The European Parliament voted yesterday (12 March) to adopt a resolution condemning spying by the US National Security Agency (NSA) on EU citizens.

The non-binding resolution, which closes a six-month inquiry into the US surveillance system, calls on the European Commission and member states to suspend existing agreements with the United States in response to the spying revelations. Agreements on bank-data-sharing and internet privacy should be suspended, and data protection should be kept out of EU-US free-trade talks and negotiated separately, the resolution says. It calls for a ‘digital bill of rights’ for EU citizens.

Information about the NSA emerged last year as a result of leaks from former NSA employee Edward Snowden, who is now in Moscow under asylum. Centre-left British MEP Claude Moraes, who led the Parliament debate, said the resolution he drafted is just the start of an EU response. “Let’s turn this into something positive and lasting into the next Parliament,” he told colleagues on Tuesday. Viviane Reding, the European commissioner for justice, fundamental rights and citizenship, agreed. “With this debate we have not finished our job. The job now only begins,” she said.

The evidence for the Moraes report included a written response to MEPs’ questions from Snowden himself, which was delivered to the Parliament on Friday (7 March). This contained further information about what Snowden says was a US strategy of pitting EU member-state intelligence services against each other. The NSA’s foreign-affairs division worked with EU national governments to “search for loopholes in laws and constitutional protections that they can use to justify indiscriminate, dragnet surveillance operations that were at best unwittingly authorised by lawmakers,” Snowden wrote.

“The result is a European bazaar, where a European Union member state like Denmark may give the NSA access to a tapping centre on the (unenforceable) condition that NSA doesn’t search it for Danes, and Germany may give the NSA access to another on the condition that it doesn’t search for Germans.”

No support from ECR

The European Conservatives and Reformists group said it could not support the report because it calls for suspending agreements with the US. British ECR MEP Timothy Kirkhope said the Parliament’s investigation was irrational. “This committee has not been interested in finding the facts, it has just been the most expensive and painstaking exercise in collecting together press cuttings and allegations,” he said.

Dutch Liberal MEP Sophie In ‘t Veld pointed out that this week the US Senate launched a similar “irrational” investigation into allegations that American spy services have been monitoring the US Congress. “This parliament is the only parliament in Europe that has held an inquiry, whereas the Council has been shamefully silent,” she said. “Massive violations of EU citizens’ rights are being ignored [by member states]. Shame on you!”

Snowden used his response to repeat his request for political asylum in the EU. The Parliament’s civil- liberties committee voted against including a call for asylum in the resolution.

The main political parties in the European Union are preparing to do battle over who should become the next president of the European Commission. Each is selecting a candidate to feature in the European Parliament elections – in the hope that a choice might make citizens more inclined to turn out and vote. The Party of European Socialists has already chosen Martin Schulz, the president of the Parliament – a choice made easier by his being the only nomination. The liberals are currently inviting nominations, and Guy Verhofstadt and Olli Rehn have declared their willingness to stand. The centre-right European People’s Party will stretch out its selection process until March.

What citizens will not be invited to vote on is who should succeed Schulz as the next president of the Parliament. That choice will be made in June at the first meeting of the newly-elected Parliament. To become president of the Parliament, an MEP has to win the votes of an absolute majority ie, a majority of the entire electorate of 751 MEPs. If no candidate has an absolute majority after three rounds of voting, the candidate who secures a simple majority of those voting wins.

The presidency of the Parliament is much less talked about at present than the presidency of the Commission or, for that matter, the presidency of the European Council (Herman Van Rompuy’s mandate expires at the end of 2014) and there are good reasons why that should be so. The first is that it is a less important job – less power, less visibility. The second is that the electorate is small and will not be formed until the results of the elections are known in May.

And yet, a bit of forward thinking about the presidency of the Parliament might help MEPs to avoid some of the mistakes of the past.

