UK ‘powerless’ over foreign emissions cheats as Government seeks to change law

The Government has admitted it is powerless to take action against foreign car firms that cheat emissions tests, as ministers announced plans to toughen the law.

Manufacturers that fit so-called “defeat devices” can only be pursued if they are based in this country, meaning that no legal action could be taken against Volkswagen during the 2015 emissions scandal that affected 1.2 million vehicles in the UK.

In future, car makers, importers or dealers could face criminal charges and unlimited fines if they use software or devices that are designed to deceive emissions tests.

Jesse Norman, the transport minister, will today open a consultation outlining the new measures. “Those who cheat should be held to proper account in this country, legally and financially, for their actions,” he said.

Mr Norman wants the new regulations to extend to any British importer who brings a non-compliant vehicle…

Go to Source

U.S. steel firms urge Trump to act now to curb imports

Reuters

WASHINGTON, Feb 1 (Reuters) – Twenty-five U.S. steel companies and groups urged President Donald Trump on Thursday to urgently impose trade measures to curb excess steel capacity and surging imports affecting the U.S. industry.

In a letter signed by some of the leading U.S. steel companies, the American Iron and Steel Institute called on Trump to immediately act under “Section 232” of a 1962 U.S. trade law, which allows for sweeping restrictions to protect national security.

“We urge you to implement a remedy that is comprehensive and broad based, covering all major sources of steel imports and the full range of steel products, with only limited exceptions for products not currently available in the United States,” according to the letter seen by Reuters. (Reporting by David Lawder and Lesley Wroughton; Editing by Peter Cooney)

Sorry we are not currently accepting comments on this article.

Go to Source

In letter, U.S. steel firms urge Trump to curb steel…

Reuters

By David Lawder and Lesley Wroughton

WASHINGTON, Feb 1 (Reuters) – The chief executives of top American steel companies and related groups urged President Donald Trump on Thursday to urgently impose trade measures to curb excess steel capacity and surging imports they say are undermining the U.S. industry.

The American Iron and Steel Institute, or AISI, called on Trump in a letter to immediately act under “Section 232” of a 1962 U.S. trade law, which allows for restrictions to protect national security.

“We urge you to implement a remedy that is comprehensive and broad based, covering all major sources of steel imports and the full range of steel products, with only limited exceptions for products not currently available in the United States,” according to the letter seen by Reuters.

Companies that signed the letter included Alton Steel, AK Steel Corp, Cleveland-Cliffs Inc, TimkenSteel Corp, Nucor Corp, and ArcelorMittal USA.

The letter was the second in five months from the steel industry to Trump, who promised in his presidential campaign to protect American steelworkers from imports and ordered an investigation of foreign steel imports under Section 232.

The results of the investigation were handed to Trump last month. He has 90 days to respond.

A White House spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Forcing a reduction of excess production in China, which now supplies half the world´s steel, is a key goal of any potential restrictions.

The United States, the world’s biggest steep importer, and China have long been at odds over how to combat excess capacity in the global steel sector. China has argued that it has done its bit to tackle the problem by cutting capacity.

The letter to Trump underscored that despite the threat of trade actions, imports continue to surge. In June 2017, steel imports hit their highest monthly total in more than two years by capturing 30 percent of the U.S. market, according to AISI.

Efforts to address global excess capacity through international consultations and groups such as the G20 and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development had failed, AISI added in its letter.

“Upon taking office you took bold steps to launch a path for addressing this ongoing crisis,” the group said, referring to Trump. “Now only you can authorize action to stop the relentless inflow of foreign steel.” (Editing by Peter Cooney)

Sorry we are not currently accepting comments on this article.

Go to Source

In letter, US steel firms urge Donald Trump to curb steel imports

us, steel, donald trump, us president donald trump, steel sector Companies that signed the letter included Alton Steel, AK Steel Corp, Cleveland-Cliffs Inc, TimkenSteel Corp, Nucor Corp, and ArcelorMittal USA.

