were the result of distressed sales and that they should be allowed to ignore those prices and value the securities instead at their value in a normal market. At first FASB, pronounced FAS-bee, resisted making changes, but that changed within a few days of a Congressional hearing at which legislators from both parties demanded the board act.

“There is a perception that we are yielding to political pressure,” one board member, Lawrence W. Smith, said as he voted for the changes.

“We are an independent standard setter, and it is important that we maintain our independence,” Mr. Smith added. “At the same time, how can we ignore what is going on around us?”

A group headed by two former chairmen of the Securities and Exchange Commission, one who served under President Bill Clinton and one who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said that it feared that politicization of accounting standards would destroy the credibility of the board.

It is not clear how much bank profits will improve as a result of the change; that will depend on how much the banks use their newly approved discretion to set values. Nor is it clear whether investors will put much faith in the new figures.

Early answers to those questions may become available within a few weeks. The board said banks could apply the new rules to their financial statements for the quarter that ended this week.

One major bank, Citigroup, said the new standard would not cause any change in its statements.

It is rare that the application of an accounting rule becomes a political issue, but that happened this year in both the United States and Europe, where the International Accounting Standards Board held an emergency meeting to change its rule after such a move was demanded by the French president.

In the United States, FASB acknowledged the investor criticism of the rules the board proposed after the Congressional hearing and responded on Thursday by voting to require banks to make additional disclosures about the assets in question.

The five-member board approved three changes to the rules, two by unanimous votes and one with two dissents. That disputed change makes it possible for banks to keep some declines in asset values off their income statements.

Robert H. Herz, the board’s chairman and the man who faced the Congressional pressure, said he voted for the changes because he thought the improved disclosures would help investors.

Mr. Smith said he had considered changing his vote as recently as Thursday morning. That would have led to the defeat of one change sought by the banks and perhaps set off a confrontation with Congress. “But,” he said, “I ultimately decided this is an improvement, because we have significantly improved the amount of information” being disclosed.

The American Bankers Association, which pushed legislators to demand the board make changes, praised the board. “Today’s decision should improve information for investors by providing more accurate estimates of market values,” said Edward Yingling, the association’s president.

One change adopted by the board would require banks to disclose the effect of the changed interpretation, although the final wording has not been released and it is not clear how detailed that disclosure will be.

For some other assets, banks must write them down to market value only if they conclude that the decline is “other than temporary.” The measure that drew dissents will allow banks to keep part of such declines off their income statements, although the decline would still show on the institutions’ balance sheets.
One of the dissenters, Thomas J. Linsmeier, argued that accounting rules already allowed the “fiction all banks are well capitalized,” adding that the changes would “make them seem better capitalized.”

The adoption of the rules was widely expected. It came on the same day that the stock market soared, but that rally began in Asia, well before the board met, and seemed to be tied to indications that the world economy might no longer be getting worse, even if recovery was not imminent.

While it was the banks who pressed for the rule, it will affect all financial institutions. But the board said it would make small changes to assure that it did not change accounting in mutual funds, which must mark their assets to market value every day.

Bank regulators already have the power to adjust accounting in computing capital, and some investor groups argued they should do that, rather than give the banks more freedom to value assets at what they think they should be worth, rather than what someone will pay for them.

The board added to the latest rule a statement that the goal of reflecting market value remained the same, but the rules will still allow more judgment by managers, and thus gives them more ability to control the numbers they report.

The vote drew condemnation from an organization called the Investors Working Group, and the two former S.E.C. chairman who lead it — William H. Donaldson, appointed by the second President Bush, and Arthur Levitt Jr., who served in the Clinton administration.

“In order to create high-quality accounting standards, it is critical that the process be independent and free from political pressure,” the group said in a statement. “This will ensure that such standards are neutral and faithfully represent economic reality. To the extent that these new FASB proposals reduce the free flow of transparent and reliable financial information, they undermine investor interests and weaken their ability to make sound investment decisions.”

http://www.nytimes.com/

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/03/business/03fasb.html?_r=1&hp

***

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision
Principles for Sound Liquidity Risk Management and Supervision
September 2008
Fundamental principle for the management and supervision of liquidity risk
Principle 1

A bank is responsible for the sound management of liquidity risk. A bank should establish a robust liquidity risk management framework that ensures it maintains sufficient liquidity, including a cushion of unencumbered, high quality liquid assets, to withstand a range of stress events, including those involving the loss or impairment of both unsecured and secured funding sources.

