South Korea and the European Union are ready to sign the free trade agreement (FTA) according to visiting European lawmakers in Seoul. The Chairman of the European Parliament's Korea delegation, Austrian conservative Member of European Parliamnet (MEP) Hubert Pirker said in a statement from Seoul, “The trade agreement between the European Union and South Korea is practically ready for signing.”
After a range of meetings in Seoul, Pirker said, “In our meetings and negotiations with the South Korean Prime Minister, the ministers for foreign affairs and trade as well as with the responsible Korean negotiators for the trade agreement, we were able to come to an agreement on concluding the negotiations. Some fine points will have to be ironed out over the next month, but I expect a final agreement ready for signature before the end of this year.”
The statement from the MEP came as a surprise to business observers in Seoul and Brussels as during the FTA talks in August, South Korean Trade Ministry sources had hinted at differences on those “sticky issues,” while EU negotiator Ignacio Garcia Bercero told New Europe on August 30 in Seoul, “We had a very fruitful discussion and we agreed to continue talks.”
South Korean Deputy Trade Minister Hye-min Lee and Deputy chief negotiator in August told New Europe about the “sticky” issues and expectations on both sides, lamenting, “On the services sector, the EU expects we should give more than what we have given to the US - but when we negotiated with the US - we already had EU FTA in mind.” “What we have agreed with the US is not just for the US but also for the EU. The Europeans are asking for more than that which is very difficult,” he said. “We will be obliged to change our regulations but European will not change anything while Europeans are set to gain from the FTA,” the Korean negotiator added.
According to business sources speaking to New Europe the EU had during talks in August flatly rejected the demand of South Korea with a booming auto-industry, to drop tariffs on South Korean cars within three years after the bilateral talks take effect.
Another major obstacle to the FTA negotiations is the legal sector as Doo-Sik Kim, an international trade lawyer told journalists at a lunch organised by the Korea Press Foundation on August 25. Addressing the fear of Korean legal sector about the take-over and expansion of the European law firms in the Korean market, Kim said it was one of the least highlighted subjects but there is a strong opposition from the concerned lawyer lobbies.
After meeting with Korean Prime Minister Dr. Han Seung-soo and the Speaker of the National Assembly, Kim Hyeong-o, responsible for the ratification of the agreement, all involved ministers of President Lee Myung-bak's government, Pirker, “In view of the international financial crisis and the regional and global security implications, this visit of the EU delegation is of high importance, also in the eyes of our South Korean counterparts.”
The EU is South Korea’s second largest trade partner after China. In 2007, the bilateral trade volume between South Korea and the EU amounted to USD 89.8 billion.
Showing posts with label MEP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MEP. Show all posts
Friday, October 31, 2008
Thursday, October 23, 2008
European Parliament approves new trade commissioner
The European parliament on Wednesday (Oct 22) overwhelmingly approved the appointment of British Baroness Catherine Ashton as the European Commissioner in charge of trade. In a plenary session in Strasbourg, 538 MEPs voted for the new Commissioner for European trade policies. There were 40 votes against her appointment and 63 abstentions.
Ashton was nominated earlier this month by the British government to succeed Peter Mandelson, following his appointment to the British government.
The President of the European Commission and the Council - the institution that regroups the Member states - having already given the green light for the appointment of the first woman commissioner for trade, it remained only for parliament to vote.
On Tuesday (Oct 21), Ashton had a three-hour hearing in parliament during which she was tested on trade. She is now a member of the European Commission in her own right till the European elections due in June 2009 when a new Commission will be appointed.
During the hearing in parliament, MEPs posed questions to the commissioner-designate and she showed good knowledge of her new trade portfolio. In particular, Ashton, who is an economist by training, was asked about the ongoing financial crisis, future of the Doha Round and its overtaking by the bilateral trade negotiations.
