WASHINGTON, DC, July 23, 2025 (Newswire.com)
– State and Federal Communications, Inc., a national leader in lobbying, campaign finance, and procurement lobbying compliance, is proud to announce its partnership with one-third of Fortune 100 companies in America, representing industries from technology and finance to healthcare and energy.
A powerful testament to the trust major corporations place in the firm’s expertise and commitment to excellence, five of those on Fortune’s Top 10 list rely on State and Federal Communications for clear, reliable, and timely compliance guidance.
As part of its ongoing commitment to innovation and service for those it serves, State and Federal Communications has launched a new client portal designed for greater ease of use, increased speed, and best-in-class security.
The platform is built with advanced encryption and multi-factor authentication, providing clients with a seamless experience and enhanced backend capabilities, including improved browser functionality and increased ease of use.
“For over 30 years, our firm has built trusted relationships by delivering customized compliance solutions with integrity,” said Elizabeth Bartz, President & CEO. “Our new client portal is just the latest example of how we’re investing in technology to better serve the companies that shape the national and global economy.”
The State and Federal Communications team of experts provides tailored consulting and access to comprehensive online guidebooks covering compliance laws across the federal government, all 50 states, more than 300 municipalities, and internationally in Canada, Europe, Australia, and Latin America.
For more information on State and Federal Communications and its new client portal, visit stateandfed.com.
Hoping to boost voter registration among their peers, a group of Marshall High School students launched a registration drive at the Northern Virginia school in September 2023.
Hoping to boost voter registration among their peers, a group of Marshall High School students launched a registration drive at the Northern Virginia school in September 2023.
It was a unique setup in a school classroom, with a few nonpartisan organizations providing funding. The group brought doughnuts, and had what it described as a great turnout. At least 150 people were registered to vote, senior Vedansh Garg said.
That drive, now run over a year ago, sparked months of subsequent advocacy. The same group of about 10 students has spent months lobbying Congress to pass the High School Voter Empowerment Act.
The legislation would require states to designate public high schools as voter registration agencies and tell schools to have voter registration drives for their students. It would also task the secretary of education with creating grants to reimburse schools for the costs associated with those drives.
“With young people, a lot of times, we care about a lot of issues, and the problem is we don’t see a lot of voter turnout among the youth, and that’s not because of voter apathy,” Garg said. “That’s because there’s a lot of red tape or a lot of steps to take in order to get to the polls and be able to vote.”
Inspired to help remove those barriers for other potential young voters, the students have spent months leaving the Falls Church campus and heading to Capitol Hill.
“We would go to school, and then we would go to the bathrooms and change into our business attire for D.C., and then we would head to the Senate office or House of Representatives offices,” said student Nia Gouvis.
They also used a Fairfax County Public Schools policy that allows students to miss class for a day for civic engagement.
Marshall High senior Vedansh Garg (center) and his peers are lobbying Congress to pass a bill that would designate public high schools as voter registration agencies and tell schools to have voter registration drives for their students. (Courtesy Fairfax County Public Schools)
Last November, the group had its first meeting in Vice President Kamala Harris’s office, “where we came together and we brought forward this issue to the federal government, and now this year after that, it seems like we’ve come a really long way,” senior Samad Quraishi said.
Quraishi reached out to Florida Rep. Frederica Wilson, who helped adjust some of the language in the proposed legislation. Then, the group started scheduling meetings with dozens of lawmakers.
Sometimes, they’d schedule 30 meetings in a week between the 10 of them. They reached out to 250 congressional offices, 30 of which “decided to hop onto the legislation and sponsor” it, Quraishi said.
While many staff members agreed with the ideas included in the proposed legislation, the students had some meetings during which, “I was just completely shut down, but it’s a matter of just coming back from that and learning from that experience, or learning what you could do better from that meeting, or how you should pitch it,” Gouvis said.
“We’ve seen that the younger generations are voting when it matters, or when they think that they need to make a difference, but they’re also taking a step back when they’re like, ‘Well, I don’t think I know what I’m doing, or I don’t think it’ll make a difference,’” senior Apoorva Navale said.
Rep. Wilson and California Sen. Laphonza Butler introduced the legislation in Congress earlier this year, though it hasn’t been scheduled for a vote in either chamber.
The Marshall students, meanwhile, are focusing their advocacy on empowering students to register to vote. Virginians are eligible to register when they turn 16.
“Our main goal is to educate people on how each individual person can make a huge impact, because you can’t do it by any other way,” student Hanna Rohde said. “You can’t force people to vote. You can’t do it by any other means, other than educating them on the specifics of what will happen if they vote.”
Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.
SAN DIEGO, CA, September 27, 2024 (Newswire.com)
– CeCors, Inc. (the “Company” or “CEOS”), through its wholly-owned subsidiary VetComm, would like to clarify its stance following a week of pivotal discussions with key Congressional members from both sides of the aisle in Washington, D.C.
During these meetings, VetComm presented its perspective on both the Guard Act and the PLUS Act, emphasizing the importance of protecting veterans while ensuring that they have the freedom of choice in the services available to them. While our previous press release focused on the positive elements of the Guard Act, we want to make it clear that we are not advocating for a one-sided approach.
“We see ourselves as the middle ground between the Guard Act and the PLUS Act,” stated Kate Monroe, CEO of VetComm and Marine Corps veteran. “While the PLUS Act allows too much profit to be siphoned off by for-profit companies, the Guard Act, on the other hand, eliminates free enterprise and choice altogether. Veterans deserve the freedom to choose the best services for their needs, but it is crucial that they are not exploited by predatory companies. That is why we at VetComm ensure they receive a high standard of care and education through our services.”
Monroe emphasized that even though VetComm is a for-profit entity, the company is seeking a veteran-centric, balanced solution. “The PLUS Act would protect our business, whereas the Guard Act might not, our priority is not just the survival of our company – it’s ensuring that veterans come first.”
In these meetings with lawmakers, VetComm advocated for a compromise that protects veterans’ interests while maintaining a competitive, ethical landscape. “What we proposed was a system where veterans have a range of choices, but those choices don’t include companies that exploit them. Freedom of choice should not mean freedom to prey on those who have served,” Monroe explained.
As VetComm continues to expand its presence and deepen its engagement with the veteran community and shareholders, we are also proactively shaping the legislative landscape through these key Congressional meetings, positioning ourselves as a leader in the veteran services industry.
“VetComm’s veterans and shareholders are at the forefront of every decision we make,” said Monroe. “We will go the extra mile to ensure we are the premier organization in the veteran service space. We are committed to big initiatives over the balance of 2024, and we welcome all veterans, shareholders and those aligned with our mission to explore the opportunity to engage with VetComm and support our mission as we continue to grow.”
At VetComm, we emphasize transparency, commitment to our mission, and sustainable, long-term growth – values that shareholders and the broader community can appreciate and support
About VETCOMM
VETCOMM’s mission is to empower United States veterans by providing them with the education and resources they need to access the benefits they are entitled to but not presently receiving. Founded by United States Marine Corps veteran Kate Monroe, VetComm is dedicated to advocating for veterans and ensuring they receive the support they need to thrive after serving our country.
CeCors, Inc. is a diversified company focused on veteran support and wellness products. In 2023, CeCors acquired VETCOMM, a company dedicated to helping U.S. veterans access underutilized benefits and compensation. PsyKey, a CeCors subsidiary, specializes in premium functional mushroom coffee, offering products that promote wellness and enhance focus. Together, VetComm and PsyKey address the unique needs of veterans and civilians, leveraging their combined expertise to make a meaningful impact.
Safe Harbour Statement – In addition to historical information, this press release may contain statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements contained in this press release include the intent, belief, or expectations of the Company and members of its management team with respect to the Company’s future business operations and the assumptions upon which such statements are based. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, and performance and involve risks and uncertainties and that actual results may differ materially from those contemplated by such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause these differences include, but are not limited to, failure to complete anticipated sales under negotiations, lack of revenue growth, client discontinuances, failure to realize improvements in performance, efficiency, and profitability, and adverse developments with respect to litigation or increased litigation costs, the operation or performance of the Company’s business units or the market price of its common stock. Additional factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated within this press release can also be found on the Company’s website. The Company disclaims any responsibility to update any forward-looking statements.
NEW YORK (AP) — Ahead of the 2022 school year, the education technology company 21stCentEd was seeking to expand its presence in New York City’s public schools. So they turned to a man, Terence Banks, whose new consulting firm promised to connect clients with top government stakeholders.
Banks wasn’t a registered lobbyist. His day job, at the time, was as a supervisor in the city’s subway system. But he had at least one platinum connection: His older brother, David Banks, is New York City’s schools chancellor, overseeing the nation’s largest school system.
Within a month of the hire, 21stCentEd had secured a private meeting with the schools chancellor. In the two years since that October 2022 meeting, more than $1.4 million in Education Department funds have flowed to the company, nearly tripling its previous total, records show.
The siblings — along with a third brother, Philip Banks, who serves as New York City’s deputy mayor of public safety — are now enmeshed in a sprawling federal probe that has touched several high-ranking members of Mayor Eric Adams’ administration.
Federal investigators seized phones last week from all three brothers and at least three other top city officials, including Police Commissioner Edward Caban, who resigned Thursday. Tom Donlon, a retired FBI official, was sworn in Friday as the interim police commissioner.
The exact nature of the investigation — or investigations — has not been disclosed. Among other things, federal authorities are investigating the former police commissioner’s twin brother, James Caban, a former police sergeant who runs a nightclub security business.
On Wednesday, a city operations coordinator was fired after a bar owner in Brooklyn told NBC New York that he had been pressured by the aide into hiring the police commissioner’s brother to make noise complaints against his business go away.
Federal investigators are also scrutinizing whether Terence Banks’ consulting firm, the Pearl Alliance, broke the law by leveraging his family connections to help private companies secure city contracts, according to a person familiar with the matter. The person spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to disclose information about the investigations.
All three Banks brothers have denied wrongdoing. David and Terence Banks have said they don’t believe they are the target of the investigation. But government watchdogs say the family’s overlapping work in the private and public sector may have run afoul of conflict of interest guardrails as well as city and state laws on procurement lobbying.
“It has the appearance of Terence Banks using his family connections to help his client and enrich himself,” said Susan Lerner, the executive director of Common Cause New York, a good-government group.
Timothy Sini, an attorney for Terence Banks, did not respond to specific questions about the consulting firm. But he wrote in an email, “We have been assured by the Government that Mr. Banks is not a target of this investigation.”
Speaking at a news conference Friday, David Banks said FBI agents had not returned his phone, and he declined to answer questions about his relationship to his brother’s consulting firm. “We are cooperating with a federal investigation,” he said.
City ethics rules ban relatives from lobbying each other. At minimum, David Banks would be required to secure a waiver from the city’s Conflicts of Interest Board before meeting with a company represented by his brother, according to John Kaehny, the executive director of the good-government group Reinvent Albany.
“It’s surprisingly arrogant or obtuse that David Banks, one of the city’s top government officials, would ignore this basic, commonsense, conflict of interest rule,” Kaehny said in an email.
Neither the Department of Education nor the Conflicts of Interest Board would say whether a waiver was requested.
A spokesperson for the Department of Education, Nathaniel Styer, said all spending linked to 21stCentEd had come from individual schools and districts, which can make purchases of less than $25,000 without the agency’s approval.
The Utah-based company trains teachers and provides curriculums focused on artificial intelligence, robotics, and automation.
Dylan Howard, a spokesperson for the company, said Terence Banks was hired “to help 21stCentEd present our STEM solutions and services to decision makers within New York City public schools.” He said they learned of his consulting firm through a 21stCentEd employee who has since left the company.
The spokesperson could not say how the meeting with the school’s chancellor came about or whether Terence Banks attended. He added that Terence Banks had provided “no value” to the company and that his contract was terminated last December.
21stCentEd was one of several companies with city contracts that hired Terence Banks’ consulting firm, according to a website for the Pearl Alliance that was taken down after news of the federal investigations emerged last week.
Another listed client, SaferWatch, sells panic buttons to schools and police departments. Since August of 2023, it has been awarded more than $67,000 in city contracts, according to city records.
The third Banks brother, Philip Banks, maintains wide influence over the NYPD as deputy mayor for public safety. A spokesperson for SaferWatch, Hank Sheinkopf, declined to comment. The NYPD did not respond to email inquiries.
In total, the Pearl Alliance listed nine clients with millions of dollars in city contracts, including a software business, a grocery delivery start-up, and a company that specializes in concrete. At least seven of the companies have past or current contracts with the city.
It wasn’t clear whether the federal inquiry into the consulting firm run by Terence Banks was part of the investigation into the police commissioner’s brother.
Ray Martin, the city official who was said to have pressured a bar owner to hire James Caban, was “terminated for cause” Thursday after the mayor’s office learned of the allegations, according to Fabien Levy, the deputy mayor for communications.
The bar owner, Shamel Kelly, told WNBC-TV that Martin gave him what felt like an ultimatum last year to either pay James Caban or risk having his business shut down. Kelly said James Caban demanded an upfront fee of $2,500. He said he had been interviewed Thursday by federal investigators and the city’s Department of Investigation. The U.S. attorney’s office and the Department of Investigation declined comment.
Attempts to reach Martin were not immediately successful. A cellphone number listed in his name was no longer working.
A lawyer for James Caban said he “unequivocally denies any wrongdoing” and has cooperated fully with law enforcement. Once the investigation is complete, lawyer Sean Hecker said, “it will be clear that these claims are unfounded and lack merit.”
Both David and Philip Banks remain in their government positions. An attorney for Philip Banks, Benjamin Brafman, declined to comment.
At a press briefing Tuesday, Adams noted his relationship with the Banks family dates back decades, to when he served in the police department under the brothers’ father. He said he never met with Terence Banks about city business.
“I’ve known the Banks families for years,” Adams said. “And my knowing someone, I hold them to the same standard that I hold myself to.”
BOSTON — A top lobbyist for small businesses said that he does not see lawmakers giving a “primary focus” to that sector, with hefty bills on economic development and health care missing an opportunity to lift up Main Street businesses.
“I think they need to be a top discussion item,” said Jon Hurst of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, adding that there was “not enough” targeted legislation for small businesses moving through the State House.
RAM joined with the Mass. Restaurant Association and the National Federation of Independent Business at a lobbying event inside the capitol on Wednesday, timed about two and a half months away from the end of large-scale lawmaking for this term.
“This is an election year. This is the year in which we do an economic development bill. Yet, what level of discussion has there been on helping our main streets, helping our small businesses? They are the backbone, they are the majority of our jobs,” Hurst told the News Service.
He added that he saw “a general taking-for-granted of small businesses out there.”
Rep. Paul McMurtry, co-chair of the Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Businesses, told the News Service he agreed that “sometimes in policymaking, we take small businesses for granted.”