Supervisors should assess the adequacy of both a bank’s liquidity risk management framework and its liquidity position and should take prompt action if a bank is deficient in either area in order to protect depositors and to limit potential damage to the financial system.
8.

A bank should establish a robust liquidity risk management framework that is well integrated into the bank-wide risk management process.

A primary objective of the liquidity risk management framework should be to ensure with a high degree of confidence that the firm is in a position to both address its daily liquidity obligations and withstand a period of liquidity stress affecting both secured and unsecured funding, the source of which could be bank-specific or market-wide.

In addition to maintaining sound liquidity risk governance and management practices, as discussed further below, a bank should hold an adequate liquidity cushion comprised of readily marketable assets to be in a position to survive such periods of liquidity stress.

A bank should demonstrate that its liquidity cushion is commensurate with the complexity of its on- and off-balance sheet activities, the liquidity of its assets and liabilities, the extent of its funding mismatches and the diversity of its business mix and funding strategies.

A bank should use appropriately conservative assumptions about the marketability of assets and its access to funding, both secured and unsecured, during periods of stress. Moreover, a bank should not allow competitive pressures to compromise the integrity of its liquidity risk management, control functions, limit systems and liquidity cushion.

Pp. 6

http://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs144.pdf?noframes=1

***
Thursday, April 2, 2009, 12:47pm CDT
New unemployment claims continues rise
Nashville Business Journal

The number of people filling new unemployment claims rose to the highest level in more than 25 years in the week ending March 28.

Seasonally adjusted initial claims was 669,000 nationally for the week, an increase of 12,000 from the previous week’s revised figure of 657,000, according to figures released Thursday by the U.S. Labor Department.

The four-week moving average was 656,750, an increase of 6,500 from the previous week’s revised average of 650,250.

State data released for the week ending March 21 showed Tennessee had 11,307 new jobless claims, down 2,707 from the week earlier, but 6,548 higher than a year earlier.

The four-week moving average of those collecting unemployment benefits in Tennessee has risen to 116,868. In February, the state had a total unemployment rate of 9.1 percent, with a seasonally adjusted 12.5 million unemployed people in the state. The national unemployment rate for February was 8.4 percent.

The seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate — the percentage of the workforce collecting unemployment benefits — was 4.3 percent for the week ending March 21, an increase of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week.

The number of seasonally adjusted insured unemployed during the week was 5,728,000, an increase of 161,000 from the preceding week’s revised level of 5,567,000. The 4-week moving average was 5,496,500, an increase of 163,500 from the preceding week’s revised average of 5,333,000.

The fiscal year-to-date average for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment for all programs is 4.7 million.

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/stories/2009/03/30/daily29.html

***
Foreclosure Surge in Feb. is “Surprising,” RealtyTrac Says
By PAUL JACKSON
March 13, 2009 8:13 AM CST
Advertisements

Foreclosures nationwide surged 6 percent from January levels, and were up 30 percent from year-ago, according to data released Thursday morning by RealtyTrac, which provides nationwide listings of properties in foreclosure and owned by banks.

The company’s data showed that foreclosure filings — default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions — were reported on 290,631 U.S. properties during the month, compared to 274,399 one month earlier.

The increase in foreclosure activity from January to February is somewhat surprising, given that many of the foreclosure prevention efforts and moratoria in place in January were extended through most of February as well,” said James J. Saccacio, chief executive officer of RealtyTrac.

Saccacio highlighted the effects of recent legislation in the foreclosure data, as well, including a 45-day voluntary moratorium in Florida expired at the end of January; foreclosure activity there was up 14 percent from the previous month, as a result. And New York saw foreclosures surge 23 percent, after a new state law had delayed the foreclosure process by an extra 90 days.

Nationally, the increase in what’s called “foreclosure activity” was actually driven by two components — new borrower defaults and an increase in reported REO inventory. Actual foreclosure sales appear to have decreased, owing to the effect of new and pending legislation that is increasingly seeking to keep borrowers in their homes at almost any cost. Notice of Defaults and Lis Pendens — the first step in the foreclosure process — increased 10.6 percent between January and February, while reported REO volume increased 5.9 percent. In contrast, Notices of Trustee Sale and Notices of Foreclosure Sale — the final step in foreclosure that signals a courthouse auction is imminent — actually fell 1.4 percent.

Foreclosure filings were reported on 80,775 California properties in February, RealtyTrac said, the most of any state and a 5 percent increase from the previous month. The state’s foreclosure activity increased 51 percent from February 2008, with auction sale notices increasing nearly 179 percent — the most of any category on a year-over-year basis.