With a short time to prepare as a result of the fast-tracking of the approval process, the Commissioner got praise from the European law-makers. Spanish MEP Ignasi Guardans, vice-President of the parliament trade committee said, "in her responses to some tough and often highly politicised questioning, she demonstrated strong political skills and composure which is evidence of good negotiating skills."
“The committee had some natural concerns about her lack of direct experience of international commerce or foreign affairs but with such a short time to prepare, she persuaded the committee that she understood the link between trade and the impact on the European small and medium sized business sector and jobs,” Guardans added.
After the approval by the parliament, she said she would pay her first visit to WTO director general Pascal Lamy in Geneva later this week to assure him that pursuing a successful Doha Round remains absolutely central to Europe’s trade policy.
Responding to the confirmation of Ashton as new trade commissioner, Benedict Southworth, Director of the World Development Movement, said: “The European Commission needs to radically overhaul its trade policy and Baroness Ashton is now in a unique position to do so. The business-as-usual approach of wholesale deregulation and trade liberalisation is out of step with today’s climate of global financial, food and energy crises.”
“Instead, sustainable development and tackling poverty must be at the heart of European trade policy. Baroness Ashton now has an excellent opportunity to draw a line under the past and Commissioner Mandelson’s legacy of unfair trade deals that hit the poorest hardest,” Southworth added.
Ashton was nominated earlier this month by the British government to succeed Peter Mandelson, following his appointment to the British government.
The President of the European Commission and the Council - the institution that regroups the Member states - having already given the green light for the appointment of the first woman commissioner for trade, it remained only for parliament to vote.
On Tuesday (Oct 21), Ashton had a three-hour hearing in parliament during which she was tested on trade. She is now a member of the European Commission in her own right till the European elections due in June 2009 when a new Commission will be appointed.
During the hearing in parliament, MEPs posed questions to the commissioner-designate and she showed good knowledge of her new trade portfolio. In particular, Ashton, who is an economist by training, was asked about the ongoing financial crisis, future of the Doha Round and its overtaking by the bilateral trade negotiations.
With a short time to prepare as a result of the fast-tracking of the approval process, the Commissioner got praise from the European law-makers. Spanish MEP Ignasi Guardans, vice-President of the parliament trade committee said, "in her responses to some tough and often highly politicised questioning, she demonstrated strong political skills and composure which is evidence of good negotiating skills."
“The committee had some natural concerns about her lack of direct experience of international commerce or foreign affairs but with such a short time to prepare, she persuaded the committee that she understood the link between trade and the impact on the European small and medium sized business sector and jobs,” Guardans added.
After the approval by the parliament, she said she would pay her first visit to WTO director general Pascal Lamy in Geneva later this week to assure him that pursuing a successful Doha Round remains absolutely central to Europe’s trade policy.
Responding to the confirmation of Ashton as new trade commissioner, Benedict Southworth, Director of the World Development Movement, said: “The European Commission needs to radically overhaul its trade policy and Baroness Ashton is now in a unique position to do so. The business-as-usual approach of wholesale deregulation and trade liberalisation is out of step with today’s climate of global financial, food and energy crises.”
“Instead, sustainable development and tackling poverty must be at the heart of European trade policy. Baroness Ashton now has an excellent opportunity to draw a line under the past and Commissioner Mandelson’s legacy of unfair trade deals that hit the poorest hardest,” Southworth added.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
European Parliament faces fraud enquiry
MEP Davies confirms "OLAF has the report"
European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) moved in swiftly on February 22, 2008 to secure a copy of "The Document," from the European parliament within 24 hours of requesting a copy, about which one member of the European Parliament (MEP) quipped, "This report is dynamite." The report prepared by European parliament's internal auditors focuses on how MEPs spent or allegedly misspent the taxpayers’ money.
So perilous is the extent of the fraud, it is claimed by a parliamentary source that the report can only be seen by members of the Budget Control Committee in a secret room, under surveillance and without taking notes or making copies.
