mid-week medley November 14, 2012
Posted by Bradley in : governance , add a commentSEC and DOJ publish a Guide to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and the SEC publishes a Small Entity Compliance Guide to Conflict Minerals Disclosure. FSA consults on Implementation of the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive. EBA consults on prudent valuation.
The European Commission proposes legislation to increase the number of women on corporate boards (because non-binding approaches have not worked) (details here):
The Commission has proposed legislation with the aim of attaining a 40% objective of the under-represented sex in non-executive board-member positions in publicly listed companies, with the exception of small and medium enterprises. Currently, boards are dominated by one gender: 85% of non-executive board members and 91.1% of executive board members are men, while women make up 15% and 8.9% respectively. Despite an intense public debate and some voluntary initiatives at national and European level, the situation has not changed significantly in recent years: an incremental average increase of the number of women on boards of just 0.6 percentage points per year has been recorded since 2003.
Viviane Reding says it is a “historic day for gender equality.” Why a targetof 40% represents equality, I am not sure.
The EU has set up a competition for young people (8-24) to go to the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony.
is meaningful citizen participation in government possible? October 23, 2012
Posted by Bradley in : governance , add a commentAfter the Presidential debates – endless reiterations of the same rather meaningless and often misleading slogans – where the viewers of the debates are encouraged to make their voting decisions on the basis of who performed better in the debate it’s complicated to think about the idea of citizen participation in government. But there’s lots of information available about the Presidential candidates, even if it’s hard to slog through the sludge of representation and misrepresentation. Making decisions about the downballot is even more complicated.
This isn’t the only election happening right now:
In the UK there’s an experiment going on to have elected Police and Crime Commissioners to hold Chief Constables and police forces to account(under the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011). Elections are to be held on November 15th and there’s some rather scary advertising going on with posters for bus shelters suggesting that criminals want voters to stay home on November 15th. And video ads with the same message:
This is a bit odd- as if the police will just stop fighting crime if people don’t show up to vote. Especially as funding cuts are a larger problem for the police than any lack of citizen participation in voting could be. Presumably the ads are about emphasizing the idea that it is important to be tough on crime. And they suggest the crimes it is important to be tough on are scary ones such as vandalism, burglary, and mugging. Not financial crimes such as fare dodging and fraud.
And making people aware of the fact of the elections doesn’t help them to decide who to vote for. There’s a website which will have information about the candidates as of October 26th. But you can see the list of candidates elsewhere, for example at the website of the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners.
In Humberside John Prescott is a candidate. But there are a number of other candidates: Godfrey Bloom (UKIP), Simone Butterworth (Liberal Democrat), Paul Davison (Independent) (“I retired this year after 30 years with Humberside Police as a Chief Superintendent in charge of policing the East Riding”), Neil Eyre (Independent) (“Most people don’t want politics and policing in the same melting pot”), Matthew Grove (Conservative) and Walter Sweeney (Independent). Matthew Grove says that Gordon Wasserman, the Goverment’s advisor on policing and criminal justice, says he is the “ideal person” to be the PCC. But that’s because they are both conservatives. So how can citizens decide whom to support?
eesc on tax havens September 20, 2012
Posted by Bradley in : governance , add a commentI have been reading some of the Economic and Social Committee’s opinions, and am very struck by the tough tone of a recent opinion on tax havens (Joe Biden gets a special mention in the context of the opinion’s description of Delaware as a tax haven), published in the Official Journal at the end of July. Here’s a brief excerpt:
There are reasonable grounds for stating that the financial crisis has been driven in part by complex and opaque transactions carried out by financial operators domiciled in jurisdictions that maintain financial secrecy, causing serious loss for investors and the purchasers of such financial products. Tax havens host off-balance sheet transactions by financial institutions, as well as complex financial products that have contributed nothing to innovation in the financial sector, but generate financial instability. There is clear evidence that much foreign direct investment, especially in developing countries, comes from tax havens.
brussels “fact-finding” conference on financial conglomerates May 24, 2012
Posted by Bradley in : governance , add a commentThe conference is an integral part of fact-finding on the regulatory framework applicable to financial conglomerates. It will allow for a wide public hearing devoted to the review of financial conglomerates’ legislative framework. It aims to contribute to a fundamental review of the objectives and features of the current Financial Conglomerates Directive (FICOD). Depending on the final outcome of the FICOD review, a proposal for an amendment of the FICOD directive might be tabled in 2013 with a view to further harmonising the definition of conglomerates, the scope of supplementary supervision and the powers available to supervisory authorities.
Speakers will represent, among others, the international supervisory community from G20 and EU countries, expert lawyers in the financial sector and of course the conglomerates themselves.
Of course.
The system for registration suggests there will be some selectivity:
If you would like to attend the conference, please complete the on-line questionnaire.
You will receive a computer-generated acknowledgement immediately after you have completed the on-line questionnaire and, at a later date, those selected will receive an invitation to participate by email.
prayers at town meetings May 17, 2012
Posted by Bradley in : governance , add a commentMuch attention has been focused recently on the Greek state, and on the question of whether or when it will exit the euro area. The town of Greece in New York State has also been having some problems arising out of the fact that
Since 1999, the Town of Greece, New York, has begun its Town Board meetings with a short prayer.