Florida and Arizona continued to rank second and third in overall foreclosure volume, according to the report.

Write to Paul Jackson at paul.jackson@housingwire.com.

http://www.housingwire.com/2009/03/13/foreclosure-surge-in-feb-is-surprising-realtytrac-says/

***
Impac’s future could resemble Thornburg’s fall
[Posted on April 1, 2009 at 2:49 PM]

The two mortgage lenders are ailing and their prospects for continued survival amid the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression are dimming.

Another mortgage company bites the dust. Thornburg Mortgage Inc. said Wednesday that it expects to file for Chapter 11, close shop and sell off its remaining assets. While the news is not surprising, the market has forced many to refocus their businesses or face extinction.

There’s not many public mortgage lenders left as the sector has contracted in step with the downfall of residential real estate. Meanwhile, the few who’ve survived and restructured still have an uphill road ahead of them. One such company and former Thornburg competitor is Impac Mortgage Holdings Inc. (OTC:IMPM).

Although Impac Mortgage CEO Joseph Tomkinson pledged in 2007 his company would not go bankrupt, it’s hard to see why not. The mortgage lender has fallen to a penny stock and was forced in August 2007 to get out of its primary bread-and butter of investing primarily in non-conforming Alt-A residential loans, and to a lesser extent, small balance commercial and multifamily loans. Alt-A and its riskier cousin sub-prime are the type of mortgages that helped sink the mortgage industry and sicken the rest of the financial services industry.

Although Impac has moved on to offer new services that include asset management, escrow services and financial consulting, the restructuring, however, might be too little too late. Despite registering a stronger third-quarter in November compared to the same year-ago period, it still reported a net loss of $16.2 million, or $0.26 per diluted shared. In the third quarter 2007, Impac recorded a staggering net loss of $1.2 billion or $15.70 per share.

What the company does have in cash is $24.5 million as of September from a buyout of an advisory services agreement. The amount, however, seems paltry compared to its precarious situation. Impac’s recent entrance into new sectors within the mortgage industry seem plausible but it will take a long time to make inroads in these areas as Americans are buying less homes and becoming more conservative with their finances. – Gerald Magpily

See Thornburg press release

http://www.thedeal.com/dealscape/2009/04/thornburgs_fall_has_negative_i.php

***

Chicago newspaper files for bankruptcy


The company that owns the Chicago Sun-Times and 58 other newspapers and online sites said Tuesday it had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Wednesday, 01 April 2009 12:44
The Sun-Times Media Group, Inc. said it would continue to operate its newspapers and Web sites as usual while it improves its cost structure and stabilizes operations.

The company that owns the Chicago Sun-Times and 58 other newspapers and online sites said Tuesday it had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Tuesday’s announcement comes amid a raft of newspaper closings and cuts that has seen the end of print editions of The Rocky Mountain News in Denver, Colorado; The Seattle Post-Intelligencer; and The Christian Science Monitor.

The Rocky Mountain News shut down completely; both the Seattle paper and the Christian Science Monitor remain in online editions.

The chain that owns the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune is in bankruptcy and other papers are on the brink. And two industry giants, The Washington Post and The New York Times, announced last week they are cutting costs and staff amid tumbling revenue and continued economic decline.

The Sun-Times said similar cost-cutting measures failed to turn around the company’s fortunes.

“The significant downturn in the print advertising environment that has affected newspapers across the country has continued to severely impact us,” said Jeremy Halbreich, chairman and interim chief executive of the Sun-Times Media Group. “Unfortunately, this deteriorating economic climate, coupled with a significant, pending IRS tax liability dating back to previous management, has led us to today’s difficult action.”

Halbreich said the company would explore the potential sale of assets or new investment in the company to help it remain viable.

At least 120 newspapers in the United States have shut down since January 2008, according to Paper Cuts, a Web site tracking the newspaper industry. More than 21,000 jobs at 67 newspapers have vaporized in that time, according to the site.

Newspapers have struggled to meet challenges posed by changing reader habits, a shifting advertising market, an anemic economy, and the newspaper industry’s own early strategic errors.

“We provide the area’s best source of local news and information and remain committed to continuing to serve our readers, advertisers, and communities,” Halbreich said. “We have enjoyed a long, rich history in the Chicago area and our goal is to preserve and sustain these strong print and online news and information assets that are such an integral part of the fabric of Chicago and its neighboring communities.”

The company said it expects the Chapter 11 process to be completed this year.

