The African Development Bank (AfDB) says it and five other multilateral banks have settled on a joint process to report on their funding for climate change adaptation.
This is significant, because researchers have complained for some time that it's almost impossible to know how much is being spent on helping vulnerable countries adjust to more extreme weather and rising seas because there is no common system for recording climate aid.
At a workshop at last week's U.N. climate talks in Bonn, the six banks agreed on a definition of adaptation and the principles of the joint methodology they will use to account for and allocate adaptation finance.
They now plan to test this methodology and make it public by this year's annual U.N. climate conference, which kicks off in late November in Qatar.
Besides the AfDB, the participating institutions are the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank , the European Investment Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
"Having a joint ... methodology for tracking aid spending that contributes to climate change adaptation means the multilateral development banks and development partners can engage in substantive analysis of climate finance," Mafalda Duarte, the AfDB's chief climate change specialist said in a statement.
"We will be better able to measure, report and verify climate financial flows and the results they support," she said.
The move will go at least some way towards appeasing climate finance experts.
They have stepped up calls for a unified reporting system since rich countries pledged in 2009 to mobilise a sum approaching $30 billion to help poorer nations tackle climate change between 2010 and 2012 (money known as 'fast start finance'), rising to $100 billion a year by 2020.
FAST-START FOG
Earlier this month, the World Resources Institute (WRI) and Overseas Development Institute (ODI) published working papers examining the fast-start contributions of Britain and the United States - £1.06 billion ($1.64 billion) and $5.1 billion respectively.
On the bright side, the researchers found an increase from climate spending in previous years - a more than four-fold rise in the case of Britain's annual funding for climate objectives.
But they say both Washington and London are counting in their fast-start donations projects and programmes they were already supporting before 2010, meaning not all the resources are "new and additional" as promised.
The United States, for example, is including its contribution to the Montreal Protocol Fund to help developing countries phase out ozone-depleting substances, which it has backed since the early 1990s. Both countries are counting their financing for the Climate Investment Funds, pledged before the fast-start period began.
To make matters worse, the approach isn't consistent. Japan tags leveraged private finance as fast-start money, whereas Britain and the U.S. count only public finance. The U.S. includes export credit but the UK doesn't.
As a result, the self-reported contributions of each country are not directly comparable, the WRI and ODI researchers say.
"This strengthens the case we and other commentators have made for clear and compatible definitions and systems to track climate finance in support of a meaningful assessment of delivery on climate finance pledges," they write in a blog on their findings.
It's also difficult to know how much money has actually been received by governments and other organisations in developing countries, they add.
As well as better information from rich country donors on this, they urge comprehensive and frequent reporting by the multilateral institutions that manage large volumes of climate funding, including the development banks. So far, their disbursement reporting practices have been "mixed", they note.
If the new reporting initiative just launched by the main international development banks puts in place the building blocks for a clearer and more transparent system, then it could go some way towards rebuilding developing countries' confidence in climate finance.
Some poorer, vulnerable states say they have received little or nothing so far; nearly all say it is not enough. Knowing how much is flowing from which donors to where will help clear the fog, and provide a sounder basis for working out effective ways of raising more money in the coming years.
Read more at AlertNet Climate, the Thomson Reuters Foundation's daily news website on the human impacts of climate change.
EU debt talks still 'a building site' - EurActiv.com
In spite of "heated" and "intense" discussions yesterday (15 February), a senior EU diplomat said that the so-called 'comprehensive package' – new proposals to police debt, up competitiveness and boost rescue efforts – was still "a building site."
Centre-right leaders from 14 eurozone countries will meet in Finland on 4 March to iron out their differences over the package, in preparation for a summit in Brussels with eurozone leaders on 11 March.
One question which has proved controversial in previous talks was where to send the proceeds of fines from economic sanctions. The options on the table right now are to inject money from fines into the new rescue facility (European Financial Stability Facility; EFSF) or to redistribute the money among EU countries.
Yesterday, member states were still divided on which option to go for. Slovakia suggested that the money sent to the facility could reduce member states' annual contributions to the EU budget.
According to a document seen by EurActiv, three member states would still rather see the money go back into their pockets. Estonia is one of those countries.
EU governments are also trying to upgrade how they collect statistics after Greece was found out for tampering with its national debt figures.