Since 1979, when direct elections to the Parliament began, the presidency has, for the most part, been decided by an unholy alliance between the two biggest political groups in the Parliament, the centre-right and the centre-left, with each taking a turn at the presidency during a five-year parliamentary term. Simone Veil, a French liberal, was the first president of the directly-elected Parliament (1979-81) chosen before the alliance was established. In 2002-04, Pat Cox, another liberal, became president when the centre-right switched its affections. But with both the German liberals and the British liberals sagging badly in the opinion polls, it seems unlikely that the liberal group will have the numbers in the next parliament to secure a turn at the presidency.

This time round, a lot will depend on how many seats Eurosceptic parties win in May’s elections and whether the centre-left (now the Socialists and Democrats, previously the Party of European Socialists) and centre-right (the European People’s Party) together can command a majority. If they fall short, then the established customs will be strained.

That would be no bad thing. The cosy arrangements between the PES and the EPP threw up results that were damaging for the Parliament. Most egregiously, in July 2004 Josep Borrell was elected to the presidency of a Parliament that he had joined only a few weeks earlier. Although a figure of some standing in Spanish politics, he did not know the MEPs over whom he was supposed to preside, nor the institution and its workings.

The situation arose because the EPP wanted to take the second half of the five-year parliamentary term, the PES was supposed to provide the president in the first half, and the Spanish delegation was powerful within the PES group. The result – the choice of Borrell – was explicable, but not forgivable. By contrast, it took another five years before the presidency went to an MEP from one of the countries that had joined the EU in 2004 (Jerzy Buzek, from Poland).

Earlier in this parliament, it seemed that the S&D and EPP were intent on pursuing their old ways. Word is that they had agreed that the presidency should be shared out between the Italian socialist Gianni Pittella, and Joseph Daul, who until recently was leader of the EPP MEPs. However, Daul has since stood down from the group leadership and announced that he will not seek re-election to the Parliament, preferring to concentrate on the presidency of the EPP’s Europe-wide organisation, which he took over from Wilfried Martens.

The rumour mill now speculates as to whether two European commissioners who might seek election to the Parliament, Viviane Reding and Michel Barnier, might seek the presidency. Both are ex-MEPs from the centre-right.

What such speculation underlines is how easily the presidency of the Parliament can become an adjunct to horse-trading over those other EU jobs – the presidencies of the European Commission and European Council, the high representative for foreign and security policy. In effect, that would mean the Parliament’s presidency was being decided by the European Council.

This is possible because of the control exerted by the EPP and S&D group on the choice of president, at least up to now. They are the means by which national leaders control what happens in the Parliament, almost regardless of rank-and-file MEPs.

Perhaps that is why the Parliament needs to break the mould. One part of the president’s role is to represent the institution to the outside world (a role that nowadays probably requires greater mastery of the English language than Pittella has). But arguably just as important is the president’s role as internal arbiter. A president who owes his or her existence to two political groups will be at their mercy. (After the cash-for-questions scandal of 2010-11, Buzek had his attempts at reform watered down by the groups.) The Parliament should have a president who is more than an instrument of the EPP and S&D. That may yet happen, despite the groups. If May’s elections return a more polarised assembly, the president will have to command wide support, and EPP and S&D backing may not be enough.

Ahead of those elections, voters should consider not just the presidency of the Commission, but also the presidency of the Parliament itself. What the parties say about the presidency tells us something about how they perceive the Parliament.

Click Here: NRL Telstra Premiership

The eruption of the 2008 economic crisis has exposed the fragility of advanced economies’ public finances, and made reform of their tax systems a pressing issue.

Developed economies’ tax revenues have stagnated since the crisis, as their recessions have been followed by periods of anaemic growth. For example, France’s economy grew by a total of only 5% between 2008 and 2012, while the United Kingdom’s economy (which felt the effects of the crisis earlier) shrank by almost 4% over the five years up to and including 2012.