CNN

http://en.timeturk.com/chicago-newspaper-files-for-bankruptcy–17793-haberi.html

US marshals seize Madoff property

WTC skyscraper won’t be ‘Freedom Tower’

***

The changes proposed on March 16 to fair-value, also known as mark-to-market accounting, would allow companies to use “significant judgment” in valuing assets and reduce the amount of writedowns they must take on so-called impaired investments, including mortgage-backed securities. A final vote on the resolutions, which would apply to first-quarter financial statements, is scheduled for April 2.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=awSxPMGzDW38

***

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Maritime_Organization

The International Maritime Organization (IMO), formerly known as the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO), is a mid-20th century creation. The Convention which established the IMCO was adopted in Geneva in 1948,[1] but it only came into force ten years later; and the new Organization met for the first time the following year in 1959. The IMCO name was changed to IMO in 1982.[2]

Headquartered in London, in the United Kingdom, the IMO is a specialized agency of the United Nations with 168 Member States and three Associate Members.[2] The IMO’s primary purpose is to develop and maintain a comprehensive regulatory framework for shipping and its remit today includes safety, environmental concerns, legal matters, technical co-operation, maritime security and the efficiency of shipping. IMO is governed by an Assembly of members and is financially administered by a Council of members elected from the Assembly. The work of IMO is conducted through five committees and these are supported by technical subcommittees.

The IMO is supported by a permanent secretariat of employees who are representative of its members. The secretariat is composed of a Secretary-General who is periodically elected by the Assembly, and various divisions such as those for marine safety, environmental protection, and a conference section.

IMO is the source of approximately 60 legal instruments that guide the regulatory development of its member states to improve safety at sea, facilitate trade among seafaring states and protect the maritime environment. The most well known is the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS).

IMO regularly enacts regulations, which are broadly enforced by national and local maritime authorities in member countries, such as the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREG). The IMO has also enacted a Port State Control (PSC) authority, allowing domestic maritime authorities such as coast guards to inspect foreign-flag ships calling at ports of the many port states. Memoranda of Understanding (protocols) were signed by some countries unifying Port State Control procedures among the signatories.

Current issues

Recent initiatives at the IMO have included amendments to SOLAS, which upgraded fire protection standards on passenger ships, the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW) which establishes basic requirements on training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers and to the Convention on the Prevention of Maritime Pollution (MARPOL 73/78), which required double hulls on all tankers. All these initiatives were instigated by representatives of the United States before the IMO.
In December 2002, new amendments to the 1974 SOLAS Convention were enacted. These amendments gave rise to the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code, which went into effect on 1 July 2004. The concept of the code is to provide layered and redundant defenses against smuggling, terrorism, piracy, stowaways, etc. The ISPS Code required most ships and port facilities engaged in international trade to establish and maintain strict security procedures as specified in ship and port specific Ship Security Plans and Port Facility Security Plans.

The IMO is also responsible for publishing the International Code of Signals for use between merchant and naval vessels.

The First Intersessional Meeting of IMO’s Working Group on Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships is currently taking place in Oslo, Norway (23-27 June, 2008), tasked with developing the technical basis for the reduction mechanisms that may form part of a future IMO regime to control greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping, and a draft of the actual reduction mechanisms themselves, for further consideration by IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC). [3]

The IMO has also served as a key partner and enabler of U.S. international and interagency efforts to establish Maritime Domain Awareness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Maritime_Organization

***

http://www.imo.org/
International Maritime Organization – (UN)

***

ICC International Maritime Bureau (IMB) research indicates that acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships in the second quarter of 2007 have jumped by 37% when compared to the second quarter of 2006.
Top
12-07-2007 11:47:16 GMT

The International Chamber of Commerce’s International Maritime Bureau (IMB) has launched an online piracy map which gives users a visual on the nature and location of attacks to help them better understand and track incidents.
Top
01-09-2006 9:52:46 GMT

2003 – 2008 Petrospot Limited: The content of this web site is copyright by Petrospot Limited.

http://www.cargosecurityinternational.com/channel.asp?cid=9

Climate factors, international cooperation key to saving Aral Sea …
Earthtimes (press release) – ?May 1, 2009?
… of the related UN convention, was released today. It describes the development of a consultative process to deal with matters ranging from piracy to the …

**

History of the chamber movement

The long history of the chamber movement can be traced back to 1599, when the term “chamber of commerce” appeared for the first time, in Marseille, France.

Moving beyond individual interests to that of a collective group, the establishment of chambers provided merchants, traders, craftsmen and industrialists a public forum to discuss issues facing them as a business community. This representation of common interests became, and remains, the foundation of chambers of commerce worldwide.