“And a lot of us in the small business community focus on running and managing and operating that business day-to-day, don’t have time to focus on the policies and legislative issues,” added the Dedham Democrat, who owns and operates Dedham Community Theatre.
NFIB’s Christopher Carlozzi told the crowd in a State House meeting room that Gov. Maura Healey’s so-called Municipal Empowerment Act “should be on a lot of your radar screens.”
The governor’s bill would open the door for increases in local-option meals and occupancy taxes, and Carlozzi said he saw “quite a few mayors and town officials” at the bill’s committee hearing who were ready to embrace the new revenue tools.
“If you’re a restaurant, if you’re in hospitality, we don’t want consumers to find a reason to go to New Hampshire, or go to Maine, or go to another state and vacation. We want them spending their dollars in Massachusetts,” Carlozzi said.
While Healey’s bill is still pending, top Democrats haven’t advanced it and have shown little interest in the local option taxes, apart from a potential new tax on high-dollar real estate transactions to fund affordable housing investments.
Sen. Bruce Tarr listed off other “challenges” that face small businesses, including the cost of workers’ compensation and Paid Family and Medical Leave contributions.
“There are so many issues when every day you’re running a small business and it’s Thursday night, and you’re thinking about making payroll for Friday,” Tarr said, “and you’re wondering, ‘How am I going to get through that next day, or that next week, with all of these different things that are coming at me?’”
Public policy affects both the “very flat to down sales” numbers as well as the “very high costs” that local shops must deal with, Hurst said.
“And particularly for small businesses, some of the costs out there are just choking them,” Hurst added. “It’s one thing, if you’re big companies or you’re very profitable margin type of companies, whether it be biotech, health care, technology, banking and so forth. They’re doing OK, but their customers are not. The small businesses are not. So we have to start focusing on, what can we do to help them?”
While that could be a “major thrust” of the economic development bill, he said he sees legislators’ eyes attracted to areas like biotech and climate technology.
“I mean they’re perfectly important for our economy, but there should be an equal thrust on helping our small businesses survive and thrive,” he said.
Tarr, a Gloucester Republican, said lawmakers were faced in the near-term with “a number of vehicles” that could carry small business priorities, including the Senate budget bill scheduled for debate next week. Senators have filed 1,100 amendments to the bill, including around 110 from Tarr, some dealing with the sales tax or health insurance purchasing cooperatives.
The Retailers Association passed out a list of four priority bills at the event, though one of them — related to insurance purchasing cooperatives — has already been effectively relegated to the dustbin by a joint committee.
Sen. Michael Moore’s bill (S 687) would allow insurers to “provide members of small business group purchasing cooperatives with year-end incentives based on administrative efficiencies resulting from the group purchase of coverage,” according to a summary.
The Joint Committee on Financial Services sent it to study in February. It remained one of the focuses of the lobby day, though, and Moore told the crowd he would potentially file the language as an amendment to the pending economic development bill.
The Millbury Democrat said he expected action on the eco-dev bill “over the next month and a half or two months,” a timeline that could have Democrats scrambling like they did two years ago when they couldn’t agree to a bill at the July 31 deadline.
“There’s a big health care bill [in the House] this week,” RAM’s Hurst told the News Service. “How much of that is focused on lowering the cost of health insurance for small businesses? Not seeing much on that, right?”
Other priorities on the Retailers Association list included bills dealing with credit card surcharging (Rep. James Murphy, H 1101), workers’ compensation premium payment schedules (Sen. Susan Moran, S 695), and a proposed “vendors’ collection allowance” to compensate businesses for collecting and remitting taxes (Sen. John Velis, S 1957).
The credit card surcharge bill is in House Rules, the workers’ comp bill was sent to Senate Ways and Means in March, and the vendors’ allowance bill is still before the Joint Committee on Revenue.
Ahead of their lobbying stops around the building, Jessica Muradian of the Mass. Restaurant Association also prepped attendees on opposition to the tipped wage ballot question. The head of the Restaurant Association is among the plaintiffs in a pending Supreme Judicial Court challenge to the question’s certification to appear before voters.
Muradian said that “we will find out by the end of June if we won that case or not. If we win it, then there’s no more ballot question. If we don’t win it, we fight on and we win it at the ballot in November with your help.”
Moore has conducted his own unscientific poll of restaurant workers, he told the business owners.
“I have, on occasion, been out and asked and tried to survey some of them. and when you actually explain what the law will do, they do understand this is going to hurt them, that their wage is going to go down,” he said, adding that policymakers should focus on the tipped wage issue “because I don’t think a lot of people really understand what the effects are going to be, and also the employees who are benefiting from the current system.”
For McMurtry’s part, he sees a number of small businesses, including his own, still affected by negative implications of COVID-19. He said the Legislature should “put some focus on the small business community” as local outfits continue to emerge from the pandemic.
McMurtry told the News Service that business at his 97-year-old cinema is “still challenging” post-COVID, but he’s staying the course.
“We get the right movie, we do well,” the Dedham Democrat said.
WASHINGTON — The young voices in the messages left for North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis were laughing, but the words were ominous.
“OK, listen, if you ban TikTok I will find you and shoot you,” one said, giggling and talking over other young voices in the background. “I’ll shoot you and find you and cut you into pieces.” Another threatened to kill Tillis, and then take their own life.
Tillis’s office says it has received around 1,000 calls about TikTok since the House passed legislation this month that would ban the popular app if its China-based owner doesn’t sell its stake. TikTok has been urging its users — many of whom are young — to call their representatives, even providing an easy link to the phone numbers. “The government will take away the community that you and millions of other Americans love,” read one pop-up message from the company when users opened the app.
Tillis, who supports the House bill, reported the call to the police. “What I hated about that was it demonstrates the enormous influence social media platforms have on young people,” he said in an interview.
While more aggressive than most, TikTok’s extensive lobbying campaign is the latest attempt by the tech industry to head off any new legislation — and it’s a fight the industry usually wins. For years Congress has failed to act on bills that would protect users’ privacy, protect children from online threats, make companies more liable for their content and put loose guardrails around artificial intelligence, among other things.
“I mean, it’s almost embarrassing,” says Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va., a former tech executive who is also supporting the TikTok bill and has long tried to push his colleagues to regulate the industry. “I would hate for us to maintain our perfect zero batting average on tech legislation.”
Some see the TikTok bill as the best chance for now to regulate the tech industry and set a precedent, if a narrow one focused on just one company. President Joe Biden has said he would sign the House bill, which overwhelmingly passed 362-65 this month after a rare 50-0 committee vote moving it to the floor.
But it’s already running into roadblocks in the Senate, where there is little unanimity on the best approach to ensure that China doesn’t access private data from the app’s 170 million U.S. users or influence them through its algorithms.
Other factors are holding the Senate back. The tech industry is broad and falls under the jurisdiction of several different committees. Plus, the issues at play don’t fall cleanly on partisan lines, making it harder for lawmakers to agree on priorities and how legislation should be written. Senate Commerce Committee Chairwoman Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., has so far been reluctant to embrace the TikTok bill, for example, calling for hearings first and suggesting that the Senate may want to rewrite it.
“We’re going through a process,” Cantwell said. “It’s important to get it right.”
Warner, on the other hand, says the House bill is the best chance to get something done after years of inaction. And he says that the threatening calls from young people are a good example of why the legislation is needed: “It makes the point, do we really want that kind of messaging being able to be manipulated by the Communist Party of China?”
Some lawmakers are worried that blocking TikTok could anger millions of young people who use the app, a crucial segment of voters in November’s election. But Warner says “the debate has shifted” from talk of an outright ban a year ago to the House bill which would force TikTok, a wholly owned subsidiary of Chinese technology firm ByteDance Ltd., to sell its stake for the app to continue operating.
Vice President Kamala Harris, in a television interview that aired Sunday, acknowledged the popularity of the app and that it has become an income stream for many people. She said the administration does not intend to ban TikTok but instead deal with its ownership. “We understand its purpose and its utility and the enjoyment that it gives a lot of folks,” Harris told ABC’s ”This Week.”
Republicans are divided. While most of them support the TikTok legislation, others are wary of overregulation and the government targeting one specific entity.
“The passage of the House TikTok ban is not just a misguided overreach; it’s a draconian measure that stifles free expression, tramples constitutional rights, and disrupts the economic pursuits of millions of Americans,” Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul posted on X, formerly Twitter.
Hoping to persuade their colleagues to support the bill, Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee have called for intelligence agencies to declassify information about TikTok and China’s ownership that has been provided to senators in classified briefings.
“It is critically important that the American people, especially TikTok users, understand the national security issues at stake,” the senators said in a joint statement.
Blumenthal and Blackburn have separate legislation they have been working on for several years aimed at protecting children’s online safety, but the Senate has yet to vote on it. Efforts to regulate online privacy have also stalled, as has legislation to make technology companies more liable for the content they publish.
And an effort by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to quickly move legislation that would regulate the burgeoning artificial intelligence industry has yet to show any results.
Schumer has said very little about the TikTok bill or whether he might put it on the Senate floor.
“The Senate will review the legislation when it comes over from the House,” was all he would say after the House passed the bill.
South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds, a Republican who has worked with Schumer on the artificial intelligence effort, says he thinks the Senate can eventually pass a TikTok bill, even if it’s a different version. He says the classified briefings “convinced the vast majority of members” that they have to address the collection of data from the app and TikTok’s ability to push out misinformation to users.
“I think it’s a clear danger to our country if we don’t act,” he said. “It does not have to be done in two weeks, but it does have to be done.”
Rounds says he and Schumer are still holding regular meetings on artificial intelligence, as well, and will soon release some of their ideas publicly. He says he’s optimistic that the Senate will eventually act to regulate the tech industry.
“There will be some areas that we will not try to get into, but there are some areas that we have very broad consensus on,” Rounds says.
Tillis says senators may have to continue laying the groundwork for a while and educating colleagues on why some regulation is needed, with an eye toward passing legislation in the next Congress.
“It can’t be the wild, wild west,” Tillis said.
___
Associated Press writer Stephen Groves contributed to this report.
WASHINGTON—In what many of his congressional colleagues have described as the most noble act of his storied career, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced Thursday that upon his death, he would donate his body to lobbyists for research. “By studying this extraordinary specimen capable of such tremendous feats of opportunism, lobbyists will gain great insights into the human capacity for corruption,” said Don Stewart, McConnell’s deputy chief of staff, explaining that lobbyists would be able to take what they learned from the remains of a seven-term senator without scruple and discover new ways to buy and pay for lawmakers. “They will be asking questions like: How much influence can the human body peddle? Was there something unique in Sen. McConnell’s genetic makeup that allowed him to engage in shameless obstructionism and fight against campaign finance reform for all those decades? And is this a quality that can be replicated in future generations of congressional leaders? The advances for the field of lobbying could be quite profound.” Reached for comment, top D.C. lobbyists said the donation of the senator’s body would finally allow them to pinpoint the exact location of the great emptiness inside of McConnell that could only be filled with cash.
Americans Describe What It’s Like Surviving A Mass Shooting
BIRMINGHAM, Ala., January 25, 2024 (Newswire.com)
– Gerrick Wilkins, candidate for Congress in Alabama’s 6th District, today unveiled his plan to clean up Congress.
“Congress’ job approval performance rating is at an all time low. We need to restore people’s faith in our system of government and it starts with cleaning the House,” said Wilkins who has just recently published a book on term limits, “Unshackling Democracy: Embracing Term Limits, Empowering Citizens.”
Wilkins’ plan of action in cleaning up Congress:
Term limiting Congress.
End insider trading on legislation by requiring Congressional members to put their personal finances in a blind trust.
Require Congressional members to join the same pension system as all other federal employees.
No more special exemptions from laws Congress passes, such as Obamacare.
Require a ten-year cooling off period for Congressional members from being able to lobby.
Prohibit immediate family members from being paid federal lobbyists and serving on foreign corporate boards.
“We need term limits. Too many politicians have gotten rich in DC, because they put their personal wealth ahead of the people. It is time to restore our founding fathers’ vision of a citizens legislature,” said Wilkins.
Wilkins is also concerned with insider trading. During the 2020 elections, 302 members of Congress accepted campaign donations from pharmaceutical companies totaling $14 million. Pfizer, who has developed one of the vaccines, has a PAC that donated to 228 members. Worse yet, 48 members invested in Pfizer.
Wilkins further says, “It is time for more than endless discussion about policy, we need to take action to restore the people’s faith in our government. By requiring members to put their money in a blind trust, we can stop them from benefiting from legislation they support or oppose. Members should be voting for the people not financial gain.”
“When Congress enacts bad legislation such as Obamacare, Congress should not be exempt. They need to live by the legislation they pass,” said Wilkins.
Wilkins is a person of action. This is the third major plan he has announced. Last month he unveiled his comprehensive “America First Border Security Plan” and earlier this month he announced his “America First Economic Overhaul Plan.” Wilkins further says, “It is time for more than just endless discussion about policy. We need to take action to restore the people’s faith in our government.”
For more information on Gerrick Wilkins, please visit www.WilkinsforAL.com or reach out to:
It’s that time of year again: Leaders, business titans, philanthropists and celebs descend on the Swiss ski town of Davos to discuss the fate of the world and do deals/shots with the global elite at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum.
This year’s theme: “Rebuilding trust.” Prescient, given the dumpster fire the world seems to be turning into lately, both literally (climate change) and figuratively (where to even begin?).
As always, the Davos great and good will be rubbing shoulders with some of the world’s absolute top-drawer dirtbags. While there’s been a distinct dearth of Russian oligarchs in attendance at the WEF since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and Donald Trump will be tied up with the Iowa caucus, there are still plenty of would-be autocrats, dictators, thugs, extortionists, misery merchants, spoilers and political pariahs on the Davos guest list.
1. Argentine President Javier Milei
Known as the Donald Trump of Argentina — and also as “The Madman” and “The Wig” — the chainsaw-wielding Javier Milei has it all: a fanatical supporter base, background as a TV shock jock, libertarian anarcho-capitalist policies (except when it comes to abortion), and a … memorable … hairdo.
A long-time Davos devotee (he’s been attending the WEF for years), Milei’s libertarian policies have turned from kooky thought bubbles to concerning reality after he was elected president of South America’s second-largest economy, riding a wave of discontent with the political establishment (sound familiar?). The question now is how far Milei will go in delivering on his campaign promises to hack back public service and state spending, close the Argentine central bank and drop the peso.
If you do get stuck talking to Milei in the congress center or on the slopes, here are some conversation starters …
Rumor has it that Mohammed bin Salman will make his first in-person WEF appearance at this year’s event, accompanied by a giant posse of top Saudi officials.
It’s the ultimate redemption arc for the repressive authoritarian ruler of a country with an appalling human rights record — who, according to United States intelligence, personally ordered the brutal assassination of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018.