Realising the gravity and extent of the possible misuse of public funds, Chris Davies, the young British MEP took the first step to bring it to light calling upon Franz Bruener, OLAF's Director General in a letter (see below), "As a member of the European Parliament's Budget Control Committee I was this morning permitted to read a copy of Internal Audit Report 06/02 on the parliamentary assistance allowance paid to MEPs for the employment of their staff. Currently I believe this amounts annually to more than 140 million Euro and represents some 10 percent of the Parliament's total expenditure."
MEP Davies told this journalist, "I believe the auditor's report was intended to be published and I think it a disgrace that it is being kept secret by the parliamentary authorities. The Parliament preaches the virtues of transparency and openness and it should start to practice them. The next step is that a copy should be given to every MEP and made public. Let the taxpayers judge what it says for themselves."
Asked to comment on reactions from fellow MEPs, Davies noted, "Support yes from some MEPs (Dutch for example, who have to work within a strong code of conduct agreed by the parties in that country)." He admitted to "some pressure from other British MEPs to shut up. Never on the basis that they are doing something wrong, but always from those who are passionate pro-Europeans, know how difficult it is to argue the pro-EU case in Britain, and believe that these revelations undermine the reputation of the Parliament. They also argue that attempts are being made to achieve reform."
MEP Davies said, "Too often it is a case of blame the messenger instead of blaming the cheats."
According to a parliamentary source, the report was kept in a secret room in an undisclosed location protected by biometric locks and security guards. Those few who enter can only do so after signing confidentiality agreements, and are prohibited from discussing what they discover inside.
The reliable source said on a condition of anonymity, "The secret room houses a confidential dossier on the ‘extensive, widespread and criminal abuse’ by Euro-MPs of staff allowances. So explosive are the figures that officials are terrified by the damage it could do should its contents be revealed to the public."
According to sources who have seen the report, the secret enquiry documents abuses of staff allowances by a sample group of 167 Euro MPs. Although the report does not name and shame any individual MEP, the detailed account of how in an unaccountable way the tax-payers' hard earned money is squandered with no taps or checks is appalling.
B
According to another reliable source, "It is widely rumoured that Italian MEPs have in many cases set up shadow companies/organisations to manage their staff budget. These organisations comply with the Parliament's rules but actually allow the money to be channelled towards individuals or political parties."
Asked to comment on it, MEP Davies said, "But what can you do? I am told that there is no mention whatsoever of this scandal in the Italian or Greek press, so how do you generate any pressure for change?"
Explaining the way the alleged fraud may have worked, MEP Davies added, "The Parliament provides a second pension scheme that the majority of MEPs have joined voluntarily. Parliament pays two thirds (GBP 18,000 pa or 24,000 Euro approximately) and the MEP is supposed to pay one third (GBP 9000 pa or 12,000 Euro). But the MEPs' contribution is deducted from their office costs allowance ‘for administrative convenience.’"
The catch lies in the fact that MEPs are supposed to pay it back personally but then the question arises how many do and how many just are too lazy to make that transfer. Commenting on this MEP Davies said, "I regard this equivalent to embezzlement and it is another disgrace that the Parliament has refused to change the arrangements that permit it."
Moreover, the fact to be noted is that the office allowance is worth more than GBP 30,000 pa (40,000 Euro) and "NO RECEIPTS WHATSOEVER" have to be provided to justify expenditure according to MEP Davies.
In the light of all this there was a panic among the lawmakers at what damage the report can inflict in the run-up to the European parliamentary elections in 2009.
"I love the Parliament. I am proud of the work that I and my colleagues do as MEPs. But I am angry that we allow procedures to exist that bring us all into contempt," MEP Davies concluded.
The report, its findings and its recommendations, are due to be discussed at the next Tuesday (February 26) meeting of the Budget Control Committee under the item 2006 discharge: EC general budget.
------------------------
COPY OF LETTER TO THE EU ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE
Mr Franz Bruener
Director-General
OLAF
Dear Mr Bruener
As a member of the European Parliament's Budget Control Committee I was this morning permitted to read a copy of Internal Audit Report 06/02 on the parliamentary assistance allowance paid to MEPs for the employment of their staff. Currently I believe this amounts annually to more than €140 million and represents some 10% of the Parliament's total expenditure.