Gaining acceptance from public authorities also helped the chamber cause. Public authorities rapidly established close dialogue with chambers, seeing them as the legitimate and institutionalized common voice of business.

Today, chambers of commerce exist in almost every country of the world.

Chambers of commerce today are diverse in name as in the business communities they represent. The word “chamber” is still predominantly used in most countries. No longer just chambers of “commerce” and “industry”, chambers are also including words like “manufacturers”, “entrepreneurship”, “training”, “shipping”, “commodity exchanges”, “agriculture” to help reflect the community they serve.

Chambers have been established along bilateral lines (eg. Swedish British Chamber of Commerce) as well as community and special interest chamber groups eg. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Singapore Indian Chamber of Commerce, and the Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. Transnational associations of chambers are also a feature of our landscape, such as the Confederation of Asia Pacific Chambers of Commerce and Association of Latin American Chambers of Commerce and Industry.

However, as diverse as the name has become, as well as the cross-section of interests they represent and their methods, the common goal remains – the support of business enterprises. Chambers are still the most important type of multi-sectoral business organizations in the world.

While chambers of commerce have evolved and grown based upon a nation’s own historical context, two basic models prevail.

The “continental” or “public law” model is founded on the remains of medieval guilds. From its origins in France, chambers were established quickly across other European countries like Austria, Germany, Italy, Slovenia and Spain. This type of chamber is called “public law” as it is established and regulated by national legislation. A key characteristic is that under most “public law” chamber systems, membership is mandatory for all enterprises.

Public law chambers are generally found on the European continent as well as French speaking Africa and other former French colonies.  Other countries like North Korea, Bhutan, as well as the majority of Arab nations fall under this model.

The predominate model in the world is the “private law” or “Anglo-Saxon” model originated in Great Britain and spread to other countries influenced by British tradition. It is also prominent in the Nordic countries.  Reflecting more the “laissez faire” economic policies of these nations, chambers are established by the desires and needs of their local business community. These chambers are not created and governed by public statute, but are established under private law requiring only registration in the business or association registers.

Private law models are found in Great Britain, other countries of the British Commonwealth, North America, Scandinavia, Belgium and Switzerland.

While most chambers can be classified as one of these two models, some countries have incorporated features of both systems more compatible with their own political and economic development. Such hydrid models can be found in China, Cuba, Paraguay as well as other Latin American countries, Singapore and Vietnam. Though established by national legislation, the chambers operate with voluntary membership systems.

Footnote

A worldwide history of the chamber of commerce movement is currently being written by the WCF. Chambers are encouraged to send any information they may have on the chamber movement in their region to help us with the development and regular revisions of this document.

http://www.iccwbo.biz/wcf/id2899/index.html

**

ICC – International Chamber of Commerce – concerned trade finance may suffer due to proposed bank leverage rules
Paris, 4 May 2010   ICC has expressed concern that proposals to introduce a new framework to limit excessive leverage in the world’s banking system may have unintended, negative consequences on trade finance, and it urged the creation of a special trade finance working group to examine the problem.

http://www.iccwbo.biz/display2/index.html

***

My Note –

I have a copy of an article somewhere – I’ll find it and I’ve already put it in an earlier post which explains that because the US has not signed the Treaty of the Sea – other nations are divvying up the Arctic for oil drilling there and leaving us with no say in the matter whatsoever and no rights either.

– cricketdiane

But the GOP doesn’t want that Treaty signed by the US. (note article below) –

***

GOP ‘Sovereignty Caucus’ Battles Obama on Treaties
Small But Influential Coalition of Hawks Holds Surprising Sway Over International Agreements

By David Weigel 7/1/09 11:53 AM
An anti-Law of the Sea Treaty ad from the Coalition to Preserve American Sovereignty (YouTube)

An anti-Law of the Sea Treaty ad from the Coalition to Preserve American Sovereignty (YouTube)

Shortly after leaving their offices on June 24, dozens of Hill staffers, foreign policy experts, and old Washington hands made their way to the lower floor of the Capitol Visitors Center, a sprawling complex below the halls of Congress. The occasion was the low-key launch of the new House Sovereignty Caucus, the project of three Republican members — Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.), Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.), and Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.) — who had become more and more worried about Americans ceding their rights to foreign institutions. Retired Lt. Col. Oliver North and former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith stopped by to make remarks and pose for photos. Patrick Henry College Chancellor Michael Farris made small talk near a table of fruits, vegetables and soft cheeses.
Image by: Matt Mahurin

Image by: Matt Mahurin

“I have said for years that we ought to get the U.S. out of the U.N. and the U.N. out of the U.S.,” said Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.), addressing the crowd in an impromptu speech. “I’ll do everything I can in the Congress to maintain the U.S. as a sovereign nation, subservient to no one but the almighty God.”