Rumor has it that Mohammed bin Salman will make his first in-person WEF appearance at this year’s event | Leon Neal/Getty Images
Perhaps MBS would still be a WEF pariah — consigned to rubbing shoulders with mere B-listers at his own Davos in the desert — if it were not for that other one-time Davos-darling-turned-persona-non-grata: Russian President Vladimir Putin. By launching his invasion of Ukraine, which killed thousands of civilians and hundreds of thousands of troops, Putin managed to push the West back into MBS’ embrace. Guess it’s all just oil under the bridge now.
Here’s a piece of free advice: Try to avoid being caught getting a signature MBS fist-bump. Unless, of course, you’re the next person on our list …
3. Jared Kushner, founder of Affinity Partners
Jared Kushner is the closest anyone on the mountain is likely to come to Trump, the former — and possibly future — billionaire baron-cum-anti-elitist president of the United States of America.
On the one hand, a chat with The Donald’s son-in-law in the days just after the Iowa caucus would probably be quite a get for the Davos devotee. On other hand … it’s Jared Kushner.
The 43-year-old, who is married to Ivanka Trump and served as a senior adviser to the former president during his time in office, leveraged his stint in the White House to build up a lucrative consulting career, focused mainly on the Middle East.
Kushner’s private equity firm, Affinity Partners, is largely funded through Gulf countries. That includes a $2 billion investment from the Saudi Public Investment Fund, led by bin Salman — which was, coincidentally, pushed through despite objections by the crown prince’s own advisers.
Kushner struck up a friendship and alliance with MBS during his father-in-law’s term in office, raising major conflict-of-interest suspicions for the Trump administration — especially when the then-U.S. president refused to condemn the Saudi leader in Jamal Khashoggi’s murder, despite the CIA concluding he was directly involved.
Running Azerbaijan is something of a family business for the Aliyevs — Ilham assumed power after the death of his father, Heydar Aliyev, an ex-Soviet KGB officer who ruled the country for decades. And the junior Aliyev changed Azerbaijan’s constitution to pave the path to power for the next generation of his family — and appointed his own wife as vice president to boot.
5. Chinese Premier Li Qiang
Li Qiang is Chinese President Xi Jinping’s ultra-loyal right-hand man, and will represent his boss and his country at the World Economic Forum this year.
Li’s claim to infamy: imposing a brutal lockdown on the entirety of Shanghai for weeks during the coronavirus pandemic, which trapped its 25 million-plus inhabitants at home while many struggled to get food, tend to their animals or seek medical help — and tanking the city’s economy in the process.
Li’s also the guy selling (and whitewashing) China’s Uyghur policy in the Islamic world. In case you need a refresher, China has detained Uyghurs, who are mostly Muslim, in internment camps in the northwest region of Xinjiang, where there have been allegations of torture, slavery, forced sterilization, sexual abuse and brainwashing. China’s actions have been branded genocide by the U.S. State Department, and as potential crimes against humanity by the United Nations.
Li Qiang will represent his boss and his country at the World Economic Forum this year | Johannes Simon/Getty Images
Nicknamed “the Napoleon of Africa” in a nod to his campaign to seize power in 1994, Paul Kagame has ruled over the land of a thousand hills since. He’s often praised for overseeing what is probably the greatest development success story of modern Africa; he’s also a dictator.
Forced from office in 2018 by mass protests following the murder of investigative journalist Ján Kuciak and his fiancée Martina Kušnírová, Fico rose from the political ashes to become Slovakian prime minister for the fourth time late last year. His Smer party ran a Putin-friendly campaign, pledging to end all military support for Ukraine.
Slovakian courts are still working through multiple organized crime cases stemming from the last time Smer was in power, involving oligarchs alleged to have profited from state contracts; former top police brass and senior military intelligence officers; and parliamentarians from all three parties in Fico’s new coalition government.
8. President of Hungary Katalin Novák
Katalin Novák, elected Hungarian president in 2022, must’ve pulled the short straw: she’s been sent to Davos to fly the flag for the EU’s pariah state. Luckily, the 46-year-old is used to being the odd one out at a shindig: She’s both the first woman and the youngest-ever Hungarian president.
It’s her thoughts on the gender pay gap, though, that ought to get attention at the famously male-dominated World Economic Forum: In an infamous video posted back in late 2020, Novák told the sisterhood: “Do not believe that women have to constantly compete with men. Do not believe that every waking moment of our lives must be spent with comparing ourselves to men, and that we should work in at least the same position, for at least the same pay they do.” That’s us told.
9. Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet
You may be surprised to see Hun Manet on this list: The new, Western-educated Cambodian prime minister has been touted in some circles as a potential modernizer and reformer.
But Hun Manet is less a breath of fresh air and a lot more continuation of the same stale story. Having inherited his position from his father, the longtime autocrat Hun Sen, Hun Manet has shown no signs of wanting to reform or modernize Cambodia. While some say it’s too early to tell where he’ll land (given his dad’s still on the scene, along with his Communist loyalists), the fact is: Many hallmarks of autocracy are still present in Cambodia. Repression of the opposition? Check. Dodgy “elections”? Check. Widespread graft and clientelism? Check and check.
10. Qatar Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim al-Thani
How has a small kingdom of 2.6 million inhabitants in the Persian Gulf managed to play a starring role in so many explosive scandals?
Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim al-Thani is the prime minister of Qatar, a country that’s played a starring role in many explosive scandals | Chris J. Ratcliffe/AFP via Getty Images
You’d think that sort of record would see Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim al-Thani shunned by the world’s top brass. Nah! Just this month, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with the Qatari leader and told him the U.S. was “deeply grateful for your ongoing leadership in this effort, for the tireless work which you undertook and that continues, to try to free the remaining hostages.”
See you on the slopes, Mohammed!
11. Polish President Andrzej Duda
When you compare Polish President Andrzej Duda to some of the others on this list, he doesn’t seem to measure up. He’s not a dictator running a violent petro-state, hasn’t invaded any neighbors or even wielded a chainsaw on stage.
But Duda is yesterday’s man. As the last one standing from Poland’s nationalist Law and Justice party that was swept out of office last year, Duda’s holding on for dear life to his own relevance, doing his best to act as a spoiler against the Donald Tusk-led government by wielding his veto powers and harboring convicted lawmakers. All of which is to say: When you catch up with President Duda at Davos, don’t assume he’s speaking for Poland.
12. Amin Nasser, CEO of Aramco
The Saudi Arabian state oil and gas company is Aramco — the world’s biggest energy firm — and Amin Nasser is its boss. If you read Aramco’s press releases, you’d be forgiven for assuming it is also the world’s biggest champion of the green energy transition. Spoiler alert: It’s far from it.
Exhibit A: Aramco is reportedly a top corporate polluter, with environment nongovernmental organization ClientEarth reporting that it accounts for more than 4 percent of the globe’s greenhouse gas emissions since 1965. Exhibit B: Bloomberg reported in 2021 that it understated its carbon footprint by as much as 50 percent.
Nasser, meanwhile, has criticized the idea that climate action should mean countries “either shut down or slow down big time” their fossil fuel production. Say that to Al Gore’s face!
This article has been updated to reflect the fact Shou Zi Chew is no longer going to attend the World Economic Forum.
Dionisios Sturis, Peter Snowdon, Suzanne Lynch and Paul de Villepin contributed reporting.
BRUSSELS — Eva Kaili and Francesco Giorgi had left nothing to chance.
The duo that would later become the most famous — many would say infamous — couple in the European Union capital had been gearing up for this moment for years.
As Qatar prepared to host the 2022 FIFA World Cup, they were among the Gulf state’s fiercest advocates in Brussels, defending its record on human rights and fending off criticism of its treatment of migrant workers.
And now, less than a week before the high-profile soccer tournament was to kick off, it was all coming to a head. At a crucial hearing in the European Parliament, Qatar’s Labor Minister Ali bin Samikh Al Marri — aka “the Doctor” — would come in person to plead his case before the chamber’s human rights committee.
In the preceding days, Kaili, a Greek lawmaker who was then a vice president of the European Parliament, had ramped up her efforts. According to public records, interviews and a cache of investigative files seen by POLITICO, she had flown back and forth to Doha and spent hours pleading and cajoling fellow lawmakers to give Qatar a clean bill of health on human rights.
At several points, she turned to her partner, Giorgi, for advice. “Who else should I talk to?” she texted him on November 14, according to transcriptions of her WhatsApp messages included in the police investigation files.
While Kaili worked the phones, Giorgi, an Italian parliamentary assistant, had been putting the finishing touches to the Qatari minister’s speech. In police surveillance photographs taken three days before the hearing, he can be seen poring over the text with his longtime boss, Pier Antonio Panzeri — a former EU lawmaker who Belgian prosecutors would later describe as the mastermind of a sweeping cash-for-influence operation known as “Qatargate.”
Per their usual working method, the Italian-speaking Panzeri wrote the speech in his native language and then passed it on to Giorgi for translation. With one day to go, Giorgi and Kaili huddled with Al Marri in his suite at the 5-star Steigenberger Wiltcher’s hotel, according to hotel video recordings obtained by the police.
Finally, it was the big day. As the minister took to the stage on November 14, 2022, Kaili nervously texted her partner again to ask if she should show up in person.
“Don’t come,” Giorgi replied via WhatsApp. “I’m afraid you will be exposed. To enter with the baby, everyone will notice u.”
She replied: “I don’t want to be exposed.”
So she stayed with the couple’s child, while the rest of the key suspects in what would become the Qatargate scandal crowded into the auditorium where Al Marri — the man police would later describe as the leader in his country’s efforts to corrupt the European Parliament — was taking to the stage.
At a hearing, Ali bin Samikh Al Marri laid out the case for Qatar’s labor reforms and why his country deserved the world’s respect despite reports alleging abuse of migrant laborers | Pierre Albouy/EFE via EPA
If everything went well and Al Marri came out satisfied with their efforts over many months of lobbying, the Italian former lawmaker stood to make good on a long-standing business relationship he and Giorgi would later tell police was worth more than €4 million.
And if it failed? Nobody wanted to know.
As Al Marri spoke, laying out the case for Qatar’s labor reforms and why his country deserved the world’s respect despite reports alleging abuse of migrant laborers, Kaili and her partner of five years WhatsApped back and forth, as one might do while watching a major sporting event from two different locations.
“So Arabic and speaks without reading,” Giorgi texted.
A few minutes later, Kaili commented: “He’s losing it a bit.”
As other lawmakers took to the floor following Al Marri’s speech, she bristled at criticism of Qatar.
“Who is this fat,” she texted her partner, referring to one lawmaker, adding an adjective which to her was an insult: “Communist.”
As Al Marri wrapped up, the Greek lawmaker asked: “Why he didn’t follow the speech.”
Finally, it was over.
Giorgi texted Kaili: “Ela, we did everything we could.”
For the watch party, a major milestone had been crossed. A senior Qatari representative had been given a chance to address criticism in what could have been a fiercely critical environment.
So far, so good. Except what they didn’t know was that Giorgi and Panzeri had been under surveillance by Belgian secret services for months, suspected of taking part in a sweeping cash-for-influence scheme under which Qatar paid to obtain specific legislative outcomes. Their communications, including with Kaili and other suspects, would be scooped up as part of the wiretaps and the subsequent investigations.
Eva Kaili maintains her defense of Qatar was part of her job as a representative of the European Union | Julien Warnand/EFE via EPA
Kaili denies any wrongdoing in a scheme in which police say Panzeri and others accepted money from Qatar, Morocco and Mauritania in exchange for pushing their interests in the European Parliament. Kaili maintains her defense of Qatar was part of her job as a representative of the European Union and that the investigation into her actions breached the parliamentary immunity enjoyed by sitting MEPs.
There is no other evidence in the hundreds of pages of wiretapping by the secret services that indicates Kaili directly received money from Qatar or other countries. Giorgi has provided details of the operation to police, but his lawyer has argued his statements were extracted under duress.
And yet, as the pro-Qatar operation turned to its next challenges, Belgian investigators who had taken over the probe from the secret service were closing in.
On the morning of December 9, the trap slammed shut. Kaili, Giorgi, Panzeri and a couple of other suspects were arrested and thrown into jail on charges of corruption, money laundering and participating in a “criminal conspiracy.” Two other members of the European Parliament, Marc Tarabella and Andrea Cozzolino, would also be arrested and charged.
Police published photographs of bags stuffed full of hundreds of thousands of euros which they had recovered in Panzeri’s flat, at Kaili and Giorgi’s home and in a suitcase wheeled by Kaili’s father — instantly turning their probe into a page one news story for outlets around the Continent.
* * *
The shock arrests of one of the highest-ranking members of the European Parliament, her boyfriend and their alleged accomplices smashed open a window onto a murky world of lobbying for foreign governments in the heart of EU democracy.
The Brussels bubble, as the EU’s policymaking apparatus is known, likes to think of itself as a global paragon of democracy, transparency and respect for human rights. There’s another side of the EU capital, however — an ecosystem of hidden connections and low-grade corruption, of back-scratching politicians and the filter feeders that gravitate toward centers of political power and public largesse.
While the Qatargate case has yet to go to court and several of the key players, including Kaili, insist they are innocent of the charges, the scandal has already led to reforms. The European Parliament has introduced changes bolstering transparency, and the creation of an ethics body establishing common standards for EU civil servants is being negotiated.
The story of Qatargate is also still being written. And nobody better captures the human element of this complex affair — and the cozy, transactional world in which it took place — than Kaili and Giorgi.
Start with Kaili: A political celebrity in her native Greece, where she’d gained fame as a TV presenter, at the time of her arrest she was one of Brussels’ most prominent politicians, widely believed to be bound for higher office either within the EU system or back home. She’d recently had her first child with Giorgi, an ambitious parliamentary assistant nine years her junior whose wavy blond hair and dimpled smile were well known in the European Parliament.
Together, they formed a formidable power couple on the Brussels circuit — as well as a shining example of what Europeans hailing from their respective Mediterranean homelands can achieve in the EU system if they play their cards right.
And yet, in an instant, it was all over. Both of them were in jail, their reputations in tatters, their infant child outside and in the care of family members. In the space of a single morning, the EU capital’s golden couple had become the most notorious duo in town.
Pier Antonio Panzeri hired Francesco Giorgi as an intern in 2009 | European Union
To understand what propelled this sudden plunge, it helps to dial back the clock to the earliest days of their relationship, five years before anyone heard of the so-called Qatargate scandal.
It was a Monday in early 2017. Giorgi was at work doing a familiar task — interpreting for his language-challenged boss, Pier Antonio Panzeri, at a conference in Parliament.
The two men went back a long way. Panzeri had been Giorgi’s boss for nearly a decade already, having hired him first as an intern in 2009 and then as a full-blown accredited assistant. The elder Italian was a well-known politician in Parliament — a shrewd operator on the left wing of Italy’s Partito Democratico, a trade union veteran from Milan who turned to international affairs late in his 15-year parliamentary career.