Click Here: cheap INTERNATIONAL jersey

Total tax revenues in the eurozone, as elsewhere, fell in 2009. They returned to their 2008 levels of approximately €3.6 trillion only in 2011.

While tax revenues have stagnated, the crisis has increased demands on the public purse, including for assistance paid out to the unemployed. For example, social-security costs in Spain rose from 21% of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2005 (figures for 2006-09 are not available) to 27.4% of GDP in 2013, while French social expenditure increased from 30% of GDP in 2005 to 33% in 2013. The pressure on the public budget of supporting large numbers of unemployed has been felt across the developed world: OECD average unemployment has risen from 5.6% of the active population in 2007 to 7.9% in 2013, while eurozone unemployment has risen from 7.6% to 12% over the same period.

Bailing out banks affected by the crisis has also exposed public budgets to enormous and unexpected costs.

According to the European Commission, European Union governments provided €591.9 billion in capital to their banks (equal to 4.6% of the EU’s 2012 GDP) in 2008-12.

Governments were ill-equipped to meet these extra costs. Taken as a whole, the eurozone has run a net deficit since at least 2002. The governments of France, Italy, Poland, the United Kingdom, Austria and Portugal have had to borrow to meet their costs every year since at least 2002. (Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Ireland all had at least one year of budget surplus during that period.)

Despite increased social security costs and lower tax receipts by value, governments have not increased the share of GDP they collect as tax. Prior to the economic crisis, government tax revenues in member states of the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development represented an average of 34.8% of GDP; by 2011 this figure had decreased slightly to 34.1%.

However, this overall tax revenue masks adjustments in specific tax rates made in response to the crisis. In the eurozone, consumption taxes have broadly increased since the crisis, while new taxes on financial institutions, air passengers and property have been introduced. By contrast, taxes on labour and corporate income have declined.

Yet, at the same time it became apparent that many governments were struggling to apply even their standard tax rates to global companies and, in particular, those in the hi-tech sector (see page 13). Examples quickly surfaced: companies such as Amazon, Google or Apple were paying unusually low tax rates in countries where they appeared to be doing good business.

This gave rise to a pronounced sense of injustice in populations whose governments were taking an axe to public spending.

A consensus has emerged within the international community of leading economies that a global approach is needed if governments are to improve their revenue collection without facing the threat at every turn of corporate relocations.

Leaders of the world’s largest economies promised in 2009 to increase scrutiny of low tax jurisdictions (so-called tax havens) (see page 11). Last Sunday (23 February), finance ministers from 20 of the world’s largest economies reaffirmed their commitment to increasing tax transparency and clamping down on tax avoidance, while only on Tuesday (25 February) a US congressional committee slammed Credit Suisse for allegedly helping more than 22,000 US citizens avoid US tax (see page 11).

The Gunners legend wants to see the Spaniard backed in the transfer market in the summer and is expecting a summer of speculation over possible exits

Martin Keown believes that Arsenal owner Stan Kroenke has to dip his hand into his own pocket this summer to give Mikel Arteta money to work with in the transfer market.

Arsenal released their accounts for 2018-19 last week which revealed the club had suffered a loss after tax of £27.1 million ($34.9m), the club’s first overall loss since 2002.

That deficit was largely put down to the Gunners missing out on the Champions League for a second successive season, even though they did go on to reach the Europa League final.

Click:Pen bag making machine

Growth in the European Union will edge up in 2014 and 2015, but will bring only marginal reductions in unemployment, according to the European Commission’s latest economic forecasts.

The Commission’s autumn economic forecast, published today (5 November), predicted that the EU’s gross domestic product will grow by 1.9% in 2015, while the eurozone’s GDP will grow by 1.7%. This would represent only a relatively small increase on expected growth of 1.4% across the EU and 1.1% in the eurozone in 2014.

The predicted growth is not expected to create many jobs, with employment rates expected to increase by only 0.3% in 2014 and 0.7% in 2015 in the EU. The figures for the eurozone are similar.  As a result unemployment in the eurozone in 2015 is expected to fall marginally to 11.8% of the economically active population in the euro area and 10.7% in the EU.