A series of traffic delays meant that, Frank Gaffney, the president of the Center For Security Policy, was the last supporter of the new caucus to give a speech. He bemoaned the confirmation of Harold Koh as Legal Adviser to the State Department, an “enemy” of sovereignty, shortly after the Senate had agreed to move ahead to a vote on his nomination. But he was optimistic. “We may now have in the House a vehicle for keeping the so-called ‘Upper House’ more honest on these issues.”

While Republicans and conservative activists were disappointed by the confirmation of Koh, the long delay leading up to the vote and its relative closeness — 65 to 31 to end debate on the nomination and 62-35 to confirm him — have boosted their hopes of successfully battling treaties that they characterize as threats to American rights and national interests. Treaties need the votes of 67 senators to be ratified, and can gum up the business of the Senate for weeks if they become flash points for controversy. The Convention on the Rights of the Child, for example, has convinced Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) — a member of the House Sovereignty Caucus — to introduce a Constitutional amendment protecting the right of American parents to discipline their children and send them to religious schools.

Those hopes are likely to be tested at least twice this year. According to staffers for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, or the Law of the Sea Treaty — a 1982 treaty that governs the right of countries to use the oceans — could be reintroduced next month. And President Obama is in Russia this week in part to move forward the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, the 1996 agreement on weapons testing that was rejected by the Senate in 1999, when the upper chamber contained 55 Republicans and 45 Democrats. Of the 16 treaties that the State Department included on its priority list in a May 11 letter to the committee, both sides agree that these two will be the first to face full votes. And both sides agree that the Koh vote provided a good idea of the support these treaties might command from a very skeptical Senate Republican conference.

“The vote against Harold Koh is probably the minimum vote against both of those treaties,” said John Bolton, who served as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under George W. Bush, and who has been a forceful critic of both treaties. “I think that a lot of Republicans, whether they agreed or disagreed with Koh’s views, basically agreed that president had the right to appoint his own team. Whether they would also support these treaties, given their concerns about national sovereignty, is another question.”

The power to approve treaties rests entirely with the Senate; on the surface, that would seem to make the House Sovereignty Caucus and its supporters less relevant. But both supporters and opponents of the treaties said that skeptics of international law and international agreements will have an outsized influence in this debate. Senate staffers from both parties, experts from liberal groups, and experts from conservative groups all cited the same handful of people as the ones able to turn opinion on treaties: Bolton, Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, and fellows at the Heritage Foundation and Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). For an example of their influence, one supporter of the treaties pointed out what happens when someone does a basic Google search for “Law of the Sea.” The first links include the Heritage Foundation’s page on the treaty, CEI’s page, and the site UNLawoftheSeaTreaty.org, owned by another think tank that opposes the treaty.

Myron Ebell, director of energy and global warming policy at CEI, said that there was some truth to this characterization. “At the one end, the American people are very suspicious of more United Nations involvement in their lives,” said Ebell. “When you’re saying that you’ll put the UN in charge of the oceans, that’s pretty strongly opposed by the American people. But at the other end, most Washington insiders, a lot of experts who work on this, a lot of admirals, say we ought to do that and say that the problems have been fixed since President Reagan opposed it. So we’re not a very broad coalition.”

Treaty supporters, who had hoped that a Democratic president and heavily Democratic Senate could get past this standoff, are frustrated by the conservatives’ success. “The fight over the Law of the Sea has been a textbook example of the politics of intensity trumping the politics of common sense,” said Don Kraus, the CEO of Citizens for Global Solutions, a group that supports both treaties. “The treaty’s narrow group of opponents have whipped up conspiracy theories to feed political temper tantrums in swing states.”

While negotiations that could lead to progress on the CTBT are taking center stage this week, treaty opponents are focusing on the Law of the Sea Treaty because it will come up first, and because its fate in the last Congress provided a roadmap for both sides. A tough campaign against the treaty, which included TV ads from the Competitive Enterprise Institute and pressure on conservative senators like Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), whittled down its support. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who had long supported the treaty, backed down and said that it needed “changes” shortly before the 2008 New Hampshire presidential primary.

According to Baker Spring, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation, opposition to international law and treaties like these has coalesced in the wake of the campaign against the Law of the Sea Treaty and because of worries about President Barack Obama. “We have a president in office who is potentially serious about this agenda. Nobody held the view that George W. Bush was going to scurry down a road that would undermine our national sovereignty.”