But he was a man of his generation — only really comfortable speaking in Italian and, according to Giorgi, unable to switch on a computer.
For all of those things, there was Giorgi. Then aged around 30, he was in a good place professionally and socially. Like thousands of Italians who flock to Brussels every year, he looked to the EU system as a land of opportunity. And the system had served him well. Paid handsomely, he had a front-row seat on his boss’s dealings, which included travel to places like Rabat, Morocco and Doha, Qatar, as well as more mundane tasks.
But nearly 10 years in, Giorgi was ready for change. And little did he know, the embodiment of that change was about to walk in the door.
While Kaili and Giorgi had seen each other in the halls of the European Parliament a few times since her election in 2014, according to her interviews with Belgian police, that Monday meeting in Brussels would stick out for them as their first proper encounter.
The mutual interest must have been powerful because it’s hard to overstate the disparity, in terms of age and political and financial power, that separated Giorgi from Kaili as she walked in, heading a NATO delegation.
To put it bluntly, Giorgi was a cog in the machine with no political weight. By contrast, Kaili was already a well-established politician in Brussels and very well plugged-in with Greece’s political and business elite. She had barreled her way up through the ranks of the Greek socialist party, PASOK, while still in her twenties, before making the jump to the European Parliament in 2014. In her office, Kaili employed no fewer than three Giorgis.
And yet the young Italian, who’d grown up sailing in the Mediterranean and skiing in the French Alps, decided to try his luck. According to Kaili’s testimony to police, after this initial encounter, the two of them dined “two or three times.” Giorgi spent the better part of a year trying to woo the Greek lawmaker, but it was tough going as she claimed to be far too busy with her work to carve out time for a serious relationship.
It was only after about a year, she said, that things became “serious.” Marking the transition from casual dating to partnership, they made a shared commitment: co-investing in an apartment located just behind their shared place of work, the European Parliament. It was Christmas Eve, 2019, according to Giorgi’s statements to police.
After Kaili returned to Greece in 2019 to campaign for reelection, Giorgi joined her a few months later. In February 2021, they were joined by a baby girl.
Eva Kaili returned to Greece in 2019 to campaign for reelection | Menelaos Myrillas/SOOC/AFP via Getty Images
But that’s where their story departs from the norm. Most wage-earning couples don’t live surrounded by stacks of cash. Most EU bubble couples don’t possess a “go bag” brimming with bank notes, or end up as suspects in sprawling corruption probes.
Part of the explanation can be found in their link to Panzeri, the Svengali-like third wheel in their relationship, whom Giorgi described initially as a “father figure” and whom Kaili later called a manipulator taking advantage of her boyfriend’s “idealistic” personality.
Indeed, in his interviews with Belgian investigators, Giorgi traces back the “original sin” of his involvement in Qatargate to a deal he agreed to with Panzeri shortly after becoming his employee in 2009. Under that arrangement, Giorgi allegedly agreed to pay Panzeri back €1,500 per month of his wages in exchange for the privilege of working for him, a relatively common scheme in the Parliament. (As a point of comparison, when the scandal broke, Giorgi was earning some €6,600 per month as an assistant to a different MEP).
The deal was to prove an introduction to a transactional world in which Panzeri — as a lawmaker and later, as the head of Fight Impunity, a nongovernmental organization he launched after leaving Parliament — had no trouble accepting large sums of cash from foreign governments in exchange for services rendered.
From 2018, Giorgi and Panzeri dove headlong into a partnership allegedly based on lobbying for Qatar in exchange for big cash payments. According to Giorgi’s statements to police, they agreed on a long-term lobbying agreement worth an estimated €4.5 million and to be split 60/40, with the larger share going to Panzeri.
Once arrested, Giorgi and Panzeri would butt heads about the precise role of each in the lobbying arrangement. But one of the younger Italian’s key tasks was to pick up cash payments at various places around Brussels, often from total strangers. Once he picked up €300,000 in cash near the Royal Palace from a person driving a black Audi with Dutch license plates. Another time, the drop-off happened in a parking lot near the canal.
In total, there were around ten such drop-offs, two or three per year, with the smallest amount around €50,000.
The alleged quid pro quo was that Giorgi and Panzeri would deliver specific parliamentary and public relations outcomes to their clients, which in addition to Qatar included Morocco and Mauritania. The ever-meticulous Giorgi kept a spreadsheet on his computer on which he documented hundreds of influence activities that the network allegedly carried out between 2018 and 2022.
It records more than 300 pieces of work, using a network of aides inside parliament whom they called their “soldiers,” according to the files.
Even as they pressed their clients’ interests, they were also trying to exploit their lack of familiarity with the workings of the bubble, reporting certain actions that, according to Giorgi, they actually had no influence over.
The scheme, Giorgi later told police, “relied on the ignorance of how parliament works” — on the part of the duo’s clients.
Panzeri, through his lawyer, declined to comment for this article.
* * *
As Giorgi dug deeper into his partnership with Panzeri, his romance with Kaili was expanding into a business partnership.
While each already had other properties — including Kaili’s two apartments in Athens (which she said were worth a combined €400,000) and one in Brussels (estimated by Kaili at €160,000) and one belonging to Giorgi purchased for €145,000 in Brussels — they were soon eyeing other purchases.
Eva Kaili and Francesco Giorgi purchased a flat near the European Parliament for €375,000 in 2019 | Leon Neal/Getty Images
After the Christmas Eve purchase of their flat near the Parliament for €375,000 in 2019, they purchased a plot of land on the Greek island of Paros for €300,000 in 2021 which they planned to develop into four holiday villas and at least one swimming pool, according to files recovered from Giorgi’s computer in a folder called “Business”. Then, in 2022, came the purchase of their second apartment, a penthouse right next to the Parliament, worth €650,000, according to Giorgi’s statements to police.
All told, the couple’s joint real estate purchases amounted to more than €1.3 million over a period of two years.
In between these purchases, there were other expenses: sailing holidays, a Land Rover bought for €56,000 and a fully refurbished kitchen. On several occasions, the couple sought to minimize their outlay by exploiting their insiders’ knowledge of the system.
According to documents seized at Giorgi’s home, a Qatari diplomat helped him get a discount on the Land Rover by taking advantage of special conditions for diplomatic staff, reducing the sticker price by about €10,000.
By any normal standards, Kaili and Giorgi were already wealthy based on their income.
In addition to taking home €6,600 per month as a parliamentary assistant, Giorgi received €1,000 in social benefits for their daughter, €1,800per month from the rental to the Mauritanian ambassador and — since the envoy never occupied the flat — €1,200 in cash from two women to whom he sublet the flat for a few months.
As for Kaili, she earned about €10,000 before taxes plus about €900 in monthly rent from a flat she owned in Brussels.
All told, the couple was pulling in well over €20,000 per month, an eye-watering amount in a country where the median monthly wage is €3,507 before taxes.
Yet even these substantial monthly earnings seem not to have covered the mounting costs related to their real estate investments or make the couple feel fully secure. Despite the fact her partner was pulling in more than three times the Belgian median wage, Kaili would tell police during the first interview after her arrest: “I know that Francesco doesn’t have a lot of money because he isn’t able to partake in all of our expenses.”
What motivated this drive for accumulation? According to a person who knew Kaili professionally and asked not to be named due to fear of retaliation, the answer lies partly in her background growing up without much money in Thessaloniki, Greece. “It feels like she grew up with a lot of deprivations,” the person said. “She wanted to feel that even if she quits politics, she will have a comfortable life.”
According to a person who knew Kaili professionally, the answer to her drive for accumulation lies partly in her background growing up without much money in Thessaloniki | Sakis Mitrolidis/AFP via Getty Images
As a result, Kaili tended to be very focused on financial opportunities. “She loved people with power and money. She was always, ‘You know this event is going to have businessmen,’” the person added. “And she always liked to have houses and property stuff, but she was never into luxury stuff.”
As for Giorgi, the son of a school director and import-export entrepreneur, he grew up in more comfortable circumstances in a town near Milan.
But as the junior partner in his relationship with Kaili, he may have struggled to keep up financially with a partner who earned more than he did and kept company with wealthy entrepreneurs and crypto bros.
“I have never loved luxury. I don’t know why I lost my way,” he told police during his first interview shortly after his arrest.
* * *
In interviews with police, Giorgi admitted to being part of a scheme, with Panzeri, to take hundreds of thousands of euros in cash from foreign governments — admissions his lawyer now says he made under pressure from police who he says threatened to take away his daughter.
But Kaili always maintained that she had nothing to do with the setup. Not only does she claim ignorance about the ultimate source of much of the money found in her apartment, and on her father; she also told police that she had nothing to do with Panzeri and Giorgi’s deals with foreign governments — an argument that her partner has always backed up, telling police early on that she had nothing to do with the scheme.
Panzeri, however, says the opposite. He alleges that in the spring of 2019, Kaili was part of a pact struck with Qatar to fund several MEPs’ election campaigns to the tune of €250,000 each. Giorgi and Panzeri both attest that a deal like this took place — but disagree on whether Kaili was involved.
In any case, having forged a reputation as a tech policymaker, Kaili’s work as a lawmaker veered suddenly toward the Middle East and the world of human rights, particularly in the Gulf, from 2017 onwards the year she met Giorgi. She traveled to Qatar for the first time later that year, at the invitation of another lawmaker, and made trips — some with Giorgi, some without — in 2020 and 2022.
In early 2022, just after she became a Parliament vice president, she asked the chamber’s president, Roberta Metsola, to give her files related to the Middle East and human rights. “I hope I didn’t make it difficult for you,” Kaili WhatsApped Metsola. “You gave me everything I love the most!” She was later designated as the vice president who would replace Metsola in her absence on issues related to the Middle East.
In the days and weeks leading up to the kickoff of the World Cup, Kaili and Giorgi’s work increasingly overlapped on two main files: opposition to a resolution critical of Qatar and a deal Doha was seeking with the EU that would allow its citizens to travel to the bloc without a visa.
On November 12, two days before Qatar’s labor minister would appear before the European Parliament, she reached out to Metsola, offering her tickets to the tournament in Doha.
“My dear President!” she wrote to Metsola. “Hope you are well. I have to pass you an invitation for the World Cup, you [sic] or your husband and boys might be interested,” she wrote on WhatsApp.
Eva Kaili reached out to European Parliament President Roberta Metsola, offering her tickets to the World Cup in Doha | Sean Gallup/Getty Images
It’s not clear what, if anything, Kaili asked from Metsola in exchange for the tickets. Throughout her dealings with lawmakers over Qatar, the Greek lawmaker would occasionally delete the messages she had sent. This includes her side of the rest of the conversation with Metsola — except for one text: “The rest I disagree too but I believe they will digest if we get the visa,” she wrote.
(A spokesperson for the Parliament president said Metsola never accepted any tickets to the World Cup and did not read Kaili’s messages before they were deleted.)
With the World Cup having started, the next big challenge awaiting Kaili, Giorgi and Panzeri was a plenary session in Strasbourg where rival politicians aimed to criticize Qatar’s human rights record weeks before the World Cup by putting a resolution on the agenda. Once again, they ramped up their lobbying.
So noticeable was the pro-Qatari line being pushed by Kaili and others affiliated with Panzeri that it started raising eyebrows among their colleagues.
“There were some very strange opinions being voiced on how we should not criticize Qatar, and we should rather recognize the reforms they were making and so on,” remembered Niels Fuglsang, a Danish MEP from the same S&D group. “I thought it was obvious that our group should criticize this, we are social democrats, we care about workers’ rights and migrants’ rights.”
For example, on November 21, Kaili pressed José Ramón Bauzá Díaz, a Spanish centrist MEP who ran the Qatari-EU friendship group, over his political faction’s stance on the resolution, poised to slam Qatar’s human rights track record.
“So, your group wants to vote in favor of a resolution Against Qatar World Cup,” she WhatsApped to him. He said: “It is crazy.” She went on to press him to take a pro-Qatari stance and reject the resolution.
Later that day, in a now-infamous video, Kaili took to the stage during Parliament’s plenary session and sung the praises of Qatar. “I alone said that Qatar is a front-runner in labor rights,” she said. “Still, some here are calling to discriminate them. They bully them and they accuse everyone that talks to them, or engages, of corruption. But still, they take their gas.”
With a crunch vote on the resolution’s final wording still to take place on November 24, Kaili was still going strong, texting with Abdulaziz bin Ahmed Al Malki, the Gulf country’s envoy to the European Union and NATO.
During this exchange, the Qatari gave Kaili direct instructions to take action on legislation of interest to Qatar.
“Hi Iva,” wrote the Qatari in a WhatsApp message on November 24. “My dear my ministry doesn’t want paragraph A about FIFA & Qatar. Please do your best to remove it via voting before 12 noon or during the voting please.”
Kaili deleted her responses.
Eva Kaili has challenged the lifting of her immunity in an EPPO investigation at the European Court of Justice | Nicolas Bouvy/EPA via EFE
But the recipient appeared to be pleased with what she texted, writing back a few hours later: “Thanks excellency” with a hands-clasped-in-prayer emoji.
The Qatar Embassy in Brussels and the spokesperson’s office in Doha did not respond to requests for comment.
* * *
Plainclothes Belgian police arrested Giorgi at 10:42 a.m. on December 9 at his home in Brussels. Earlier, they had picked up Panzeri. According to her statements to police, Kaili did not immediately know what had happened and originally thought Giorgi was involved in a car accident. She was told by police that her partner had been arrested.
Having tried and failed to get through by phone to Panzeri and his friends, Kaili set about trying to get rid of the stacks of cash in her apartment.
She headed to the safe that Giorgi had installed in their apartment and started to shovel stacks of bills into a travel bag. On top of them, she placed baby bottles for her child as well as a mobile phone and a laptop computer. Then she told her father, a civil engineer and sometime political operator who was visiting the family in Brussels, to take the bag and go to a hotel, where her father’s partner and Kaili’s baby were waiting. “I didn’t leave him the choice,” she later told police. “I just said, ‘Take this and go.’”
A few hours later, police followed Kaili’s father as he walked to the Sofitel, a short distance from their flat. According to a person familiar with the details of the investigation, bank notes were fluttering out of the bag as he went. Cops stoppedKaili’s father inside the hotel, seized the suitcase and detained him. Then it was Kaili’s turn. In the early afternoon, police detained her and took her to the Prison de Saint-Gilles.
The next day, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) announced it was investigating Kaili and another Greek member of Parliament in a probe looking at whether she took kickbacks from her assistant’s salaries as well as cuts of their reimbursements for “fake” work trips. Kaili has challenged the lifting of her immunity in this case at the European Court of Justice.
As the one-year anniversary of her spectacular downfall has approached, Kaili and her lawyers have done their best to turn the tables on the prosecutors, casting doubt on the evidence gathered against her and the way the investigation was carried out. Since her arrest, and through a four-month incarceration, Kaili has never wavered from her story. Her advocacy for Qatar, she has argued, was just part of her job as a European politician trying to foster ties with a petroleum-rich country in a region of critical importance to the EU.