Plaintiffs challenged the practice arguing a violation of the Establishment Clause. The Second Circuit found that the cases required an examination of the totality of the circumstances. The Court said:
In our view, whether a town’s prayer-selection process constitutes an establishment of religion depends on the extent to which the selection process results in a perspective that is substantially neutral amongst creeds. The town asserts, and there is no evidence to the contrary, that it would have accepted any and all volunteers who asked to give the prayer. But the town neither publicly solicited volunteers to deliver invocations nor informed members of the general public that volunteers would be considered or accepted, let alone welcomed, regardless of their religious beliefs or non-beliefs. Had the town publicly opened its prayer practice to volunteers in this way, its selection process could be defended more readily as random in the relevant sense…. we need not determine whether any single prayer at issue here suffices to give such an indication of establishment, since we find that on the totality of the circumstances presented the town’s prayer practice identified the town with Christianity in violation of the Establishment Clause
I recently noted an English decision that a town council did not have implied authority to have prayers as a formal part of council meetings. Clearly this is a complicated issue whether the state in question has an established religion (as England does – the Queen is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England) or not. The English judge seemed to prefer that prayers be separated from the formal part of council meetings whereas the Second Circuit requires complex balancing:
Ultimately, municipalities must consider their prayer practices in context and as a whole. A municipality must ask itself whether what it does, in context, reasonably can be seen as endorsing a particular faith or creed over others. That is the delicate balancing act required by the Establishment Clause and its jurisprudence.
europe day: citizens’ initiative, citizens rights consultation May 9, 2012
Posted by Bradley in : consultation, governance , add a commentAs European citizens are grumbling about austerity measures, the Commission consults citizens on the issues that concern them:
In 2013, EU citizenship will celebrate its 20th birthday since its introduction with the entry into force of the Treaty of Maastricht. The European Commission wants to mark this occasion by further developing and strengthening the Citizens’ Agenda and making sure you can enjoy your EU rights in your daily life. The European Commission will present a new EU Citizenship Report in 2013 with further measures responding to issues raised by EU citizens. The Commission has also proposed to make 2013 the European Year of Citizens and intends to take a series of initiatives, putting the citizen at the heart of its action.
We want to hear from you!
Your contribution to the 2013 Citizenship Report is paramount. The European Commission would like to hear your views about the issues that concern you.
You can send us your views from 9 May until 9 September 2012. The Commission will prepare a consolidated and anonymous analysis of all responses to the questionnaire and publish it online.
And there’s an open citizens’ initiative: Fraternité 2020.
transparency and international investment April 10, 2012
Posted by Bradley in : governance , add a commentThe Statement of the European Union and the United States on Shared Principles for International Investment includes the following principle:
Governments should ensure the highest levels of transparency and public participation in the development of domestic laws and other measures relating to investment.
Note, the highest levels not only of transparency, but also of public participation.
english councils have no implied power to include prayers in formal meetings February 11, 2012
Posted by Bradley in : governance , add a commentUnder s 111 of the Local Government Act 1972 local authorities have implied powers “to do any thing which is calculated to facilitate, or is conducive or incidental to, the discharge of any of their functions.” Mr Justice Ouseley held that Bideford Town Council did not have the power to have prayers as a formal part of council meetings under this provision. The Council didn’t do itself any favours here by arguing at the same time that the prayers were important and that Councillors who did not wish to participate would not be required to do so:
There is a contradiction at the heart of the Council’s position. It has made the prayers part of the formal business of the Council, yet it says that Councillors, summoned to its meetings, are not obliged to be present for this incident to the transaction of business nor to participate in it. I do not think that what falls within the scope of s111, as an incident to the transaction of the business of the meeting, can then be regarded as such that attendance for it is unnecessary or optional, in distinction from all other business. In effect it is treated as being outside the scope of the meeting. I do not see that it can be calculated to facilitate the transaction of business or any other functions if, for it to take place at all, it is necessary to give Councillors the choice not to attend. Nor can it be conducive to the transaction of business or to the exercise of any functions, if it does not matter if Councillors attend or not. If the Council does not regard it as business for which attendance is summoned, then it should not be on the agenda. If it regards it as business to which the summons applies, it cannot make attendance for it optional on the grounds that participation could be objectionable to some Councillors. No such arrangement would be necessary for a few minutes silent reflection.
The judge said that if the council had had the power to hold prayers during council meetings the way in which it had been managing the practice did not infringe the complaining Councillor’s human rights or unlawfully discriminate indirectly against him on the grounds of his lack of religious belief.
Lord Carey, former archbishop of Canterbury, said the judgment could have “incredibly far-reaching consequences”. “Will the next step be scrapping the prayers which mark the start of each day in parliament?” he asked.
This seems to me to be both wrong and unnecessarily inflamatory. It ignores the narrow basis on which the decision rests. This interpretation of the Local Government Act has nothing to do with the powers of Parliament, which is a sovereign authority in a way that local authorities are not. So here, the fact that the judge thought the Council’s practice did not violate human rights or constitute unlawful discrimination seems to be what is significant.
eu citizens initiatives.. January 26, 2012
Posted by Bradley in : governance , add a commentpublic administration select committee on the big society December 14, 2011
Posted by Bradley in : governance , add a commentConclusions of today’s report:
The substantial change expected to result from the Big Society project, namely the devolution of power to communities and citizens will not occur overnight: if successful, as witnesses suggested, it will take a generation. The Government’s Big Society statements have, so far, failed to communicate this point effectively. There is public confusion with the policy agenda, eighteen months into this administration. Confusion also still exists among many service providers. Early examples, such as the Work Programme, have caused the charitable sector to express serious reservations about the implementation of the Government’s ambitions in practice.
To bring in charities and voluntary groups to deliver public services, the government must take steps to address the barriers they experience in the contracting and commissioning system, which means developing a plan to address roles, tasks, responsibilities and skills in Whitehall departments. We recommend:
a) A single Big Society Minister, who has a cross-cutting brief, to help other Ministers to drive through this agenda once they begin reporting progress against the aims of Open Public Services White Paper, from April 2012.
b) An impact assessment, applied to every Government policy, statutory instrument, and new Bill, which asks the simple question: “what substantively will this do to build social capital, people power, and social entrepreneurs?”
Unless this is done, the Big Society project will not succeed