Spring suggested that Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), the ranking member on the Foreign Relations Committee, slow-walked the treaty last year because he wanted to get a majority of Republicans on board. Lugar spokesman Mark would not confirm that, but he pointed out that so far the Obama administration’s support for the treaty is comparable to the Bush administration’s — just one of the items on the priority list. “The Obama campaign was fantastic at using social networking to organize and build up grassroots support,” said Hayes. “The administration has chosen to use that skill on some campaigns, like the health care push, but not on other campaigns.”

Unless that happens, skeptics of international law suggested that high-visibility coalitions like the House Sovereignty Caucus can win the argument.

“I think it can have a real impact if it raises the volume of the debate,” said John Bolton. “The higher the salience of the issue, for conservatives in particular, the greater the likelihood that people will oppose these treaties.”

http://washingtonindependent.com/49312/gop-sovereignty-caucus-battles-obama-on-treaties

***

My Note –

These are the same people that gave our United States sovereignty away to the oil companies in the Gulf of Mexico, in Alaska, across our national lands and our national coastal waters – both offshore and onshore.

– cricketdiane, 06-09-10

***

Research Shows Little Effect From Arctic Offshore Oil Drilling …
Oct 3, 2003 … “In fact, the entire offshore area was near pristine. … 2008) — The area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 90 billion barrels … Oil Exploration In Arctic Highly Risky: ‘Response Gap’ In Case Of Oil Spill, …
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/10/031002055859.htm

Arctic Circle’s oil-rich seabeds: Off-limits to the U.S.? – Aug. 8 …
Aug 8, 2007 … Melting icecaps in the Arctic Circle are giving way to oil-rich waters … a drilling industry lobbyist, “and I think now we’ll finally get …
money.cnn.com/2007/…/arctic_oil…/index.htm

Time to Permit Oil Drilling In the Arctic Refuge
| The Heritage …
Time to Permit Oil Drilling In the Arctic Refuge … ANWR is an enormous area of land located in the Northeast corner of Alaska within the Arctic Circle. …
http://www.heritage.org/…/Time-to-Permit-Oil-Drilling-In-the-Arctic-Refuge
(my note – I hate them – they won’t be happy until the United States is nothing but a wasteland where no man, woman, child, elderly, family, community, bird, animal, fish, mammal, clean air, clean water, clean earth can exist for the rest of eternity. They are genuinely and considerately wrong over and over and over again, and it just doesn’t seem to matter – even as their policies destroy and decimate and obliterate and ultimately destroy our country in fact. – cricketdiane, 06-09-10)
#
Putin Tries to Lay Claim to Arctic Circle – Associated Content …
Jun 28, 2007 … In the past, any country could drill for oil and mine in the arctic … The Arctic is very heavy in oil supply. If Russia were able to take …
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/…/putin_tries_to_lay_claim_to_arctic.html
#
Petroleum exploration in the Arctic – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
1 Canada; 2 Russia; 3 Greenland; 4 Geological basins in the Arctic … of the arctic circle) could contain up to 110 billion barrels (17×10^9 m3) of oil. …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_exploration_in_the_Arctic
#
Arctic – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Battle for the Next Energy Frontier: The Russian Polar Expedition and the Future of … “The great Arctic Circle oil rush.” CNN. August 8, 2007. ^ Shaw, Rob. …. Arctic Refuge drilling controversy • Parks, reserves and refuges …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic

#
Parker Drilling Company
… in Russia and has developed a productive oil field north of the Arctic Circle. … Houston-based Parker Drilling Co. was the first drilling company granted a … “Putin wants to develop Russia’s oil industry fast to get the economy …
http://www.parkerdrilling.com/newsroom/coverage_putin.html
#
EIA – Arctic Oil and Natural Gas Potential
Region within the Arctic Circle (North America is to the left and … Large Arctic oil and natural gas discoveries began in Russia with the discovery …. Shell had reactivated and towed the Kulluk arctic drilling ship to the Beaufort …
http://www.eia.doe.gov › … › Natural Gas Analysis Reports
#
Oil and Gas Production and Exploration Companies
Circle Oil Plc – is an oil and gas exploration, development and …. CJSC – Development of oil and gas fields on Russia’s Arctic continental shelf …
http://www.subsea.org/equipment/exploration+and…/listcat.asp
#
Offshore Drilling: An Arctic Future
May 4, 2010 … But we’ve been drilling under water since 1947, and we’re not going … 400 oil and gas fields north of the Arctic Circle in Canada, Russia …
http://www.investingdaily.com/ce/…/offshore-drilling-an-arctic-future.html

***

Cruise Ships Dumping Tons Of Waste In Caribbean Waters

by Dionne Jackson Miller

(IPS) KINGSTON — The multi-million dollar Caribbean shipping industry, necessary to the economic prosperity of the region’s small island states, also has its negative side: the generation of tons of waste, which these countries are often ill-prepared to cope with.