Kaili’s lawyers have argued that the testimony provided by Panzeri, who has struck a deal with investigators and confessed in detail, cannot be trusted. Giorgi’s lawyer, Pierre Monville, has maintained his client’s statements were made under duress. “Whatever Giorgi has declared or written during his detention was under extreme pressure and preoccupation regarding the fact that his daughter was left without her parents,” he said.
Kaili’s lawyers have also noted that police kept Panzeri and Giorgi in the same cell in the days after their detention, giving them a chance to coordinate their stories. Kaili’s lawyers argue she was subjected to illegal surveillance, arbitrary detention and what amounts to “torture” while in jail.
The Qatargate suspects won a major victory last summer when the lead investigator, Michel Claise, stepped down over conflict-of-interest concerns after it was revealed that his son was in business with the son of an MEP who was close to Panzeri but hasn’t been arrested or charged.
Then, in September, Kaili played the ace up her sleeve, throwing the entire investigation in doubt with a legal challenge arguing that the evidence against her should be ruled inadmissible because it was gathered before the European Parliament voted to lift the immunity she enjoyed as a lawmaker.
The Qatargate suspects won a major victory last summer when the lead investigator, Michel Claise, stepped down over conflict-of-interest concerns | BELPRESS
Prosecutors retort that such a step wasn’t needed because Kaili had been caught red-handed by her decision to send her father out with a suitcase full of cash, but the case has been delayed pending a decision on her challenge by an appeals court expected in the middle of next year.
“We’re exploring uncharted legal territory here,” said a person familiar with the case, who requested anonymity as they were not allowed to speak on the record. In the meantime, Kaili is back in Parliament, giving interviews to international media and losing few opportunities to make the case for her innocence to her fellow lawmakers.
Giorgi and Kaili are, by all accounts, living together again. One of her lawyers says they’ve been given dispensation to do so, despite the fact that they are suspects in the same case.
Kaili and Giorgi declined to comment for this article, but they clearly haven’t given up the fight. Giorgi’s WhatsApp status is “FORTITUDINE VINCIMUS” — through endurance, we conquer.
Kaili’s profile pic on the app features the famous quote often wrongly attributed to Mahatma Gandhi:
“First they ignore you.
Then they laugh at you.
Then they fight you.
Then you win.”
[ad_2]
Nicholas Vinocur, Elisa Braun, Eddy Wax and Gian Volpicelli
OpenSecrets researchers have found that the cryptocurrency industry is on track to set a new record for federal lobbying spending.
The record spending comes after a year in which firms struggled to rebuild their reputations and push for friendlire legislation, according to Reuters.
In total, cryptocurrency firms spent $18.96 million over the three quarters of 2023. However, during the same period in 2022, $16.1 million was spent. In total, firms spent nearly $22 million on lobbying in 2022, including the failed crypto exchange FTX.
Coinbase (COIN.O), the largest US cryptocurrency exchange, again topped the list with $2.16 million spent, followed by Foris DAX, which operates Crypto.com, Blockchain Association and Binance Holdings.
Experts point out that cryptocurrency companies are partly trying to improve their reputation after a string of scandals last year, including the collapse of FTX. Crypto firms are also grappling with growing regulatory scrutiny, especially from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which says the industry is violating its rules.
According to OpenSecrets, Binance and Binance.US spent more than $1 million lobbying politicians. In total, Binance Holdings invested $850,000 in 2023, and Binance.US spent $340,000, both up significantly from the previous year.
These lobbying efforts in 2022 focused on two specific bills: the Digital Consumer Protection Act and the Lummis-Gillibrand Responsible Financial Innovation Act, the report says.
LONDON — Britain’s tech chief is no stranger to dealing with big egos. She used to promote superstar wrestlers.
U.K. Science and Technology Secretary Michelle Donelan’s past career as a marketeer for WWE wrestling may stand her in good stead at Bletchley Park on Wednesday, as she hosts representatives from more than 100 tech companies, countries and academic institutions on the first day of a U.K.-hosted summit which aims to grapple with one of the biggest challenges of our time — the rise of artificial intelligence.
Working at the fast-paced WWE was “very much like” being at her busy Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), Donelan tells POLITICO — somewhat improbably — in an eve-of-summit interview at her sparsely-decorated office on Whitehall.
The oddball world of commercial wrestling was also good training for politics.
“It was an eye-opener to different personalities, and how to deal with those different personalities,” she says — ideal for “dealing with big egos, in terms of British politics.”
A low-profile Tory MP who only bagged her first junior ministerial job in 2019, Donelan makes for a surprising compère for the first day of Rishi Sunak’s much-hyped AI summit.
Unlike Sunak, the 39-year-old was no self-professed tech geek when she was entrusted with setting up his new science and technology department in February 2023. By her own admission she doesn’t regularly use generative AI tools like ChatGPT.
But Donelan, who was pregnant with her first child when she was handed the science and tech brief, has been wading through piles of binders detailing technical information as she tries to get to grips with the subject. Colleagues note admiringly (and sometimes despairingly) how she operates on just a few hours sleep.
“I think my journey on this has been a deeper understanding of … just how vital it is that we do lead in this, that we aren’t passive, that we don’t wait for others,” she says.
Summit going on
Since February, Donelan has been laying the groundwork for a summit Sunak hopes will be one of the defining moments of his premiership, with the objective of convincing world leaders to agree on the risks posed by AI.
She, like the PM, is concerned about the potential disruption artificial intelligence could pose. “The risks are very daunting, there’s no denying that,” she says, while acknowledging “there is a debate about whether they will materialize or not.”
Her critics say the summit is wrongly focused on long-term risk, however, and argue not enough is being done to tackle AI’s more immediate threats.
The U.K. is “way behind” in terms of bringing forward actual legislation, said Peter Kyle, Donelan’s opposite number in the Labour Party, who has not been invited to this week’s summit. Donelan’s department has not yet even published a response to its own consultation on an artificial intelligence white paper published way back in March, he pointed out.
Donelan insists the summit is “only part” of the U.K.’s work on artificial intelligence, however and that it plans to say more about the white paper — a first step toward legislation — “by the end of the year.”
“We’re not afraid to legislate. There will have to be legislation in this space eventually,” she says.
But specifics are thin on the ground. She refuses to be drawn on “arbitrary timelines.”
Surviving the hospital pass
It was Donelan’s embrace of the government’s controversial Online Safety Bill, which she inherited in her previous ministerial role during the short-lived premiership of Liz Truss, which attracted the attention of Sunak.
In the hard-fought Tory leadership campaign of July and August 2022, Truss and Sunak both promised to scrap parts of the bill focused on policing “legal but harmful” online content. It was Donelan, appointed as culture secretary by Truss, who was left to unravel those pledges.
Her “no-nonsense” and “methodical” approach to the bill, and her willingness to take the views of her MP colleagues seriously, impressed Sunak when he arrived in No. 10 following Truss’ self-destruction.
For that reason he kept her in post — and then chose her to set up the new department for science and technology earlier this year, according to a No. 10 official closely involved with that decision, granted anonymity to discuss internal government business.
“I think Rishi, like me, can see that she is one of those effective secretaries of state that will deliver outcomes,” said former Education Secretary Nadhim Zahawi, whom Donelan worked alongside prior to her promotion to Cabinet.
Finally getting the Online Safety Bill into law was a notable achievement. Donelan’s previous claim to fame had been her unwanted record of being the shortest-serving Cabinet minister in British history. She took the job of education secretary, and then resigned 35 hours later, in the chaotic final days of the Boris Johnson administration.
Child protection
Donelan’s resolve to get the bill through parliament had been hardened by a one-to-one meeting with campaigner Ian Russell last November. His daughter Molly took her own life after viewing suicide content online.
Donelan has kept the dossier of Molly’s posts handed to her by Russell at that private meeting, according to one U.K. government official. “From that [meeting] she was more determined to do something on child protection,” they said.
“It was heart-wrenching to hear his story, and those of other bereaved parents and I felt very passionately that we had an opportunity to really make a difference on this and to and to change the nature in which we regulate the online world,” Donelan says.
Her approach was strikingly different to the long line of Tory ministers who preceded her. Her willingness to simply pick up the phone to relevant business leaders — often bypassing official government channels — has won her admirers in the exasperated U.K. tech industry, which has endured a succession of different ministers overseeing a bill plagued by uncertainty.
“It was a complete breath of fresh air when she came in,” said Dom Hallas, executive director of tech lobbying outfit the Startup Coalition. “At industry roundtables she is to the point and well-briefed, but she is also frank when something is not going to happen.”
“She actually gets things done, which I would contrast with the previous [Boris Johnson-led] regime. She does listen and seems interested in trying to find out what various stakeholders think about things,” Julian David, chief executive of industry body TechUK, added.
Donelan feels she has skin in the game. Her son was born in the spring, and the tech secretary says the new online laws make her “a lot more confident in his use of social media, when he’s old enough.”
Donelan confirms, however, that being handed a new government department, while heavily pregnant, and about to take maternity leave, was no small challenge.
“I’m not going to lie. It’s a lot harder than I thought it was going to be. Before you have a child you don’t appreciate you are going to have things like ‘Mum guilt’,” she says. “It was easier in my head and harder in reality.”
The long game
Donelan’s unshowy style belies a burning ambition, according to multiple MPs and officials who have tracked her career to date.
In 1999, aged just 15, she spoke at the Conservative Party Conference in Blackpool. She was just 26 when she first stood for election, as a no-hoper in the safe Labour seat of Wentworth and Dearne in 2010.
Three years later she became the Conservative candidate for the Lib Dem held seat of Chippenham — going on to overturn a 2,470 Lib Dem majority in the 2015 general election.
On arriving in parliament, Donelan’s ambition was obvious to colleagues. One recalls her immediately asking for advice on how to climb the career ladder.
Soon after she took her first step up, as a parliamentary private secretary — a lowly unpaid aide to a minister — the Conservative whips’ office created a leaderboard tallying the workrate of the 40-odd MPs holding similar roles. Donelan led the way, smashing every target by a significant margin, one minister said.
“If she’s given a task she will attack it like nothing else. I’m not so sure about the bigger picture stuff — wider strategizing and setting a direction herself. But give her a direction and she’ll go at it,” the same minister said.
In her private life, Donelan is a committed Christian who shies away from the darker side of politics. She is “extremely respectful of Cabinet colleagues,” another former government official who worked with her said. “She doesn’t seem to be involved in backdoor skulduggery. It is all very earnest, but it is working for her in a way that is quite refreshing.”
Yet she raised eyebrows at the Conservative Party conference in October with a main stage speech clearly designed to please the grassroots and capture a few right-wing headlines. Donelan vowed a crackdown on the “creeping wokeism” she claimed is threatening scientific research — and went viral for all the wrong reasons.
A difficult interview with the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire at the same conference also landed her less-than-positive headlines.
For an ambitious minister looking to wrestle her way onto the world stage this week, these are nothing more than hazards of the job.
Two lobbyists have been sentenced to prison for bribing the head of a Michigan marijuana licensing board
ByThe Associated Press
October 18, 2023, 1:07 PM
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. — Two lobbyists were sentenced to federal prison Wednesday for conspiring to provide $42,000 in bribes to the head of a Michigan marijuana licensing board.
Brian Pierce and Vincent Brown were partners and consultants for the state’s fledgling marijuana industry when Rick Johnson, formerly known as a powerful Republican lawmaker, led the board in 2017-19.
Pierce was sentenced to two years in prison while Brown received a 20-month term from U.S. District Judge Jane Beckering.
“Choices were made, and each time they were the wrong ones,” Pierce told the judge.
The board reviewed and approved applications to grow and sell marijuana for medical purposes. Johnson was recently sentenced to more than four years in prison for accepting $110,000 when he was in charge.
Pierce was greedy and in a “dark place” when he conspired to bribe Johnson, defense attorney Ben Gonek said in a court filing.
Prosecutors said the corruption included paying a Detroit stripper $2,000 to have sex with Johnson.
“They owned Rick Johnson. … They cheated, and they put at a disadvantage those people who followed the rules,” U.S. Attorney Mark Totten told reporters outside court.
In a letter to the judge, Brown said he followed Pierce’s “lead in virtually every facet” of being a lobbyist.
“I was too foolish and blinded by the dollars to refuse to participate in the bribery scheme,” Brown said.
Four people pleaded guilty. A Detroit-area businessman who paid bribes, John Dalaly, was recently sentenced to more than two years in prison.
Michigan voters legalized marijuana for medical purposes in 2008. A decade later, voters approved the recreational use of marijuana.
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer abolished the medical marijuana board a few months after taking office in 2019 and put oversight of the industry inside a state agency.
LONDON — It is a multi-billion-dollar plan to build a metropolis in the Indo-Pacific which critics fear may one day act as a Chinese military outpost.
Now the vast Colombo Port City project has a new champion — former British Prime Minister David Cameron.
Cameron has been enlisted to drum up foreign investment in the controversial Sri Lankan project, which is a major part of Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative — China’s global infrastructure strategy — and is billed as a Chinese-funded rival to Singapore and Dubai.
Cameron flew to the Middle East in late September to speak at two glitzy investment events for Colombo Port City, having visited the waterside site in Sri Lanka in person earlier this year.
His spokesperson said the former PM had had no direct contact with either the Chinese government or the Chinese firm involved. But Cameron’s lobbying for the scheme has drawn severe backlash from critics, who say his activities will aid China in its geopolitical ambitions.
Former Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan Smith, who was sanctioned by Beijing for criticizing its human rights record, said: “Cameron of all people must realize that China’s Belt and Road is not about help and support and development, it’s ultimately about gaining control — as they’ve already demonstrated in Sri Lanka.
“I hope that he will reconsider the position he’s taken on this.”
Tim Loughton, another Tory MP sanctioned by China, said: “The Sri Lankan project is a classic example of how China buys votes and influence in developing countries and then sends the bailiffs in when those countries can’t keep up the payments.”
“Cameron should be working to help wean vulnerable countries off Chinese influence and debt rather than tying them in more tightly.”
At the roadshow
Dilum Amunugama, Sri Lanka’s investment minister who attended the investment events in the UAE last month, told POLITICO he believed Cameron was enlisted to convince Western investors to put their money into the project.
Amunugama was at two events where Cameron spoke — one in Abu Dhabi with an audience of 100, and one in Dubai with an audience of 300.
“The main point he [Cameron] was trying to stress is that it is not a purely Chinese project, it is a Sri Lankan-owned project — and that is the main point I think the Chinese also wanted him to iron out,” Amunugama said.
Cameron is in charge of drumming up investment into the Chinese-funded Colombo Port City project | Ishara S. Kodikara/AFP via Getty Images
The Sri Lankan minister said the decision to enlist Cameron “was taken by the Chinese company, not the government.”
