|
|
|
Eyjafjallajokull – MEPs on whether closing airspace was right call
Posted on 27. Apr, 2010 by Headlines – current highlights in the European Parliament.
The political fallout from the Eyjafjallajokull volcano in Iceland continues as people around Europe ponder whether the closure of so much of the continent’s airspace was the right thing. Following a Parliamentary debate on 20 April we spoke to a few MEPs to ask them what they thought about Europe’s response. All agreed that safety must be paramount, but others called for more investment in other forms of transport.
Source : © European Parliament
Continue Reading
0630 GMT: More Challenges. From the conservative side, leading member of Parliament Ahmad Tavakoli has said that the number and impudence of corrupt high-level officials have risen. He insisted that these officials must be confronted, no matter where and who they serve.
0540 GMT: Monday was notable for the rush of opposition challenges to the Government. There was Mehdi Karroubi on a law-abiding, Constitution-promoting resistance that would bring victory to Iran, Mir Hossein Mousavi’s “Who Defends the Islamic Republic?”, and Zahra Rahnavard calling for the release of detained workers and teachers.
Of course, the important leap will be from statement to action. Yet it is striking this moment to compare the renewed calls for justice and freedom with the Government’s rhetorical flourishes.
There was President Ahmadinejad again looking outside Iran with his promotion of the “satanic tools” of the United Nations and the US. There was Foreign Minister Mottaki, confronted with a list of more than 100 detained journalists and political analysts, replying brusquely, “Stick to the nuclear issue.”
And there were apparent flights of desperation. As the chief executive of the French oil company Total was announcing that it would pull out of Iran if US sanctions proceeded, the deputy head of Iran’s oil industry, Hojatollah Ghanimi-Fard, proclamed, “Iran has negotiated development projects with several foreign oil companies, including French concerns.”
Ghanimi-Fard’s optimism contrasted sharply with a statement from the Revolutionary Guard that it was prepared to replace Total and Royal Dutch Shell in oil and natural gas projects. Ali Vakili, the managing director of the Pars Oil and Gas Company, said a one-week ultimatum had been given to Shell and Spanish company Repsol, “We will not delay the development of South Pars phases waiting for foreign companies.”
Continue Reading
The Best Terrorist Commercial
Continue Reading
We are a grassroots campaign of rabbis, educators, lay leaders and members of communities nationwide who are working to stop the war in Iraq. Sign our statement of support at www.jewsagainstthewar.org Video produced, directed and edited by Chaim Singer-Frankes. Please visit YouTube channel: Chaimster66
Continue Reading
An overhaul of financial regulations had Mars raising concerns about the derivatives market, and Harley-Davidson worrying about its dealer-financed loans.
WASHINGTON — Mars, the maker of M&M’s and Snickers, wants to make sure it can continue dabbling in the derivatives market to protect the price of sugar and chocolate for its candies.
Harley-Davidson is worried that its dealer-financed loans to bikers will fall victim to new federal financing regulations. And eBay is concerned about possible restrictions on PayPal, a subsidiary, in moving money in the Internet marketplace.
Far afield from Wall Street, the intense debate over the overhaul of financial regulations by Congress is attracting some unlikely but powerful players. More than 130 companies from the manufacturing, retail and service sectors have retained high-powered lobbyists to weigh in on, and often oppose, the regulatory system being debated this week in Washington, according to an analysis of lobbying records by The New York Times.
The companies bear little resemblance to Goldman Sachs and the other Wall Street financial giants that have become the main targets of the legislation. The lobbying push by these other industries shows just how broadly the legislation could affect businesses.
It also illustrates what some critics say is legislation so loosely drawn that it may inadvertently cover a variety of companies that are involved in lending or moving money, even if they operate far from Wall Street and had little to do with the financial crisis. Some industries, like payday lenders, fear that the financial overhaul may be a backdoor way for Congress to regulate them, something they have successfully fought for years.
Steve Adamske, communications director of the House Financial Services Committee, acknowledges that some House legislation would regulate payday lenders, which make short-term, high-interest loans to people who promise to pay in full with their next check.
“There is a fair amount of caution any time the federal government proposes new oversight,” said Christopher Colwell, a lobbyist for Check ’n Go, a payday lender. “We are trying to determine what impacts these proposals will have on business, intentionally or unintentionally.”
While the legislation’s backers in Congress insist that most nonfinancial companies have little to worry about, many of these businesses say they are deeply concerned that the sweeping provisions in the 1,400-page Senate bill, particularly the regulation of the derivatives market, the creation of a consumer protection board and rules on corporate government, could draw them in and affect their bottom lines.
For instance, auto dealers from 35 states are converging on their senators’ offices this week to seek an exemption from legislation that would treat them as financial lending institutions subject to new federal regulations.
“I don’t think the level of concern could be any higher,” David Hyatt, vice president for the National Automobile Dealers Association, said Monday. “There’s a sense of urgency. And we’ve got to raise awareness about why this doesn’t make sense and why it’s anticonsumer.”
Like the automobile industry, many financial sectors unrelated to Wall Street are seeking exemptions — or “carve-outs” as their Washington lobbyists call them — to shield themselves from the impact of the new regulations. Unless a bipartisan deal is reached first, those exemptions are likely to be considered as amendments once the legislation reaches the Senate floor for a final vote, probably this week.
As Mr. Colwell, the Check ’n Go lobbyist, suggested, much of the concern from the private sector has focused on what the legislation could do, and disagreement is wide over what it actually would do.
Senator Christopher J. Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat who is chairman of the Banking Committee, said Sunday on “Meet the Press” on NBC that it was a “red herring” for opponents to suggest that the legislation would harm ordinary businesses and reduce the number of jobs.
Most Congressional Democrats and administration officials would not comment on the record on Monday on the concerns of nonfinancial companies, partly because they said many parts of the legislative proposals were still under discussion in an effort to garner Republican support in the Senate.
“The bill doesn’t target those companies,” said Kirstin Brost, a spokeswoman for the Senate financial services committee. “It targets the financial companies, and it changes things for financial companies.”
She said that opponents of the legislation from the Chamber of Commerce and elsewhere have sought to stir concerns and “gin up everybody” over what are often unfounded concerns about wider implications for businesses across the country.
Click here to get 50% off Home Delivery of The New York Times.
