shell oil corporation president: please regulate us!

[maladroit]

Shell Canada president wants better co-ordination on climate change
Last Updated: Friday, November 7, 2008 | 1:23 PM ET

John Weidlich, CBC News

Governments across the country need to get their act together on policies to address climate change, the president of one of Canada's major oil companies says.

Brian Straub, president of Shell Canada, said Thursday that voluntary efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emission should be replaced by coherent and consistent government-mandated rules.

"It often comes as a bit of a surprise to hear a major oil company advocating for more and better public policy guidance," Straub said at a news conference in Regina. "But that's exactly what we're after. We believe the time for voluntary action has passed and must be replaced by consistent government policy on a Canadian, North American and a global basis."

maladroit Reviewed by maladroit on 11-07-2008. shell oil corporation president: please regulate us! Shell Canada president wants better co-ordination on climate change Last Updated: Friday, November 7, 2008 | 1:23 PM ET John Weidlich, CBC News Governments across the country need to get their act together on policies to address climate change, the president of one of Canada's major oil companies says. Brian Straub, president of Shell Canada, said Thursday that voluntary efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emission should be replaced by coherent and consistent government-mandated rules. Rating: 5

[maladroit]

In Turnaround, Industries Seek U.S. Regulations

By ERIC LIPTON and GARDINER HARRIS
Published: September 16, 2007

WASHINGTON, Sept. 15 â?? After years of favoring the hands-off doctrine of the Bush administration, some of the nationâ??s biggest industries are pushing for something they have long resisted: new federal regulations.

For toys and cars, antifreeze and fireworks, popcorn and produce and cigarettes and light bulbs, among other products, industry groups or major manufacturers are calling for federal health, safety and environmental mandates. Some of those industries are abandoning years of efforts to block such measures, often in alliance with the Bush administration, which pledged to ease what it views as costly, unnecessary rules.

The consequences for consumers, though, are not yet clear. The tactical shift by industry groups is motivated by a confluence of self-interests: growing competition from inexpensive imports that do not meet voluntary standards, and a desire to head off liability lawsuits and pre-empt tough state laws or legal actions that were a response to laissez-faire Bush administration policies. Concerns that Democrats could soon expand their control in Washington have also prompted manufacturers or producers to seek regulations that they consider the least burdensome, regulatory experts say.

â??There seems to be, at the moment, a fair amount of efforts under way by individual industries to put into statute what had either previously been voluntary consensus standards or industry goals,â?� said Rosario Palmieri, a regulatory lobbyist at the National Association of Manufacturers, which has often opposed government regulations. â??This year, we have seen quite a bit of it.â?�

Rick Melberth, director of regulatory policy at OMB Watch, a Washington group that tracks federal regulatory actions, agreed. â??I have never before seen so many industries joining a push for regulation,â?� Mr. Melberth said. â??What we need to watch closely is if this will achieve a real increase in standards and public protections or simply serve corporate interests.â?�

Some industries and consumer groups are aligned in seeking the same regulations, though perhaps for different reasons. â??Itâ??s definitely a strange-bedfellow situation,â?� said Sarah Klein, a lawyer at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which is seeking, along with grocery stores and produce growers, new requirements to prevent food-borne illnesses. â??The voluntary system is not working from a food-safety perspective, and itâ??s creating real problems for the industry.â?�

[maladroit]

Testimony of
Michael W. Masters
Managing Member / Portfolio Manager
Masters Capital Management, LLC
before the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
United States Senate
May 20, 2008


Good morning and thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, for the
invitation to speak to you today. This is a topic that I care deeply about, and I
appreciate the chance to share what I have discovered.

I have been successfully managing a long-short equity hedge fund for over 12 years
and I have extensive contacts on Wall Street and within the hedge fund community. Itʼs
important that you know that I am not currently involved in trading the commodities
futures markets. I am not representing any corporate, financial, or lobby organizations. I
am speaking with you today as a concerned citizen whose professional background has
given me insight into a situation that I believe is negatively affecting the U.S. economy.
While some in my profession might be disappointed that I am presenting this testimony
to Congress, I feel that it is the right thing to do.

You have asked the question â??Are Institutional Investors contributing to food and energy
price inflation?â?� And my unequivocal answer is â??YES.â?� In this testimony I will explain
that Institutional Investors are one of, if not the primary, factors affecting commodities
prices today. Clearly, there are many factors that contribute to price determination in the
commodities markets; I am here to expose a fast-growing yet virtually unnoticed factor,
and one that presents a problem that can be expediently corrected through legislative
policy action.
:
:
:
I would like to conclude my testimony today by outlining three steps that can be taken to
immediately reduce Index Speculation.

Number One:
Congress has closely regulated pension funds, recognizing that they serve a public
purpose. Congress should modify ERISA regulations to prohibit commodity index
replication strategies as unsuitable pension investments because of the damage that
they do to the commodities futures markets and to Americans as a whole.

Number Two:
Congress should act immediately to close the Swaps Loophole. Speculative position
limits must â??look-throughâ?� the swaps transaction to the ultimate counterparty and hold
that counterparty to the speculative position limits. This would curtail Index Speculation
and it would force ALL Speculators to face position limits.

Number Three:
Congress should further compel the CFTC to reclassify all the positions in the
Commercial category of the Commitments of Traders Reports to distinguish those
positions that are controlled by â??Bona Fideâ?� Physical Hedgers from those controlled by
Wall Street banks. The positions of Wall Street banks should be further broken down
based on their OTC swaps counter-party into â??Bona Fideâ?� Physical Hedgers and
Speculators

[maladroit]

Former AIG CEOs back credit default swap regulation
Tue Oct 7, 2008 1:33pm EDT

WASHINGTON, Oct 7 (Reuters) - Two former chief executives of American International Group (AIG.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) said they would back regulation of the credit default swaps market in testimony at the U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform hearing on Tuesday.

* Robert Willumstad, CEO from June through mid-September 2008, said that if the right regulation was put in place he would support it.

* Martin Sullivan, who stepped down as CEO after 3 years in June 2008, also said he backed regulation.

* Investments in this market contributed to the company's cash crisis and eventual rescue by the government.