Cameron’s office said his involvement was organized by the Washington Speakers Bureau, a D.C.-based agency that books guest speakers for corporate events.
His spokesperson said: “David Cameron spoke at two events in the UAE organized via Washington Speakers Bureau (WSB), in support of Port City Colombo, Sri Lanka.
“The contracting party for the events was KPMG Sri Lanka and Mr Cameron’s engagement followed a meeting he had with Sri Lanka’s president, Ranil Wickremesinghe, earlier in the year.
“Mr Cameron has not engaged in any way with China or any Chinese company about these speaking events. The Port City project is fully supported by the Sri Lankan government,” his spokesperson added.
The spokesperson declined to say how much Cameron was paid for his time. Cameron traveled to Sri Lanka in January and visited the development, but his office said that he did so as a guest of the president and that there was no commercial aspect to that trip.
Mired in controversy
The Colombo Port City project has been controversial since its inception.
It was unveiled in 2014 by China’s Xi and Sri Lanka’s then-president, Mahinda Rajapaksa. Three years later, Sri Lanka handed it over to Chinese control after struggling to pay off its debt to Chinese firms.
Multiple concerns have been raised about the project, including its environmental impact; U.S. warnings it could be used for money laundering; and fears that it will ultimately be used as a Chinese military outpost.
Analysts have warned repeatedly that China is using the project to extend its strategic influence in the region. Beijing has already used the nearby Hambantota port — also funded by Chinese loans — to dock military vessels.
The main developer behind the Colombo Port City Project, CHEC Port City Colombo Ltd, has pumped in an initial $1.3 billion. Its ultimate owner is the China Communications Construction Company, a majority state-owned enterprise headquartered in Beijing.
Golden era no more
As prime minister, Cameron and his Chancellor George Osborne famously heralded a “golden era” of U.K. relations with China. Since leaving office in 2016, the ex-PM has come under heavy scrutiny over his lobbying activities, including for the now-collapsed finance company Greensill Capital.
The ex-PM has come under scrutiny for his lobbying activities, including for the now-bankrupt company Greensill Capital | David Hecker/Getty Images
For a period Cameron was also vice-chair of a £1 billion China-U.K. investment fund. The U.K. parliament’s intelligence and security committee said this year that Cameron’s appointment to that role could have been “in some part engineered by the Chinese state to lend credibility to Chinese investment.”
Sam Hogg, a U.K.-China analyst who writes the “Beijing to Britain” briefing, said: “As the ISC pointed out, China has a habit of utilizing former senior-ranking politicians to give credibility to their companies and projects.
“At a time when the Belt and Road Initiative is under intense scrutiny ahead of its 10th anniversary next week, Cameron’s involvement will raise a few eyebrows.”
Luke de Pulford, executive director of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, added: “We can’t have a situation where the EU and U.S. are so concerned about the Belt and Road Initiative that they’re pumping billions into alternative projects, while our own former PM appears to be batting for Beijing.”
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has so many fans and friends that he receives a $30 gift at the rate of one every three days, but because of his job he accepts none of them, and rarely even sees them.
The second-term Democratic governor and multi-billionaire has been lavished with hundreds of gifts from around the world, ranging from a $950 bottle of Japanese whiskey to 35 cents: a quarter and dime, to be exact.
The state’s 25-year-old Gift Ban Act prohibits public employees such as Pritzker from accepting presents, with broad exceptions. Therefore, the high-priced hooch delivered compliments of the Japanese embassy and three bottles of tequila valued at $450 have remained untapped.
“I don’t get to do that,” Pritzker said at a stop in Springfield. “I will say I like tequila, so that’s why people will have given that to me, but there are a few other spirits that I like as well.”
Pricey bottles of alcohol are not the only gifts that Pritzker eschews. Most are stored in Springfield and Chicago, with a staff member responsible for thank-you notes. Together, they comprise 4 1/2 years of gratuities totaling 561 gifts valued at $16,890.14, according to a log provided to The Associated Press in response to a public records request.
Perishable food is shared with office staff and visitors. The rest will eventually end up in an appropriate charitable home, gubernatorial spokesperson Jordan Abudayyeh said.
A governor receives gifts for reasons you’d expect: A gift bag when he visits a town or cuts a ribbon, a plaque from an advocacy group when he champions its cause. Promotion also plays a part. Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards has sent king cake and beads to gin up interest in Mardi Gras, while authors seem to believe getting a copy of their latest work into Pritzker’s hands will land it on the bestseller list.
With a net worth of $3.5 billion as a Hyatt Hotel heir, Pritzker is not pining for much. But for those government employees who aren’t among the nation’s 326 richest people, according to Forbes magazine, the law prohibits accepting gifts from those who do or seek business with the state, who perform state-regulated activities and lobbyists.
Acceptable presents from one source must not exceed $100 in a single year and no one may accept food or refreshments valued at more than $75 in a single day.
Initiated in 1998 by the late U.S. Sen. Paul Simon, co-authored by then-first-term state Sen. Barack Obama and signed by Republican Gov. Jim Edgar, the Gift Ban Act was the first major ethics reform in Illinois since post-Watergate campaign-finance disclosure laws.
“It’s worked pretty well,” said David Melton of the advocacy group Reform for Illinois. “As a general rule, they (public employees) are not allowed to accept gifts. That’s the right approach.”
Based on value alone, Pritzker could accept the overwhelming majority of his gubernatorial gift pile. Each present, arriving at a rate of just under 10 a month, averages about $30.
Beside the four bottles of luxurious liquor, there are only six gifts that are generally off limits, including a $200 Mondaine watch from the Swiss ambassador to the U.S. and a $120 potpourri of eco-friendly pet waste bags, biodegradable diaper bags, bamboo utensils and more from a citizen named Tiffany Kuhl.
The COVID-19 crisis imbued the governor’s admirers with generosity. From March 2020 through December 2021, Pritzker received 33 gifts specifically in appreciation of his pandemic protocol, including some that seemed more personal: handmade face-coverings, items with inspirational messages, selections of food and a Gov. Pritzker bobblehead from the National Bobblehead Hall of Fame and Museum in Milwaukee.
There also was “2:30 p.m. Man,” a painting of a smiling Pritzker in acrylic by SeungRi “Victoria” Park, a Chicago schoolteacher and artist.
“Every day at 2:30, he showed up on my TV,” said Park, referring to Pritzker’s daily news conferences during the worst of the pandemic. “I don’t vote for any politicians, but I like him. I wanted to paint him. He reminded me of Buddha.”
Pritzker, the state’s third Jewish governor, was not a spiritual leader to Park, but his message resonated.
“I don’t go with religion and I don’t go with politicians,” said Park, who has remained free of COVID-19 in the 3 1/2 years since the coronavirus crept into Illinois. “But I go with science.”
As for the Governor’s Gifts scorecard? Shirts: 54. Hats: 21. Mugs and totes: 23. Scarves: seven, including three maroon and gold Loyola University wraps. Pens and pencils: 8. Pins: 11 (plus one rolling pin).
There were 188 books, 27 from the authors themselves, including former Israeli prime minister Shimon Peres. He is listed as sending a signed copy of his autobiography, though he died two years before Pritzker’s election. Sidney Blumenthal, a former adviser to President Bill Clinton, sent his latest Abraham Lincoln biography, along with tequila and a stuffed pink flamingo. Consumer advocate Ralph Nader and his co-author, Mark Green, each sent a copy of “Wrecking America,” a critique of Donald Trump’s presidency.
Sometimes gifts come wrapped in the wrong potato chip bag, like when Pritzker stopped at a Freeport elementary school on June 6 and received from the Stephenson County Democratic Party two bags of Mrs. Fishers potato chips made in nearby Rockford, instead of the equally salty Mrs. Mike’s potato chips manufactured in Freeport.
Party chairperson Jody Coss cannot say for certain whether she grabbed the Freeport snack when she decided to add some hometown flavor to the governor’s greeting.
“The intention,” Coss said sheepishly, “was to give him Mrs. Mike’s.”
___
Associated Press researcher Jennifer Farrar in New York contributed.
RENO, Nev. — Santos Brizuela spent more than two decades laboring outdoors, persisting despite a bout of heatstroke while cutting sugarcane in Mexico and chronic laryngitis from repeated exposure to the hot sun while on various other jobs.
But last summer, while on a construction crew in Las Vegas, he reached his breaking point. Exposure to the sun made his head ache immediately. He lost much of his appetite.
Now at a maintenance job, Brizuela, 47, is able to take breaks. There are flyers on the walls with best practices for staying healthy — protections he had not been afforded before.
“Sometimes as a worker you ask your employer for protection or for health and safety related needs, and they don’t listen or follow,” he said in Spanish through an interpreter.
A historic heat wave that began blasting the Southwest and other parts of the country this summer is shining a spotlight on one of the harshest, yet least-addressed effects of U.S. climate change: the rising deaths and injuries of people who work in extreme heat, whether inside warehouses and kitchens or outside under the blazing sun. Many of them are migrants in low-wage jobs.
State and federal governments have long implemented federal procedures for environmental risks exacerbated by climate change, namely drought, flood and wildfires. But extreme heat protections have generally lagged with “no owner” in state and federal governments, said Ladd Keith, an assistant professor of planning and a research associate at the University of Arizona.
“In some ways, we have a very long way to catch up to the governance gap in treating the heat as a true climate hazard,” Keith said.
There is no federal heat standard in the U.S. despite an ongoing push from President Joe Biden’s administration to establish one. Most of the hottest U.S. states currently have no heat-specific standards either.
Instead, workers in many states who are exposed to extreme heat are ostensibly protected by what is known as the “general duty clause,” which requires employers to mitigate hazards that could cause serious injury or death. The clause permits state authorities to inspect work sites for violations, and many do, but there are no consistent benchmarks for determining what constitutes a serious heat hazard.
“What’s unsafe isn’t always clear,” said Juanita Constible, a senior advocate from the National Resources Defense Council who tracks extreme heat policy. “Without a specific heat standard, it makes it more challenging for regulators to decide, ‘OK, this employer’s breaking the law or not.’”
Many states are adopting their own versions of a federal “emphasis” program increasing inspections to ensure employers offer water, shade and breaks, but citations and enforcement still must go through the general duty clause.
Extreme heat is notably absent from the list of disasters to which the Federal Emergency Management Agency can respond. And while regional floodplain managers are common throughout the country, there are only three newly created “chief heat officer” positions to coordinate extreme heat planning, in Miami-Dade County, Phoenix and Los Angeles.
Federal experts have recommended extreme heat protections since 1972, but it wasn’t until 1997 and 2006, respectively, that Minnesota and California adopted the first statewide protections. For a long time, those states were the exception, with only a scattering of others joining them throughout the early 2000s.
But as heat waves get longer and hotter, the tide is starting to change.
“There are a lot of positive movements that give me some hope,” Keith said.
Colorado strengthened existing rules last year to require regular rest and meal breaks in extreme heat and cold and provide water and shade breaks when temperatures hit 80 degrees Fahrenheit (26.7 degrees Celsius). Washington state last month updated 15-year-old heat safety standards to lower the temperature at which cool-down breaks and other protections are required. Oregon, which adopted temporary heat protection rules in 2021, made them permanent last year.
Several other states are considering similar laws or regulations.
Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs recently announced new regulations through the heat emphasis program and declared a state of emergency over extreme heat, allowing the state to reimburse various government entities for funds spent on providing relief from high temperatures.
Nevada also adopted a version of the heat emphasis program. But a separate bill that would define what constitutes extreme heat and require employers to provide protections ultimately failed in the final month of the legislative session.
The measure faltered even after the temperature threshold for those protections was increased from 95 degrees Fahrenheit (35 degrees Celsius) to 105 (40.5 degrees Celsius). Democratic lawmakers in Nevada are now trying to pass those protections through a regulatory process before next summer.
The Biden administration introduced new regulations in 2021 that would develop heat safety standards and strengthen required protective measures for most at-risk private sector workers, but the mandates are likely subject to several more years of review. A group of Democratic U.S. Congress members introduced a bill last month that would effectively speed up the process by legislating heat standards.
The guidelines would apply to all 50 states and include private sector and select federal workers, but leave most other public sector workers uncovered. Differing conditions across states and potential discrepancies in how the federal law would be implemented make consistent state standards crucial, Constible said.
For now, protections for those workers are largely at the discretion of individual employers.
Eleazar Castellanos, who trains workers on dealing with extreme heat at Arriba Las Vegas, a nonprofit supporting migrant and low-wage employees, said he experienced two types of employers during his 20 years of working construction.
“The first version is the employer that makes sure that their workers do have access to water, shade and rest,” he said in Spanish through an interpreter. “And the second type of employer is the kind who threatens workers with consequences for asking for those kinds of preventative measures.”
Heat protection laws have faced steady industry opposition, including chambers of commerce and other business associations. They say a blanket mandate would be too difficult to implement across such a wide range of industries.
“We are always concerned about a one-size-fits-all bill like this,” Tray Abney, a lobbyist for the National Federation of Independent Businesses, told Nevada legislators.
Opinions vary on why the Nevada bill failed after passing the Senate on party lines. Some say it was a victim of partisan politics. Others say there were too many bills competing for attention in a session that meets for just four months every other year.
“It all comes down to the dollar,” said Vince Saavedra, secretary-treasurer and lobbyist for Southern Nevada Building Trades. “But I’ll challenge anybody to go work outside with any of these people, and then tell me that we don’t need these regs.”
___
This version corrects the university affiliation of Ladd Keith. He is an assistant professor and research associate at the University of Arizona, not Arizona State University.
___
Stern is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America places journalists in local newsrooms across the country to report on undercovered issues. Follow Stern on Twitter: @gabestern326.
RENO, Nev. — Santos Brizuela spent more than two decades laboring outdoors, persisting despite a bout of heatstroke while cutting sugarcane in Mexico and chronic laryngitis from repeated exposure to the hot sun while on various other jobs.
But last summer, while on a construction crew in Las Vegas, he reached his breaking point. Exposure to the sun made his head ache immediately. He lost much of his appetite.
Now at a maintenance job, Brizuela, 47, is able to take breaks. There are flyers on the walls with best practices for staying healthy — protections he had not been afforded before.
“Sometimes as a worker you ask your employer for protection or for health and safety related needs, and they don’t listen or follow,” he said in Spanish through an interpreter.
A historic heat wave that began blasting the Southwest and other parts of the country this summer is shining a spotlight on one of the harshest, yet least-addressed effects of U.S. climate change: the rising deaths and injuries of people who work in extreme heat, whether inside warehouses and kitchens or outside under the blazing sun. Many of them are migrants in low-wage jobs.
State and federal governments have long implemented federal procedures for environmental risks exacerbated by climate change, namely drought, flood and wildfires. But extreme heat protections have generally lagged with “no owner” in state and federal governments, said Ladd Keith, an assistant professor of planning at Arizona State University.