The chief executives of top American steel companies and related groups urged President Donald Trump on Thursday to urgently impose trade measures to curb excess steel capacity and surging imports they say are undermining the US industry. The American Iron and Steel Institute, or AISI, called on Trump in a letter to immediately act under “Section 232” of a 1962 US trade law, which allows for restrictions to protect national security.

“We urge you to implement a remedy that is comprehensive and broad based, covering all major sources of steel imports and the full range of steel products, with only limited exceptions for products not currently available in the United States,” according to the letter seen by Reuters.

Companies that signed the letter included Alton Steel, AK Steel Corp, Cleveland-Cliffs Inc, TimkenSteel Corp, Nucor Corp, and ArcelorMittal USA.

The letter was the second in five months from the steel industry to Trump, who promised in his presidential campaign to protect American steelworkers from imports and ordered an investigation of foreign steel imports under Section 232.

The results of the investigation were handed to Trump last month. He has 90 days to respond.

A White House spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Forcing a reduction of excess production in China, which now supplies half the world’s steel, is a key goal of any potential restrictions.

The United States, the world’s biggest steep importer, and China have long been at odds over how to combat excess capacity in the global steel sector. China has argued that it has done its bit to tackle the problem by cutting capacity.

The letter to Trump underscored that despite the threat of trade actions, imports continue to surge. In June 2017, steel imports hit their highest monthly total in more than two years by capturing 30 percent of the U.S. market, according to AISI.

Efforts to address global excess capacity through international consultations and groups such as the G20 and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development had failed, AISI added in its letter.

“Upon taking office you took bold steps to launch a path for addressing this ongoing crisis,” the group said, referring to Trump. “Now only you can authorize action to stop the relentless inflow of foreign steel.”

Go to Source

New programme launched to help law firms expand overseas

SINGAPORE: A new programme to help local law firms that wish to expand overseas was launched on Thursday (Feb 1) by the Ministry of Law, the Law Society of Singapore (LawSoc) and International Enterprise (IE) Singapore.

Called Lawyers Go Global, the programme aims to help law firms expand their networks through overseas mission trips, training and branding.

Based on recommendations by the Committee on the Future Economy working group on legal and accounting services, it is part of efforts to “enhance Singapore’s position as an international legal hub” according to the law ministry.

“It’s really expanding the markets for the local legal services and venturing out to look for new markets and new work,” said Senior Minister of State for Law and Finance Indranee Rajah. “When Singapore companies go overseas, what they’re really doing is they are expanding their market.”

“They are looking for new places to sell goods, services, to do business. When you do it, it has to be supported by the legal documentation and in some cases the legal strategy or legal advice.”

Demand for legal services in Asia is growing, according to the Ministry of Law. 

“Singapore is an international hub for legal services. Many multi-national corporations are based here and use Singapore lawyers for their regional transactions,” said the ministry. “Legal work in Asia is also expected to grow in areas such as infrastructure and arising out of China’s Belt and Road initiative as legal services (are) driven by economic activities.”

OVERSEAS TRIPS AND TRAINING

As part of the programme, over the next three years there will be eight mission trips to bring Singapore lawyers to fast-growing regional countries including China, India and Association of Southeast Asian Nations countries.

Up to 35 lawyers will be involved in each trip, with each trip expected to last about four to five days. The lawyers will get to learn about the legal needs and business opportunities in these countries and network with local businesses and the legal community there.

There will also be workshops organised to equip Singapore lawyers with skills relevant to venturing overseas as part of the new programme.

This includes training on the legal regimes, business and cultural norms of overseas markets as well as networking skills and branding strategies for law firms.

“Local firms have been internationalising, but the efforts have been pretty ad hoc and very much driven by solo efforts or, for instance, where large firms in particular had resources,” said Gregory Vijayendran, LawSoc’s president. “They were able to go in alone and explore new markets.”

“What is different this time around is this is a strategic and concerted effort on the part of (the) Ministry of Law, IE Singapore and Law Society of Singapore so it’s a tripartite collaboration. It helps us very much in terms of funding.”