“The fiscal consolidation and structural reforms undertaken in Europe have created the basis for recovery”, said Olli Rehn, the European commissioner for economic and monetary affairs and the euro. “But it is too early to declare victory: unemployment remains at unacceptably high levels.”

According to the autumn forecast, the EU’s economy will remain weak and uneven in the face of continued government austerity and a worsening global economy. While the EU’s financial markets have improved significantly, their continued fragmentation across member states means that loans remain expensive, stifling growth. But the autumn report credits recent EU policies of having abated perceived risks to the euro stemming from the sovereign debt crisis, marking an improvement on the winter and spring forecasts. 

Dans Vie Privée, Vie Publique, sur France 3, Jean-Claude Camus a crié son étonnement et voulu mettre en garde . Mais contre quoi? Ou qui…

Fin 2009, Johnny Hallyday était dans le coma, mais en ce début 2011, Jean-Claude Camus estime qu’il ne s’est toujours pas réveillé. A tel point, que l’ancien producteur du Taulier a lancé un appel sur les ondes pour que son rocker infidèle lui revienne… Ou du moins pour lui faire savoir son désarroi.

C’est chez

lors de Vie Privée, Vie Publique sur France 3, que Jean-Claude Camus a lancéen quelques mots, ce vendredi soir, cette bouteille à la mer pour qu’elle parvienne jusqu’à Johnny Hallyday, puisque les ponts semblent bien rompus. Pour l’heure, en tout cas.

Questionné sur cette séparation qui intervient après trois décennies des collaboration entre les deux hommes, Jean-Claude Camus rétorque par une citation. « Je me contenterai, dit-il, de reprendre une phrase que j’ai lue dans un journal »Johnny, réveille-toi”.

Ce qui laisse visiblement Mirelle Dumas sur sa faim. Car cette mise en garde laisse penser que Johnny pourrait courir un danger, voire se faire berner.? Mais par qui? Pourquoi? Comment? Ne serait-ce pas une mis en garde digne d’une amitié, voire d’un amour, blessés. « Ça veut dire quoi, ça, Johnny réveille-toi? », demande l’intervieweuse- qui a lu dans nos pensées- au producteur évincé à la rentrée des classes.

Lequel reprend: « Si j’étais le seul à être débarqué… Vous avez les attachées de presse qui ont été débarquées. Des attachés de presse de vingt ans qui ont donné toute leur vie. »

Là, Camus évoque Catherine Battner, Vincence Stark et l’équipe de l’agence 96B qui a été écartée des affaires de Johnny Hallyday juste avant les fêtes de Noël. Même punition pour le photographe jusqu’alors attitré de la star, Daniel Angeli. Bref, si Johnny n’est Jamais Seul, comme l’indique le titre de son renouveau discographique, pour Jean-Claude Camus, un seul être vous manque et c’est la blues attitude.

Jean-Frédéric Tronche

Lundi 7 février 2011

Suivez l’actu Gala sur Twitter et Facebook

Click Here: Cheap FIJI Rugby Jersey

Deux mois après la naissance de sa fille Faith Margaret, grâce à une mère porteuse, a justifié sa démarche dans un entretien déchirant de sincérité.

Nicole Kidman et le chanteur country

sont parents pour la deuxième fois. Leur fillette, née à Nashville, Tennessee, le 28 décembre 2010, est le fruit d’une grossesse par mère subrogée. Ce bébé qu’attendait le couple, c’est une autre qui l’a porté.

S’ils voient assurément la vie en

, la sublime Rousse et son époux (depuis 2006) n’avaient jamais évoqué leur démarche aux médias. L’alternative de la gestation pour autrui ne fait pas encore l’unanimité.