“In some ways, we have a very long way to catch up to the governance gap in treating the heat as a true climate hazard,” Keith said.
There is no federal heat standard in the U.S. despite an ongoing push from President Joe Biden’s administration to establish one. Most of the hottest U.S. states currently have no heat-specific standards either.
Instead, workers in many states who are exposed to extreme heat are ostensibly protected by what is known as the “general duty clause,” which requires employers to mitigate hazards that could cause serious injury or death. The clause permits state authorities to inspect work sites for violations, and many do, but there are no consistent benchmarks for determining what constitutes a serious heat hazard.
“What’s unsafe isn’t always clear,” said Juanita Constible, a senior advocate from the National Resources Defense Council who tracks extreme heat policy. “Without a specific heat standard, it makes it more challenging for regulators to decide, ‘OK, this employer’s breaking the law or not.’”
Many states are adopting their own versions of a federal “emphasis” program increasing inspections to ensure employers offer water, shade and breaks, but citations and enforcement still must go through the general duty clause.
Extreme heat is notably absent from the list of disasters to which the Federal Emergency Management Agency can respond. And while regional floodplain managers are common throughout the country, there are only three newly created “chief heat officer” positions to coordinate extreme heat planning, in Miami-Dade County, Phoenix and Los Angeles.
Federal experts have recommended extreme heat protections since 1972, but it wasn’t until 1997 and 2006, respectively, that Minnesota and California adopted the first statewide protections. For a long time, those states were the exception, with only a scattering of others joining them throughout the early 2000s.
But as heat waves get longer and hotter, the tide is starting to change.
“There are a lot of positive movements that give me some hope,” Keith said.
Colorado strengthened existing rules last year to require regular rest and meal breaks in extreme heat and cold and provide water and shade breaks when temperatures hit 80 degrees Fahrenheit (26.7 degrees Celsius). Washington state last month updated 15-year-old heat safety standards to lower the temperature at which cool-down breaks and other protections are required. Oregon, which adopted temporary heat protection rules in 2021, made them permanent last year.
Several other states are considering similar laws or regulations.
Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs recently announced new regulations through the heat emphasis program and declared a state of emergency over extreme heat, allowing the state to reimburse various government entities for funds spent on providing relief from high temperatures.
Nevada also adopted a version of the heat emphasis program. But a separate bill that would define what constitutes extreme heat and require employers to provide protections ultimately failed in the final month of the legislative session.
The measure faltered even after the temperature threshold for those protections was increased from 95 degrees Fahrenheit (35 degrees Celsius) to 105 (40.5 degrees Celsius). Democratic lawmakers in Nevada are now trying to pass those protections through a regulatory process before next summer.
The Biden administration introduced new regulations in 2021 that would develop heat safety standards and strengthen required protective measures for most at-risk private sector workers, but the mandates are likely subject to several more years of review. A group of Democratic U.S. Congress members introduced a bill last month that would effectively speed up the process by legislating heat standards.
The guidelines would apply to all 50 states and include private sector and select federal workers, but leave most other public sector workers uncovered. Differing conditions across states and potential discrepancies in how the federal law would be implemented make consistent state standards crucial, Constible said.
For now, protections for those workers are largely at the discretion of individual employers.
Eleazar Castellanos, who trains workers on dealing with extreme heat at Arriba Las Vegas, a nonprofit supporting migrant and low-wage employees, said he experienced two types of employers during his 20 years of working construction.
“The first version is the employer that makes sure that their workers do have access to water, shade and rest,” he said in Spanish through an interpreter. “And the second type of employer is the kind who threatens workers with consequences for asking for those kinds of preventative measures.”
Heat protection laws have faced steady industry opposition, including chambers of commerce and other business associations. They say a blanket mandate would be too difficult to implement across such a wide range of industries.
“We are always concerned about a one-size-fits-all bill like this,” Tray Abney, a lobbyist for the National Federation of Independent Businesses, told Nevada legislators.
Opinions vary on why the Nevada bill failed after passing the Senate on party lines. Some say it was a victim of partisan politics. Others say there were too many bills competing for attention in a session that meets for just four months every other year.
“It all comes down to the dollar,” said Vince Saavedra, secretary-treasurer and lobbyist for Southern Nevada Building Trades. “But I’ll challenge anybody to go work outside with any of these people, and then tell me that we don’t need these regs.”
___
Stern is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America places journalists in local newsrooms across the country to report on undercovered issues. Follow Stern on Twitter: @gabestern326.
Here is a look at the life of Dennis Hastert, former Republican speaker of the House. Hastert was sentenced to 15 months in prison in a hush money case that revealed he was being accused of sexually abusing young boys while he was a teacher in Illinois.
Was named Illinois Coach of the Year after leading the Yorkville High School wrestling team to the state championship.
Instituted the so-called “Hastert Rule,” an informal guideline where only legislation supported by “the majority of the majority” party is brought to a vote on the House floor.
1964-1980 – Wrestling and football coach and government/history teacher at Yorkville High School.
1980-1986 – Member of the Illinois House of Representatives.
January 3, 1987-November 26, 2007 – US representative from Illinois’ 14th congressional district.
1995-1999 – House chief deputy minority whip.
January 6, 1999 – Is elected speaker of the House, replacing Newt Gingrich.
November 22, 2003 – Hastert fights hard to secure passage of a Medicare bill in the House. The vote takes three hours and lasts well into the night. It is signed into law by US President George W. Bush on December 8 after also being passed by the Senate.
November 7, 2006 – Is reelected to his eleventh term in Congress. Republicans lose their majority in the House, so Hastert loses his position as speaker of the House when the new Congress begins on January 4, 2007.
August 17, 2007 – Announces that he will not run for reelection in 2008.
November 15, 2007 – Announces his resignation on the House floor. He formally resigns on November 26 after 20 years in office.
June 2008 – Joins the Washington lobbying firm of Dickstein Shapiro as a senior adviser.
June 8, 2009 – Hastert’s son, Ethan, announces he will run for his father’s former congressional seat but later loses in the GOP primary.
May 7, 2010 – Hastert is conferred the Grand Cordon of the Order of the Rising Sun by Emperor Akihito of Japan.
May 28, 2015 – Federal officials indict Hastert for lying to the FBI about $3.5 million he agreed to pay to an undisclosed subject to “cover up past misconduct.” The Justice Department alleges that Hastert paid the subject a total of about $1.7 million over a period of years beginning in 2010 and ending in 2014. Hastert resigns from the lobbying firm Dickstein Shapiro.
May 29, 2015 – Sources with knowledge of the federal investigation tell CNN Hastert was paying a former student to keep quiet about allegations of sexual misconduct from the time when Hastert was a teacher and wrestling coach in Illinois.
June 9, 2015 –Pleads not guilty to all charges related to lying to the FBI about $3.5 million he agreed to pay to an undisclosed subject.
October 28, 2015 – Hastert pleads guilty to structuring money transactions in a way to evade requirements to report where the money was going.
December 17, 2015 – A statement is released announcing that Hastert was admitted to the hospital in the first week of November 2015. He was treated for a stroke and sepsis. This was followed by two back surgeries.
April 25, 2016 – Hastert is sued by a former student in Illinois Circuit Court. The former student seeks to collect $1.8 million. This is the remainder of the $3.5 million promised him for covering up Hastert’s past misconduct.
April 27, 2016 – Hastert is sentenced to 15 months in prison. He is ordered to pay $250,000 to a victims’ fund, must serve two years of supervised release once he finishes his prison term, and enter a sex offender treatment program.
June 22, 2016 – Hastert begins serving his 15-month sentence at a federal medical prison in Rochester, Minnesota.
July 18, 2017 – Is released from prison and is placed under the supervision of a residential reentry management field office in Chicago.
November 20, 2017 – A judge in Kendall County, Illinois, throws out a lawsuit brought by a man who claims Hastert abused him when he was a child, saying the statute of limitations had passed.
December 12, 2017 – New court-ordered restrictions ban Hastert from having contact with anyone under 18 unless an adult is present who’s aware that he pleaded guilty in the hush money case.
September 10, 2019 – A judge in Kendall County, Illinois, rules that a lawsuit over the terms of a $3.5 million hush money deal can go to trial. One of Hastert’s former students filed the lawsuit in April 2016.
September 29, 2021 – A Kendall County judge finalizes an out-of-court settlement between Hastert and a former student who alleged that Hastert sexually abused him, ending the lawsuit filed in April 2016 that was set to go to trial.
STRASBOURG — The European Parliament’s response to Qatargate: Fight corruption with paperwork.
When Belgian police made sweeping arrests and recovered €1.5 million from Parliament members in a cash-for-influence probe last December, it sparked mass clamoring for a deep clean of the institution, which has long languished with lax ethics and transparency rules, and even weaker enforcement.
Seven months later, the Parliament and its president, Roberta Metsola, can certainly claim to have tightened some rules — but the results are not much to shout about. With accused MEPs Eva Kaili and Marc Tarabella back in the Parliament and even voting on ethics changes themselves, the reforms lack the political punch to take the sting out of a scandal that Euroskeptic forces have leaped on ahead of the EU election next year.
“Judge us on what we’ve done rather [than] on what we didn’t,” Metsola told journalists earlier this month, arguing that Parliament has acted swiftly where it could.
While the Parliament can claim some limited improvements, calls for a more profound overhaul in the EU’s only directly elected institution — including more serious enforcement of existing rules — have been met with finger-pointing, blame-shifting and bureaucratic slow-walking.
The Parliament dodged some headline-worthy proposals in the process. It declined to launch its own inquiry into what really happened, it decided not to force MEPs to declare their assets and it won’t be stripping any convicted MEPs of their gold-plated pensions.
Instead, the institution favored more minimal nips and tucks. The rule changes amount to much more bureaucracy and more potential alarm bells to spot malfeasance sooner — but little in the way of stronger enforcement of ethics rules for MEPs.
EU Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly, who investigates complaints about EU administration lamented that the initial sense of urgency to adopt strict reforms had “dissipated.” After handing the EU a reputational blow, she argued, the scandal’s aftermath offered a pre-election chance, “to show that lessons have been learned and safeguards have been put in place.”
Former MEP Richard Corbett, who co-wrote the Socialists & Democrats group’s own inquiry into Qatargate and favors more aggressive reforms, admitted he isn’t sure whether Parliament will get there.
“The Parliament is getting to grips with this gradually, muddling its way through the complex field, but it’s too early to say whether it will do what it should,” he said.
Bags of cash
The sense of resignation that criminals will be criminals was only one of the starting points that shaped the Parliament’s response.
“We will never be able to prevent people taking bags of cash. This is human nature. What we have to do is create a protection network,” said Raphaël Glucksmann, a French MEP who sketched out some longer-term recommendations he hopes the Parliament will take up.
Another is that the Belgian authorities’ painstaking judicial investigation is still ongoing, with three MEPs charged and a fourth facing imminent questioning. Much is unknown about how the alleged bribery ring really operated, or what the countries Qatar, Morocco and Mauritania really got for their bribes.
On top of that, Parliament was occasionally looking outward rather than inward for people to blame.
Metsola’s message in the wake of the scandal was that EU democracy was “under attack” by foreign forces. The emphasis on “malign actors, linked to autocratic third countries” set the stage for the Parliament’s response to Qatargate: blame foreign interference, not an integrity deficit.
Instead of creating a new panel to investigate how corruption might have steered Parliament’s work, Parliament repurposed an existing committee on foreign interference and misinformation to probe the matter. The result was a set of medium- and long-term recommendations that focus as much on blocking IT contractors from Russia and China as they do on holding MEPs accountable — and they remain merely recommendations.
Metsola did also turn inward, presenting a 14-point plan in January she labeled as “first steps” of a promised ethics overhaul. The measures are a finely tailored lattice-work of technical measures that could make it harder for Qatargate to happen again, primarily by making it harder to lobby the Parliament undetected.
The central figure in Qatargate, an Italian ex-MEP called Pier Antonio Panzeri, enjoyed unfettered access to the Parliament, using it to give prominence to his human rights NGO Fight Impunity, which held events and even struck a collaboration deal with the institution.
This 14-point package, which Metsola declared is now “done,” includes a new entry register, a six-month cooling-off period banning ex-MEPs from lobbying their colleagues, tighter rules for events, stricter scrutiny of human rights work — all tailored to ensure a future Panzeri hits a tripwire and can be spotted sooner.
Notably, however, an initial idea to ban former MEPs from lobbying for two years after leaving office — which would mirror the European Commission’s rules — instead turned into just a six-month “cooling off” period.
Internal divisions
Behind the scenes, the house remains sharply divided over just how much change is needed. Many MEPs resisted bigger changes to how they conduct their work, despite Metsola’s promise in December that there would be “no business as usual,” which she repeated in July.
The limited ambition reflects an argument — pushed by a powerful subset of MEPs, primarily in Metsola’s large, center-right European People’s Party group — that changing that “business as usual” will only tie the hands of innocent politicians while doing little to stop the few with criminal intent. They’re bolstered by the fact that the Socialists & Democrats remain the only group touched by the scandal.
“There were voices in this house who said, ‘Do nothing, these things will always happen, things are fine as they are,’” Metsola said. Some of the changes, she said, had been “resisted for decades” before Qatargate momentum pushed them through.
The Parliament already has some of the Continent’s highest standards for legislative bodies, said Rainer Wieland, a long-serving EPP member from Germany who sits on the several key rule-making committees: “I don’t think anyone can hold a candle to us.”
MEP Rainer Wieland holds lots of sway over the reforms | Patrick Seeger/EFE via EPA
Those who are still complaining, he added in a debate last week, “are living in wonderland.”
Wieland holds lots of sway over the reforms. He chairs an internal working group on the Parliament’s rules that feeds into the Parliament’s powerful Committee on Constitutional Affairs, where Metsola’s 14-point plan will be translated into cold, hard rules.
Those rule changes are expected to be adopted by the full Parliament in September.
The measures will boost existing transparency rules significantly. The lead MEP on a legislative file will soon have to declare (and deal with) potential conflicts of interest, including those coming from their “emotional life.” And more MEPs will have to publish their meetings related to parliamentary business, including those with representatives from outside the EU.
Members will also have to disclose outside income over €5,000 — with additional details about the sector if they work in something like law or consulting.
Negotiators also agreed to double potential penalties for breaches: MEPs can lose their daily allowance and be barred from most parliamentary work for up to 60 days.
Yet the Parliament’s track record punishing MEPs who break the rules is virtually nonexistent.
As it stands, an internal advisory committee can recommend a punishment, but it’s up to the president to impose it. Of 26 breaches of transparency rules identified over the years, not one MEP has been punished. (Metsola has imposed penalties for things like harassment and hate speech.)
And hopes for an outside integrity cop to help with enforcement were dashed when a long-delayed Commission proposal for an EU-wide independent ethics body was scaled back.