One law firm that intends to expand abroad plans to tap on the programme, as it saves them from doing some legwork.

“It’s always a good thing to have somebody holding your hands when you go into a new territory – for somebody who has already done a lot of the groundwork for you, getting together networking sessions and all that so that you don’t have to go there blind and meet people individually which can be quite inefficient timewise,” said Sunil Sudheesan, director, Quahe Woo and Palmer LLC. 

“With everybody clumped together and with meetings set up well in advance with especially interested people, it makes for a more effective platform in building collaboration.” 

Lawyers Go Global will be funded by IE Singapore under its Local Enterprise and Association Development (LEAD) programme. 

Those keen to participate can apply through LawSoc. The programme is based on a first come, first served basis.

Go to Source

Invest, listen and evolve – lessons for family firms from Jarrold director

PUBLISHED: 16:26 31 January 2018 | UPDATED: 16:53 31 January 2018

Birketts Family Business Day at Benji's restaurant in Jarrolds. Michelle Jarrold speaking at the event.
Picture: ANTONY KELLY

Birketts Family Business Day at Benji’s restaurant in Jarrolds. Michelle Jarrold speaking at the event. Picture: ANTONY KELLY

Archant Norfolk 2018

That was the advice from Michelle Jarrold when she spoke to other family-run businesses about her experience taking the department store group into the 21st century.

Birketts Family Business Day at Benji's restaurant in Jarrolds. Michelle Jarrold speaking at the event.
Picture: ANTONY KELLYBirketts Family Business Day at Benji’s restaurant in Jarrolds. Michelle Jarrold speaking at the event. Picture: ANTONY KELLY

Jarrold and Sons is a seventh-generation-run company with its history dating back to 1770 when it started out as a printing and stationery operation.

Now, as well as its flagship Norwich department store, which sells stationery, clothing, beauty products, food and much else besides, it has a book shop, furniture store, training service and sports shop with a combined turnover of £34m and around 400 employees.

Ms Jarrold, the development, marketing and fashion director, said while the heritage and legacy of the brand was important it was also key to bring in non-family members, such as outgoing managing director Peter Mitchell, to make sure the business was well placed to navigate modern markets. She said: “If you can get the best combination of family and non-family working collaboratively that is very helpful.

“Family businesses which assume that only family should be involved can be difficult if you don’t have people with the right skills or motivation.

“Of course you can then have the challenge of motivating non-family members if they are not shareholders so you have to ensure they are looked after.”

Despite tough times in the retail sector and for businesses in general, Jarrold has managed to thrive which Ms Jarrold said was down to having a clear vision and understanding its customer base.

While the company has embraced the internet, with 75% of its items stocked online, 5% of turnover coming from web sales and a social media strategy, Ms Jarrold said there was a focus on providing an experience in-store for customers and making shopping as straightforward as possible.

The coming year will be an exciting time for Jarrolds as the company continues to reinvest, something Ms Jarrold said was vital for family firms to stay relevant, by refreshing its Pilch sports shop and launching own brand deli food.

Ms Jarrold said one of the hardest decisions for the business had been to sell off the printing arm which made it famous, publishing books such as Black Beauty, but said it had been done for the good of the company.

She said: “We sold the business and unfortunately it did not survive which was a great shame but actually there was an exposure to the whole of the Jarrold company had we not made that decision.”

Ms Jarrold was speaking at a breakfast event at the department store’s Benji cafe for East Anglia Family Business Day, which is organised by Family Business United alongside law firm Birketts.

The event celebrates family-run firms across the region and names a family business of the year.

Family Business United’s Paul Andrews said succession was one of the key issues for such companies currently.

He said: “We have got a real glut of family businesses in the UK now approaching that transition stage with founders looking to step back or take it on to the next stage.

“Often people are scared to have those conversations because they are worried about what the answer might be but it is important to have those conversations early.”

Head of the Birketts family-owned business team Adam Jones added firms needed to professionalise their processes and have a charter in place so everyone was on the same page when it came to change.