Pendant plus de onze ans, Madame Tom Cruise a joué l’épouse modèle, discrète, effacée… Puis, une fausse-couche a eu raison de son couple. Elle a laissé à son ex, contrainte et forcée, la garde de ses bambins adoptifs, Isabella (18 ans) et Connor (16 ans).

?La quarantaine éblouissante, l’Australienne oscarisée pour son interprétation de Virginia Woolf s’est épanouie auprès de son poète folk. Comblée par la naissance de son adorable Sunday Rose (le 7 juillet 2008) qu’elle «désirait depuis ses 17 ans», Nicole Kidman souhaitait plus que tout pouponner à nouveau.

Plusieurs fois, la presse a commenté ses tenues vaporeuses ou montré du doigt ses courbes arrondies. Mais à 43 ans, pas facile de défier l’horloge biologique. Son ventre désespérément plat, notre poupée au teint de porcelaine s’est résignée à faire appel à la procréation médicalement assistée. Un «miracle», que Nicole Kidman a évoqué, face aux caméras de l’émission australienne 60 Minutes.

«Ceux qui souhaitent chérir un petit être sans y parvenir, connaissent le désespoir, la douleur et le sentiment de perte qu’engendre l’infertilité (…) Notre désir était plus fort que tout. Nous voulions désespérément un autre enfant. L’occasion s’est présentée alors que je n’arrivais pas à tomber enceinte», a expliqué la muse de Stanley Kubrick.

Avant de verser quelques larmes à l’écran: «Quand je parle de celle qui a mis mon enfant au monde, je deviens très émotive, parce que je lui suis tellement reconnaissante… Ah, je n’arrive pas à croire que je pleure à l’antenne», a confessé celle que l’on a connue autrement plus glaciale et distante avec ses sentiments. Emouvante, notre sublime créature à la taille de guêpe s’est ensuite épanchée sur sa maternité par substitution: «J’ai assisté à l’accouchement de Faith Margaret. Le lien que j’ai avec ma fille, qui s’est développée dans l’utérus d’une mère porteuse, est exactement le même que celui que j’ai avec mes trois autres enfants», a-t-elle encore raconté.

Puis, lorsque le journaliste lui a demandé quels conseils elle donnerait à la jeune première qu’elle était, cette liane à la silhouette parfaite a répondu: «Je lui dirais profites-en et amuse-toi. Il sera toujours temps (…) Vous savez, ce jour où vous vous rendez compte que vous pourriez mourir pour vos chères têtes blondes, à ce moment-là, vous comprenez ce qu’est un amour inconditionnel et vous relativisez.»

Et la divine interprète de conclure: «Vous voulez savoir ce que ma grand-mère maternelle m’a dit, juste avant de mourir? « Sois heureuse ». C’est juste la plus belle chose qu’on puisse dire à quelqu’un, vous ne trouvez pas?»

Heureuse, sereine, aux anges, l’égérie Chanel 5 concilie à merveille vie de famille et vie professionnelle…

Justine Boivin

Mardi 22 février 2011

Suivez l’actu Gala sur Twitter et Facebook

Une plainte devant l’Ordre des médecins: c’est la nouvelle phase de la riposte de à l’encontre du Docteur Stéphane Delajoux.

Johnny Hallyday passe à l’offensive. Après un bras de fer par experts, puis médias interposés, l’Idole des jeunes passe aux actes. Le rocker a déposé une plainte devant l’Ordre des médecins à l’encontre du docteur Stéphane Delajoux. Il veut que l’homme qui avait procédé à son opération d’une hernie discale en novembre 2009 paie la facture de l’infection qui s’en était suivie et qu’il impute au médecin.

Une déclaration de guerre-bis qui a été ainsi formulée par Pierric Le Perdriel, fondé de pouvoir de Johnny Hallyday : « A la demande de monsieur Johnny Hallyday, pour qui le temps de la réparation est venu, Me Virginie Lapp et Me Claude Lienhard ont saisi le Conseil départemental de l’Ordre des médecins de Paris d’une plainte à l’encontre du docteur Stéphane Delajoux, chirurgien ».