The Caribbean has the ‘most intensive maritime traffic in the world,’ with some 50,000 ships and 14.5 million tourists visiting annually, according to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).

A typical cruise ship carries 3,000 passengers and produces between 400 and 1,200 cubic metres of watery waste daily, including waste from kitchens and showers, according to UNEP.

‘They don’t have the facilities to accept ship waste, and more importantly, lack the necessary resources and organizational structure to monitor ships,” whether cargo or passenger vessels, Ian Blair, senior vice president of the Jamaican Port Authority, told Tierramerica.

There are major concerns related to the disposal of ship-generated garbage, oily bilge water (water accumulated in part of the ship’s hull) and ballast water, which is taken in by ships to increase their stability and manoeuvrability while in transit.

Oily waste and garbage affect water quality and marine life, and ballast water carries into the region organisms from far-flung places, which can alter ecosystems and hurt biodiversity, Cowell Lyn, a consultant working on a rehabilitation project for Jamaica’s Kingston Harbor, explained to Tierramerica.

Invasive species threaten the existence of endemic flora and fauna, that is, native species that are unique, not found in any other part of the world, and which are already threatened by deforestation and urbanization.

The Dominican Republic has recorded the presence of 186 invasive species, the largest number in the region, followed by Puerto Rico, with 182, and the Bahamas, with 159.

Passenger cruise ships also dump as much as 70 litres of dangerous waste a day into the sea. Toxins include photo processing chemicals, paints, solvents and batteries, which threaten animal and human life alike, as 70 percent of the Caribbean population lives in coastal areas.

The region is also affected by heavy oil tanker traffic. Several of the world’s leading crude oil producers are in the Greater Caribbean area, including Venezuela, Mexico, Colombia and Trinidad and Tobago.

Petroleum often ends up dumped in the Caribbean waters, due to erratic waste management or to accidental spills.

Cuba’s Havana Bay is the most polluted, with 1,200 milligrams of hydrocarbons per kilogram of dry sediment, while Jamaica’s Kingston Harbour has 578 milligrams per kilo of dry sediment, according to UNEP.

The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78 — developed in 1973 and amended in 1978) regulates the disposal of oil, toxic substances, and garbage from ships.

Annex Five, which entered into force on December 31, 1988, governs the disposal of garbage and imposes a complete ban on the dumping into the sea of all forms of plastic.

A 1993 amendment designated the ‘Wider Caribbean’ as a vulnerable ‘special area’ with restrictions on how ships can deal with garbage disposal.

This designation has not yet come into force, however, because states have not advized the oversight body, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), as to whether adequate facilities exist to deal with ship generated waste.

‘It may be that the systems are there but they have not been reported,” IMO regional adviser Curtis Roach told Tierramerica.

IMO Secretary General Efthimios Mitropoulos urged Caribbean countries ‘to redouble their efforts to ensure that the provisions of the Special Area status take effect without further delay,’ during a regional seminar in Barbados last July,

The Wider Caribbean encompasses the region’s islands and the coastal areas of the mainland Latin American countries, from Mexico to French Guyana, as well as El Salvador, even thought its shoreline is on the Pacific Ocean.

Its institutional manifestation is the Association of Caribbean States, created in 1994, with 25 independent states as full members, plus Aruba, Dutch Antilles and France (on behalf of Guadeloupe, French Guyana and Martinique).

According to Caribbean Environment Outlook, a publication prepared by the United Nations Development Program for the Jan. 10-14 Mauritius meeting of small island states, the nine-member Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) is reporting “harmonized policies and legislation for both shore and ship generated waste.”

St. Lucia cites improved ship waste reception at major ports and marinas. And in Jamaica, extensive groundwork is now being done to establish a facility to dispose of ship generated garbage.

Originally published Jan. 15 by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierramerica network. Tierramerica is a specialized news service produced by IPS with the backing of the United Nations Development Program and the United Nations Environment Program

Comments? Send a letter to the editor.Albion Monitor January 17, 2005 (http://www.albionmonitor.com)
(from)
http://www.albionmonitor.com/0502a/copyright/carribeancruiseships.html

Advertisements