Go to Source

UN reviews 206 firms over their links to Israeli settlements

GENEVA — The U.N. human rights office said Wednesday that 206 companies — mostly Israeli and American — are facing a review of their business practices involving Israeli settlements, which are considered illegal under international law.

In a long-awaited report, the office said more resources were needed to handle the complex and unprecedented task of compiling what some critics call an unfair “blacklist” and a sign of anti-Israel bias at the U.N.

Proponents insist that companies must be held accountable for their activities in the settlements, arguing that those actions can contribute to injustices against Palestinians.

The governments of both Israel and the United States criticized the U.N. effort.

The 16-page report, which does not cite companies by name, said the rights office still has work to do.

The office said it had contacted 64 companies, but it would not identify any until all 206 companies had been contacted — and possibly not at all. Of those companies, 143 are based in Israel or the settlements and 22 in the United States. Of the 19 other countries linked to such companies, Germany is home to seven and the Netherlands to five.

Ultimately, the rights office’s review could lead to a public naming and shaming of companies for their activities linked to the settlements and give an U.N. imprimatur to efforts championed by the “BDS” movement (boycott, divest and sanction), which has been primarily a grassroots campaign to pressure Israel through action against companies.

“The violations of human rights associated with the settlements are pervasive and devastating, reaching every facet of Palestinian life,” the report said, citing restrictions on movement, freedom of religion, education and land ownership faced by Palestinians in east Jerusalem and the West Bank. “Businesses play a central role in furthering the establishment, maintenance and expansion of Israeli settlements.”

“Business enterprises may need to consider whether it is possible to engage in such an environment in a manner that respects human rights,” it said.

Some 115 other companies were eliminated after an initial review.

Israel and the United States have been sharply critical of a resolution passed by the 47-member Human Rights Council in March 2016 that paved the way for the review — the first of its kind. The resolution called on the rights office to create “database” of companies found to engage in any of 10 activities, either explicitly linked to the settlements or supportive of them.

“I urge all sides to avoid misrepresenting the contents of this report, which has been produced in good faith on the basis of the mandate laid down by the Human Rights Council,” said Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights. He said he hopes the database “will assist states and businesses in complying with their obligations and responsibilities under international law.”

Israeli officials vowed to fight what they called a “blacklist,” with Israel’s ambassador saying the whole review process pointed to the council’s “moral bankruptcy” and alleged slant against the Jewish state.

“We view the report, and the initiative as a whole, as fundamentally illegitimate,” said Aviva Raz Shechter, the Israeli ambassador in Geneva. “It is, in our view, outside the competence and the authority of the Human Rights Council … This is kind of another instrument to pursue a discriminatory and politically motivated agenda.”

In Washington, the State Department lashed out at “such biased and politicized actions taken against Israel.”

“We have not provided, and will not provide, any information or support to the Office of the High Commissioner in this process,” the U.S. statement said. “We strongly urge other countries to do the same.”

Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said an Israeli and U.S. pressure campaign to block publication of the company names violates international law.

“We call upon the secretary-general of the U.N. to publish the names of the companies that are doing business with the settlements,” he said. “Settlements are illegal according to international law and thus companies doing business with it should be known because what they are doing is illegal.”

Advocacy group Human Rights Watch urged more resources for the rights office to continue its work.

“Today’s report shows progress in identifying and communicating with companies that contribute to serious abuses in Israeli settlements in the West Bank,” said Sari Bashi, Israel and Palestine advocacy director at Human Rights Watch.

Eugene Kontorovich, head of International Law at the Kohelet Policy Forum, a conservative think-tank in Jerusalem, said no international law was being violated by countries who do business in occupied lands, including in the settlements, and said Israel was being singled out unfairly.

“The U.N. Human Rights Council is supposed to be about human rights, not Israeli wrongs, so to create a report just about Israel seems to go against its own mission,” he said.


Associated Press writers Josef Federman in Jerusalem and Tia Goldenberg in Tel Aviv contributed to this report.