Disgracefully in my view the document has been declared confidential under the Parliament's rules, pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, that gives such authority to the President of Parliament, the chairmen of the parliamentary committees concerned and the Secretary-General and/or any person they have duly authorised by written delegation. I was therefore allowed to read the document only under supervision and was not allowed to make notes. Members authorised to read it are required to sign a confidentiality statement that prohibits the dissemination of the information.
The report, its findings and its recommendations, are due to be discussed at the meeting of the Budget Control Committee on 26 February under the item 2006 discharge: EC general budget.
OLAF was established to uphold the principle that the European Institutions have a duty to guarantee, with regard to the taxpayer, the best use of their money and in particular to fight as effectively as possible against fraud and any other illegal activity harmful to the financial interests of the Community.
In my view the findings of the Parliament's internal auditors fall within OLAF's terms of reference.
If a copy of report 06/02 has not yet been provided to you I believe you should insist that the parliamentary authorities provide you with one, and thereafter that the auditors should give you such further information as may be needed to commence investigations against individuals.
There is a great reluctance amongst some MEPs to ensure that the financial procedures of the European Parliament in relation to its members are put on the same sound basis that we would expect of other public institutions. Maybe when some MEPs are named, exposed for defrauding the Parliament and the public, and are sent to prison, a more acceptable approach will be adopted.
I would be pleased to discuss this matter with yourself or Ms Heinkelmann.
Yours faithfully
Chris Davies MEP
European Parliament
European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) moved in swiftly on February 22, 2008 to secure a copy of "The Document," from the European parliament within 24 hours of requesting a copy, about which one member of the European Parliament (MEP) quipped, "This report is dynamite." The report prepared by European parliament's internal auditors focuses on how MEPs spent or allegedly misspent the taxpayers’ money.
So perilous is the extent of the fraud, it is claimed by a parliamentary source that the report can only be seen by members of the Budget Control Committee in a secret room, under surveillance and without taking notes or making copies.
Realising the gravity and extent of the possible misuse of public funds, Chris Davies, the young British MEP took the first step to bring it to light calling upon Franz Bruener, OLAF's Director General in a letter (see below), "As a member of the European Parliament's Budget Control Committee I was this morning permitted to read a copy of Internal Audit Report 06/02 on the parliamentary assistance allowance paid to MEPs for the employment of their staff. Currently I believe this amounts annually to more than 140 million Euro and represents some 10 percent of the Parliament's total expenditure."
MEP Davies told this journalist, "I believe the auditor's report was intended to be published and I think it a disgrace that it is being kept secret by the parliamentary authorities. The Parliament preaches the virtues of transparency and openness and it should start to practice them. The next step is that a copy should be given to every MEP and made public. Let the taxpayers judge what it says for themselves."
Asked to comment on reactions from fellow MEPs, Davies noted, "Support yes from some MEPs (Dutch for example, who have to work within a strong code of conduct agreed by the parties in that country)." He admitted to "some pressure from other British MEPs to shut up. Never on the basis that they are doing something wrong, but always from those who are passionate pro-Europeans, know how difficult it is to argue the pro-EU case in Britain, and believe that these revelations undermine the reputation of the Parliament. They also argue that attempts are being made to achieve reform."
MEP Davies said, "Too often it is a case of blame the messenger instead of blaming the cheats."
According to a parliamentary source, the report was kept in a secret room in an undisclosed location protected by biometric locks and security guards. Those few who enter can only do so after signing confidentiality agreements, and are prohibited from discussing what they discover inside.
The reliable source said on a condition of anonymity, "The secret room houses a confidential dossier on the ‘extensive, widespread and criminal abuse’ by Euro-MPs of staff allowances. So explosive are the figures that officials are terrified by the damage it could do should its contents be revealed to the public."