Stymied by legal constraints and left-right divides within the Parliament, the Commission opted for suggesting a standards-setting panel that, at best, would pressure institutions into better policing their own rules.
“I really hate listening to some, especially members of the European Parliament, who say that ‘Without having the ethics body, we cannot behave ethical[ly],’” Commission Vice President for Values and Transparency Věra Jourová lamented in June.
Metsola, for her part, has pledged to adhere to the advisory committee’s recommendations going forward. But MEPs from across the political spectrum flagged the president’s complete discretion to mete out punishments as unsustainable.
“The problem was not (and never really was) [so] much the details of the rules!!! But the enforcement,” French Green MEP Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield — who sits in the working group — wrote to POLITICO.
Wieland, the German EPP member on the rule-making committees, presented the situation more matter-of-factly: Parliament had done what it said it would do.
“We fully delivered” on Metsola’s plan, Wieland told POLITICO in an interview. “Not more than that.”
The pictures posted on the Chinese company’s website show a tall, Caucasian man with a crew cut and flattened nose inspecting body armor at its factory.
“This spring, one of our customers came to our company to confirm the style and quantity of bulletproof vests, and carefully tested the quality of our vests,” Shanghai H Win, a manufacturer of military-grade protective gear, proudly reported on its website in March. The customer “immediately directly confirmed the order quantity of bulletproof vests and subsequent purchase intention.”
The identity of the smiling customer isn’t clear, but there’s a fair chance he was Russian: According to customs records obtained by POLITICO, Russian buyers have declared orders for hundreds of thousands of bulletproof vests and helmets made by Shanghai H Win — the items listed in the documents match those in the company’s online catalog.
Evidence of this kind shows that China, despite Beijing’s calls for peace, is pushing right up to a red line in delivering enough nonlethal, but militarily useful, equipment to Russia to have a material impact on President Vladimir Putin’s 17-month-old war on Ukraine. The protective gear would be sufficient to equip many of the men mobilized by Russia since the invasion. Then there are drones that can be used to direct artillery fire or drop grenades, and thermal optical sights to target the enemy at night.
These shipments point to a China-sized loophole in the West’s attempts to hobble Putin’s war machine. The sale of so-called dual-use technology that can have both civilian and military uses leaves just enough deniability for Western authorities looking for reasons not to confront a huge economic power like Beijing.
The wartime strength of China’s exports of dual-use products to Russia is confirmed by customs data. And, while Ukraine is a customer of China too, its imports of most of the equipment covered in this story have fallen sharply, the figures show.
Russia has imported more than $100 million-worth of drones from China so far this year — 30 times more than Ukraine. And Chinese exports of ceramics, a component used in body armor, increased by 69 percent to Russia to more than $225 million, while dropping by 61 percent to Ukraine to a mere $5 million, Chinese and Ukrainian customs data show.
“What is very clear is that China, for all its claims that it is a neutral actor, is in fact supporting Russia’s positions in this war,” said Helena Legarda, a lead analyst specializing in Chinese defense and foreign policy at the Mercator Institute for China Studies, a Berlin think tank.
Were China to cross the red line and sell weapons or military equipment to Russia, Legarda said she would expect the EU to enforce secondary sanctions targeting enablers of Putin’s war of aggression.
But, she added, equipment like body armor, thermal imaging, and even commercial drones that can be used in offensive frontline operations are unlikely to trigger a response.
“Then there’s this situation that we’re in at the moment — all these dual-use components or equipment and how you handle those,” Legarda explained. “I would not expect the EU to be able to agree to sanctions on that.”
Disappearing customer
Shanghai H Win, like other Chinese companies producing dual-use equipment, has enjoyed a surge in business since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
According to customs records obtained by POLITICO, Russia has ordered hundreds of thousands of bulletproof vests and helmets made by Shanghai H Win | Genya Savilov/AFP via Getty Images
“Because of the war, a lot of trading companies are looking for us and ask: ‘Are you making this kind of vest?’ We received a lot of inquiries,” a sales representative told POLITICO over the phone.
At first, the representative said Shanghai H Win wasn’t allowed to export directly to Russia unless the Chinese military issues a certificate and it can provide documentary proof of its final customer.
Yet when asked who the man in the pictures was, and where he was from, the representative denied that he was even a customer — even though the website said so.
“He is our customer’s customer. We cannot ask him directly, ‘Where are you from?’ But I guess maybe he is from Europe — maybe Ukraine, maybe Poland, even maybe from Russia. I’m not sure.”
Shortly after the call, Shanghai H Win took down the post featuring the mystery shopper from its website.
Who are the buyers?
So, who exactly are those customers? Evidence of deals — importers, suppliers, and product descriptions — can be found in a registry of declarations of conformity by anyone with access to the Russian internet who is familiar with international customs classifications.
In an earlier story, POLITICO searched these filings and found evidence that sniper bullets made in the United States were reaching Russia, where they were freely available on the black market.
The declarations enable the final buyer to certify that the products are genuine and, in effect, make it possible to import goods without the express consent of the maker. If goods are traded through an intermediary, the maker may not even be aware that its goods are going to Russia. The registry is, however, searchable so it’s still easy to find the ultimate buyers of the Chinese kit.
One is Silva, a company headquartered in the remote Eastern Siberian region of Buryatia. It filed declarations in January of this year detailing orders for 100,000 bulletproof vests and 100,000 helmets. The manufacturer? Shanghai H Win.
Such importers often bear the hallmarks of “one-day” firms, as shell companies are known in Russia, set up by actors who want to conceal their dealings. They tend to be new, listed at obscure residential addresses, and have few staff or assets. Their financial statements often don’t report the levels of turnover that the filings would imply.
According to public records, Silva was registered only last September. It reported zero revenues for 2022. A Google Street View search of its address in Ulan-Ude, the capital of Buryatia, takes visitors to a dilapidated apartment block.
POLITICO tried to contact Silva but the phone number given on its filings rang off the hook and a message sent to its email address bounced.
The sale of so-called dual-use technology that can have both civilian and military uses leaves enough deniability for Western authorities looking for reasons not to confront China | STR/AFP via Getty Images
Another Russian company called Rika declared a smaller shipment of body armor from Shanghai H Win in March. Before that, in January, Rika declared a consignment of helmets from a company called Deekon Shanghai, which shares an address with Shanghai H Win. The two companies are affiliated, another Shanghai H Win representative said.
A woman who answered the phone at Rika said: “We buy in Russia, not in China.” The company didn’t reply to a follow-up email from POLITICO.
The denial is hardly plausible: In addition to the protective gear, a search of declarations by Rika threw up hits for deals for thermal optical equipment from China. That was corroborated by customs data accessed by POLITICO, which revealed more than 220 shipments, worth $11 million, for thermal optics and protective equipment since the outbreak of the war. Rika advertises Chinese-made night sights right at the top of its website.
Another Russian company called Legittelekom, whose homepage reveals it to be a Moscow freight forwarding company, also appears as a buyer of 100,000 items of headgear and 100,000 suits of outerwear from Deekon Shanghai, according to filings dated last November 24.
A man who answered a call to Legittelekom declined to comment on POLITICO’s findings and would not say whether the company supplied the Russian military.
“This is a commercial activity and we do not disclose our commercial activities,” the man said in response to both questions.
Bigger deal
Then there’s Pozitron, a company based in Rostov-on-Don, the southern city briefly captured by warlord Yevgeny Prigozhin’s Wagner mercenaries in their failed uprising last month. It imported more than $60 million-worth of “airsoft helmets,” “miscellaneous ceramics,” and other items from Chinese firm Beijing KRNatural in November and December 2022, according to customs data shared by ImportGenius.
These flows check out with Pozitron’s own declarations of conformity between late October and December 2022, for a total of 100,000 helmets. The declarations also reveal that Pozitron acquired a range of drones from Chinese multinational SZ DJI Technology Co., Ltd last December.
Although the quantity is unclear, the models specified include ones known to have been used in the Ukrainian theater of war, like DJI’s Mavic 2 Enterprise Advanced quadcopter or the Mini 2 lightweight drone.
At first sight, the product descriptions in the declarations and customs records appear harmless enough — the “airsoft helmets,” for example, are said to be for use in paintball games and “not for military use, not for dual use.”
Sanctions and defense experts say, however, that it’s common practice to mislabel dual-use goods as being for civilian purposes when they’re in fact destined for the battlefield.
At any rate, Pozitron, which was only founded in March 2021, is having a very good war: Its revenues exploded from 31 million rubles — around $400,000 — in 2021 to 20 billion rubles — almost $300 million — in 2022, according to its financial statement.
Reached by email, Pozitron’s general director, Andrey Vitkovsky, said that his company has “never imported drones and similar products” from the People’s Republic of China.
“The main activity of Pozitron LLC is the purchase and sale of consumer goods, sporting goods, and fabrics, both produced in the Russian Federation and imported from China,” Vitkovsky added, saying that his company’s activities were “exclusively peaceful in nature, in compliance with all rules and restrictions.”
The denial is typical — Russian companies have good reason to fear Western sanctions if they are implicated in trade that supports the Kremlin’s war effort. After POLITICO reported in March that a company called Tekhkrim was importing Chinese assault weapons, and declaring them as “hunting rifles,” the firm was sanctioned by the United States.
Pozitron is on the West’s radar, said one sanctions expert, who was granted anonymity as they are not authorized to speak publicly.
As for Beijing KRNatural, POLITICO was able to trace a company with a similar name at the address given in the Pozitron filings. The company, Beijing Natural Hanhua International Trade Co., Ltd, is listed as a “small and micro enterprise.” It was founded in April 2022, a few months before the Pozitron deals. Nobody answered when POLITICO called.
Heavenly mechanics
In contrast to the bulk consignments of protective gear that appear intended to equip a large fighting force, the orders for drones found by POLITICO are more dispersed among different buyers — both companies and individuals.
In addition to Pozitron, buyers of drones from DJI and its subsidiaries include firms called Gigantshina and Vozdukh — neither of which responded to emailed requests for comment. Another is Nebesnaya Mekhanika (“Heavenly Mechanics”), which before the war was the Chinese company’s official distributor in Russia.
A DJI spokesperson said that the company and its subsidiaries had voluntarily stopped all shipments to, and operations in, Russia and Ukraine on April 26, 2022 — two months after the war broke out.
“We stand alone as the only drone company to clearly denounce and actively discourage use of products in combat,” the spokesperson said in comments emailed to POLITICO.
DJI said it had also broken off its relationship with Nebesnaya Mekhanika, although the Russian company filed further declarations for shipments of the Chinese company’s drones last September 15 and on March 27 of this year.
The spokesperson said that DJI was not in any way involved in the drafting of the declarations of conformity found by POLITICO: “These documents would have been filled out by Russian parties, and they do not indicate in any shape or form who ex- or imported the products that are being declared conform.”
“We have seen media reports and other documents that appear to show how our products are being transported to Russia and Ukraine from other countries where they can be bought off-the-shelf,” the spokesperson added. “However, it is not in our power to influence how our products are being used once they leave our control.”
Still, a search of ImportGenius shows that a Chinese company called Iflight has continued to ship DJI drones to Nebesnaya Mechnika via Hong Kong, care of a local company called Lotos. The most recent consignment was delivered last October 10. In an apparent anomaly, Russia is stated as the country of origin for the shipments.
Nebesnaya Mekhanika, which still advertises DJI drones on its website, did not respond to a request for comment.
Political will
The trafficking of low-tech body armor to high-tech drones and thermal optics highlights a vulnerability in the Western sanctions regime. The ambiguity surrounding the dual-use status of this equipment, coupled with the fact that a significant portion of it is manufactured in China, seems, at least for now, to have placed the possibility of the West taking meaningful action beyond reach.
Then there is the flow of technology through China that may include components made in the West that could be of direct military use.
Russia is fully aware of the China loophole and is using it to buy Western technology to fight its war against Ukraine, according to a recent analysis by the KSE Institute, a think tank affiliated to the Kyiv School of Economics. More than 60 percent of imported critical components in Russian weapons found on the battlefield came from U.S. companies, the researchers found.
It’s an issue that U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken brought up on a visit to Beijing last month — the first by Washington’s top diplomat in five years. He told reporters that China had given assurances that “it is not and will not provide lethal assistance to Russia for use in Ukraine.” Blinken, however, expressed “ongoing concerns” that Chinese firms may be providing technology that Russia can use to advance its aggression in Ukraine. “And we have asked the Chinese government to be very vigilant about that.”
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told reporters that China had given assurances that “it is not and will not provide lethal assistance to Russia for use in Ukraine” during a visit to Beijing last month | Pool photo by Leah Millis/AFP via Getty Images
France is also concerned that China is delivering dual-use equipment to Russia. “There are indications that they are doing things we would prefer them not to do,” Emmanuel Bonne, President Emmanuel Macron’s top diplomatic adviser, told the recent Aspen Security Forum. Pressed on whether China was supplying weapons, Bonne said: “Well, kind of military equipment … as far as we know they are not delivering massively military capacities to Russia but (we need there to be) no delivery.”
Yet there’s little the West can do to twist Beijing’s arm into halting flows of dual-use products into Russia. Only the United States would have the real power to impose an outright ban on dollar-denominated transactions — as Washington did when it sanctioned Iran over its secret nuclear program.
The EU, however, lacks such a strong sanctions weapon because the euro is far less ubiquitous on global markets. It’s also been hesitant to act. In its latest package of Russia sanctions last month, the EU compiled a list of seven Chinese companies that shouldn’t be allowed to trade with the bloc. But, after lobbying by Beijing, Brussels dropped four companies from the blacklist.
Elina Ribakova, one of the authors of the KSE Institute report, said indirect shipments via China pose challenges in terms of both the scope and enforcement of Western sanctions. Secondary sanctions may not be sufficient, she said. She called for manufacturers to be forced to take responsibility for where their products end up — just as banks were required by regulators to step up customer oversight and anti-money laundering operations in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.
“What we can do differently is to create the same infrastructure for the corporates,” explained Ribakova, who is director of the international program at the Kyiv School of Economics. “We have to threaten them with serious fines.”
Maxim Mironov, a sanctions expert and assistant professor of finance at the IE Business School in Madrid, reckons that the West, despite expanding sanctions to punish Putin’s helpers, lacks the political conviction to enforce them against Beijing.
“Do politicians have enough will to put sanctions on China? Basically, the answer is no,” said Mironov.
“China signals: You can try, but I don’t care what you are trying to do,” Mironov added. “And the European Union is like: If you don’t like it, we are not going to do it. And if the Chinese see that, they are just going to continue doing what they think is in their best interest.”
The European Commission, the U.S. National Security Council and the Chinese Mission to the EU did not respond to requests for comment.
Stuart Lau contributed reporting.
[ad_2]
Sarah Anne Aarup, Sergey Panov and Douglas Busvine