Go to Source

UN reviews 206 firms over their links to Israeli s

(AP) The U.N. human rights office said Wednesday that 206 companies mostly Israeli and American are facing a review of their business practices involving Israeli settlements, which are considered illegal under international law.

In a long-awaited report, the office said more resources were needed to handle the complex and unprecedented task of compiling what some critics call an unfair “blacklist” and a sign of anti-Israel bias at the U.N.

Proponents insist that companies must be held accountable for their activities in the settlements, arguing that those actions can contribute to injustices against Palestinians.

The governments of both Israel and the United States criticized the U.N. effort.

The 16-page report, which does not cite companies by name, said the rights office still has work to do.

The office said it had contacted 64 companies, but it would not identify any until all 206 companies had been contacted and possibly not at all. Of those companies, 143 are based in Israel or the settlements and 22 in the United States. Of the 19 other countries linked to such companies, Germany is home to seven and the Netherlands to five.

Ultimately, the rights office’s review could lead to a public naming and shaming of companies for their activities linked to the settlements and give an U.N. imprimatur to efforts championed by the “BDS” movement (boycott, divest and sanction), which has been primarily a grassroots campaign to pressure Israel through action against companies.

“The violations of human rights associated with the settlements are pervasive and devastating, reaching every facet of Palestinian life,” the report said, citing restrictions on movement, freedom of religion, education and land ownership faced by Palestinians in east Jerusalem and the West Bank. “Businesses play a central role in furthering the establishment, maintenance and expansion of Israeli settlements.”

“Business enterprises may need to consider whether it is possible to engage in such an environment in a manner that respects human rights,” it said.

Some 115 other companies were eliminated after an initial review.

Israel and the United States have been sharply critical of a resolution passed by the 47-member Human Rights Council in March 2016 that paved the way for the review the first of its kind. The resolution called on the rights office to create “database” of companies found to engage in any of 10 activities, either explicitly linked to the settlements or supportive of them.

“I urge all sides to avoid misrepresenting the contents of this report, which has been produced in good faith on the basis of the mandate laid down by the Human Rights Council,” said Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights. He said he hopes the database “will assist states and businesses in complying with their obligations and responsibilities under international law.”

Israeli officials vowed to fight what they called a “blacklist,” with Israel’s ambassador saying the whole review process pointed to the council’s “moral bankruptcy” and alleged slant against the Jewish state.

“We view the report, and the initiative as a whole, as fundamentally illegitimate,” said Aviva Raz Shechter, the Israeli ambassador in Geneva. “It is, in our view, outside the competence and the authority of the Human Rights Council … This is kind of another instrument to pursue a discriminatory and politically motivated agenda.”

In Washington, the State Department lashed out at “such biased and politicized actions taken against Israel.”

“We have not provided, and will not provide, any information or support to the Office of the High Commissioner in this process,” the U.S. statement said. “We strongly urge other countries to do the same.”

Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said an Israeli and U.S. pressure campaign to block publication of the company names violates international law.

“We call upon the secretary-general of the U.N. to publish the names of the companies that are doing business with the settlements,” he said. “Settlements are illegal according to international law and thus companies doing business with it should be known because what they are doing is illegal.”

Advocacy group Human Rights Watch urged more resources for the rights office to continue its work.

“Today’s report shows progress in identifying and communicating with companies that contribute to serious abuses in Israeli settlements in the West Bank,” said Sari Bashi, Israel and Palestine advocacy director at Human Rights Watch.

Eugene Kontorovich, head of International Law at the Kohelet Policy Forum, a conservative think-tank in Jerusalem, said no international law was being violated by countries who do business in occupied lands, including in the settlements, and said Israel was being singled out unfairly.

“The U.N. Human Rights Council is supposed to be about human rights, not Israeli wrongs, so to create a report just about Israel seems to go against its own mission,” he said.

___

Associated Press writers Josef Federman in Jerusalem and Tia Goldenberg in Tel Aviv contributed to this report.