Le célèbre plaignant compte « tirer toutes les conséquences de la méconnaissance par le docteur Delajoux de ses obligations telles que prévues et définies par le Code de la Santé publique et de ses manquements tels qu’établis par le rapport définitif des experts judiciaires ».

Une responsabilité que le neuro-chirugien avait rejetée sur le comportement du chanteur qui avait pris l’avion pour Los Angeles très, voire trop rapidement après son intervention. Mais Johnny lui-même déclarait il y a peu au JT de Claire Chazal qu’il n’avait pas été vraiment incité à garder la chambre… Ce qu’il a bien été contraint de faire, une fois rendu aux Etats-Unis où les complications post-opératoires lui avaient valu une hospitalisation en catastrophe avant qu’il soit placé sous sédation.

Des conséquences physiques mais aussi économiques pour Johnny Hallyday ; son Tour 66 avait été stoppé net alors que 160 000 billets s’étaient déjà arrachés. Mais le Dr Delajoux n’a pas la même vision des choses. “J’ai, au contraire, fait tout ce que j’ai pu pour l’encadrer médicalement, dit-il. Et je peux vous dire qu’avec un patient comme Johnny, ce n’est pas chose facile… Je suis exaspéré… Près de deux ans après les faits, alors que les expertises m’ont blanchi sur le plan médical, il revient à la charge». Restent les conclusions de l’expertise médicale menée en septembre dernier. Et, au-delà des arguments de Johnny Hallyday, ce sont bien elles qui pourraient peser sur le dossier du médecin des stars.

Jean-Frédéric Tronche

Jeudi 10 mars 2011

Suivez l’actu Gala sur Twitter et Facebook

Tandis que son tout dernier single Girls! grimpe tranquillement dans les charts, Beyoncé s’est offert une escapade amoureuse à Paris. Endroits branchés et look impeccable, Be est de sortie.

La rue François 1er était en ébullition hier après-midi et pas seulement à cause de la présence de

dans les studios d’Europe 1. La rue du 8e arrondissement n’accueille pas uniquement les studios d’une des plus grande radios française, elle aussi le lieux de restaurants chic. C’est pourquoi Beyoncé et Jay-Z ont décidé de s’y rentre pour déjeuner mercredi. C’est à l’Avenue qu’ils ont retrouvé Daniel le neveu de la chanteuse.

Mini mini-robe asymétrique et talons hauts pour Beyoncé versus jogging et baskets pour Jay-z. Le couple ne se la joue pas assorti, mais c’est aussi ça le R’n’b… Monsieur assure le look street et madame le total glamour.

Même avec des lunettes over-size, Beyoncé ne passe inaperçue dans les «Streets of Paris». On adore l’association chaussures dorées/robe satinée/sac croco. Côté beauté, Be semble s’être laissée séduire par le lissage brésilien. Plus blonde que jamais, la peau cuivrée sans imperfection, la chanteuse est un rayon de soleil sur Paris.

Jay-Z et sa douce ne sont pas venus par hasard nous rendre visite. Ils ont choisi la capitale de l’amour pour fêter leurs trois ans de mariage. Une visite presque volontairement médiatisée afin de faire taire ceux qui les disaient déjà séparés.

Beyoncé et son mari ont pris résidence à l’hôtel Meurice, en plein cœur de Paris afin de pouvoir profiter de tous les attraits de la ville, dont le shopping… Véritable fashion-addict, la chanteuse a débarqué sur le sol français lookée de la tête au pieds: robe Preen, des escarpins Chrisitan Louboutin et un sac Jimmy Choo.

Le Girl Power façon Beyoncé on adhère.

Laure Costey

Jeudi 21 avril 2011

Suivez l’actu Gala sur Twitter et Facebook

Click Here: nrl league jerseys