According to sources who have seen the report, the secret enquiry documents abuses of staff allowances by a sample group of 167 Euro MPs. Although the report does not name and shame any individual MEP, the detailed account of how in an unaccountable way the tax-payers' hard earned money is squandered with no taps or checks is appalling.
B
According to another reliable source, "It is widely rumoured that Italian MEPs have in many cases set up shadow companies/organisations to manage their staff budget. These organisations comply with the Parliament's rules but actually allow the money to be channelled towards individuals or political parties."
Asked to comment on it, MEP Davies said, "But what can you do? I am told that there is no mention whatsoever of this scandal in the Italian or Greek press, so how do you generate any pressure for change?"
Explaining the way the alleged fraud may have worked, MEP Davies added, "The Parliament provides a second pension scheme that the majority of MEPs have joined voluntarily. Parliament pays two thirds (GBP 18,000 pa or 24,000 Euro approximately) and the MEP is supposed to pay one third (GBP 9000 pa or 12,000 Euro). But the MEPs' contribution is deducted from their office costs allowance ‘for administrative convenience.’"
The catch lies in the fact that MEPs are supposed to pay it back personally but then the question arises how many do and how many just are too lazy to make that transfer. Commenting on this MEP Davies said, "I regard this equivalent to embezzlement and it is another disgrace that the Parliament has refused to change the arrangements that permit it."
Moreover, the fact to be noted is that the office allowance is worth more than GBP 30,000 pa (40,000 Euro) and "NO RECEIPTS WHATSOEVER" have to be provided to justify expenditure according to MEP Davies.
In the light of all this there was a panic among the lawmakers at what damage the report can inflict in the run-up to the European parliamentary elections in 2009.
"I love the Parliament. I am proud of the work that I and my colleagues do as MEPs. But I am angry that we allow procedures to exist that bring us all into contempt," MEP Davies concluded.
The report, its findings and its recommendations, are due to be discussed at the next Tuesday (February 26) meeting of the Budget Control Committee under the item 2006 discharge: EC general budget.
------------------------
COPY OF LETTER TO THE EU ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE
Mr Franz Bruener
Director-General
OLAF
Dear Mr Bruener
As a member of the European Parliament's Budget Control Committee I was this morning permitted to read a copy of Internal Audit Report 06/02 on the parliamentary assistance allowance paid to MEPs for the employment of their staff. Currently I believe this amounts annually to more than €140 million and represents some 10% of the Parliament's total expenditure.
Disgracefully in my view the document has been declared confidential under the Parliament's rules, pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, that gives such authority to the President of Parliament, the chairmen of the parliamentary committees concerned and the Secretary-General and/or any person they have duly authorised by written delegation. I was therefore allowed to read the document only under supervision and was not allowed to make notes. Members authorised to read it are required to sign a confidentiality statement that prohibits the dissemination of the information.
The report, its findings and its recommendations, are due to be discussed at the meeting of the Budget Control Committee on 26 February under the item 2006 discharge: EC general budget.
OLAF was established to uphold the principle that the European Institutions have a duty to guarantee, with regard to the taxpayer, the best use of their money and in particular to fight as effectively as possible against fraud and any other illegal activity harmful to the financial interests of the Community.
In my view the findings of the Parliament's internal auditors fall within OLAF's terms of reference.
If a copy of report 06/02 has not yet been provided to you I believe you should insist that the parliamentary authorities provide you with one, and thereafter that the auditors should give you such further information as may be needed to commence investigations against individuals.
There is a great reluctance amongst some MEPs to ensure that the financial procedures of the European Parliament in relation to its members are put on the same sound basis that we would expect of other public institutions. Maybe when some MEPs are named, exposed for defrauding the Parliament and the public, and are sent to prison, a more acceptable approach will be adopted.
I would be pleased to discuss this matter with yourself or Ms Heinkelmann.
Yours faithfully
Chris Davies MEP
European Parliament
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