Go to Source

Iceland puts onus on firms to pay gender equal wages

In a world first, Iceland has introduced a new law requiring employers to prove they are paying men and women the same wage for doing the same work, or face fines. As of next January, companies in Iceland must prove, with proper documentation carried out regularly, that they are paying gender equal wages. The country’s biggest bank, Landsbankinn, nationalized in 2008 during the country’s financial collapse, has already begun complying with the law. Elisabet Bjornsdottir, 34, who works in the bank’s treasury department, says she’s never experienced any discrimination vis-a-vis her male counterparts, in a country that is already among the world’s best performers in terms of gender equality. But “that’s one of the fundamental reasons why we need this law, because it’s not something that you can easily feel or see. You can maybe have a feeling […] but it’s really hard to prove,” she said. While Iceland has had a law mandating equal pay for men and women since 1961, the new law puts the onus on the employer. It’s no longer up to an employee to prove that they are being discriminated against, but rather, the employer must prove – in the event of a wage gap – that gender has nothing to do with it.

Go to Source

Buyers of insolvent firms with stressed arms may get to bid for other companies

ET Bureau|

Feb 01, 2018, 12.23 AM IST

Insolvency-bccl
Under Section 29A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code promoters of any defaulting company are ineligible to be a resolution applicant.

NEW DELHI: The government is considering amending the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) to allow a person who acquires an insolvent asset that has a subsidiary with a non-performing loan to be eligible for bidding for other insolvent assets.

Under Section 29A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code promoters of any defaulting company are ineligible to be a resolution applicant.

The amendment will ensure that anyone acquiring an insolvent asset does not become ineligible under the law to offer a resolution plan for another asset.

Responding to a query on whether the government plans to dilute Section 29A, M Sahoo, chairperson of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India said on Wednesday, “I would not be able to comment on that… The insolvency law committee is taking up the industry recommendations… The issue of group entities is in the consideration of the committee.” The government has allowed ineligible promoters to submit a resolution plan if they clear the dues before submitting a resolution plan. The committee of creditors will allow a period of 30 days to the resolution applicant to make the payment of overdue amounts to become eligible.

On the issue of more companies getting into liquidation than resolving insolvency, Sahoo said, “It is not surprising. It is a legacy issue and in the initial days there will be many companies going into liquidation.” Addressing a conference on the new disclosure regime for insolvency professionals Sahoo said that all loopholes in the law cannot be plugged at once. “We are learning by experience,” he said. A year since Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was introduced, the government is still in the process of fine-tuning resolution procedures.

A 14-member IBC law committee, chaired by corporate affairs secretary Injeti Srinivas, has been formed to identify issues that may impact efficiency of corporate insolvency resolution.

Read more on

From Around The Web

More from The Economic Times

#pd#’;var orghtmlD = ‘”{{titleLength}}60{{titleLength}}”,#og##og#’;*/function WZWeeOrL(par) { if(typeof otab == ‘function’){ otab(par,”); } else{if(typeof canRun == ‘undefined’ || (typeof canRun != ‘undefined’ && !canRun)) { window.open(par,’_blank’);}else{window.open(par,’_blank’); } } } window.onload = function (){ if (window.frameElement !== null){document.body.style.margin=”0px”; }};try{trev(‘//economictimes.indiatimes.com/itetnfy/notify.htm?d=%7B%22skuIds%22%3A%2217238069%2C19198645-%2C19316485-%2C19399694-%2C19343978-%22%2C%22fdId%22%3A0%2C%22imprId%22%3A%22a1846eb6-dd60-4138-974e-ae72c16d7792-10nw5%22%2C%22adsltId%22%3A%22210766%22%2C%22fpc%22%3A%220ba5747c-924e-4959-b160-11eb30b4aab0-10nw5%22%2C%22pv%22%3A%22PV_MACRO%22%2C%22i%22%3Atrue%2C%22ci%22%3A%2283016244%22%7D’,’dBQqqmqRGU’);tpImp([[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[]],’dBQqqmqRGU’,[]);}catch(e){};

Go to Source