The Spanish finance minister, Elena Salgado, asked EU Economic Affairs Commissioner Olli Rehn if he could live with receiving data from states, such as Catalonia, every three months instead of every month.
Salgado said Spain could not provide state governmental expenses on a monthly basis. EU diplomats at the talks say Rehn stood his ground and insisted that Spain had until 2013 to adapt to the new conditions.
British opt-out on the horizon
Britain, a non-eurozone country which has been on the sidelines for the majority of the talks, has once again sought a guarantee on fiscal sovereignty, this time on a proposal to harmonise national budget-making.
A proposal on national budgetary frameworks includes new rules on public accounting systems, statistics, forecasting practices and many other stages in the budgetary process.
UK opposition is so fervent that the UK ambassador is currently in talks with Commissioner Rehn to guarantee an opt-out from the proposed directive on budgetary frameworks.
And to add to recent opposition on a German-Franco pact to harmonise salary indexation, tax, social security and pension systems, among others, Swedish Finance Minister Anders Borg reportedly came out in force against all of the above, insisting these were matters of national sovereignty.
Finland will host a meeting of 14 European Union leaders, including Germany's Angela Merkel and France's Nicolas Sarkozy, on 4 March, to help prepare the comprehensive response to the eurozone debt crisis.
"I will host in Helsinki a special meeting of European People's Party prime ministers, which will focus on the preparation of the crucial eurozone summit of 11 March," Finland's deputy prime minister and finance minister, Jyrki Katainen, said in a statement.
The 11 March talks in Brussels are supposed to pave the way for an agreement on 24-25 March on a package to boost the euro zone's current rescue fund - as well as making it permanent from 2013 onwards - and on reforms to boost competitiveness.
Money making expert: Cash guru Martin Lewis flogs MoneySavingExpert website he set up in bedroom for £87million - Daily Mirror
Consumer champion Martin Lewis is set to make an £87million fortune by selling his hit money advice website.
The journalist and TV personality is quids in after agreeing a deal with online heavyweight MoneySupermarket.
Mr Lewis, who set-up MoneySavingExpert.com in his bedroom nine years ago, will get £60million up front in cash and shares and a further £27million if the business hits certain targets over the next three years.
He will stay as editor-in-chief for at least the next three years – and announced he would be donating £10million from the sale to charity, including £1million to Citizens Advice.
It was a double celebration for the 40-year-old after he let slip that he and wife Lara Lewington, 33, a Channel 5 weather presenter, are expecting a baby in November.
He said: “MoneySupermarket are good at the technology. I hope it’ll enable us to engage with a lot more people.”
His only spending plan was to buy a three-wheeled motorbike “if Mrs MoneySavingExpert lets me”.
He added: “Some might think this is about shutting me up but I can assure you I’ll be ranting and raving even more.”
Mr Lewis said he chose MoneySupemarket because it was not owned by a financial firm that sells products.
He went on: “After that, the door is open for me to carry on, and I hope to do so, though perhaps with fewer hours than now, so I can spend more time on my media work and other projects I’m passionate about.
"These include getting financial education on the curriculum.”
MoneySupermarket chief Peter Plumb said: “MoneySavingExpert is rightly trusted by its users as a unique source of independent information and views in today’s complex financial world.
"We are committed to maintaining its trusted, independent reputation.”
Mr Lewis, who owns 100% of MoneySavingExpert, said his decision to give £1million to Citizens Advice was in response to its “terrible funding cuts”.
The rest of the £10 million donation will go to a Charities Aid Foundation trust.
He was born in Manchester and grew up in Cheshire before studying at the London School of Economics.
He worked briefly in financial public relations while dabbling in stand-up comedy to “relieve the tedium”.
After training to be a journalist, he went on to become business editor of Radio 4’s Today programme.
He left the BBC in 1999, worked for a now defunct digital TV channel called Simply Money and then became a newspaper columnist.
A former colleague is quoted as calling him a “bit of a geek”.
He now lives in North West London with Lara, who he married in 2009.
• STARTED by Martin Lewis in 2003 when he was working as a columnist on a newspaper.
• CALLS itself the UK’s “biggest money site”, with 13 million monthly users and seven million regular recipients of his tips email.
• GENERATED £15.7million in revenues in 2011 and makes its money from linking, via “switching” web-sites like MoneySupermarket, to the websites of financial providers. Insists income doesn’t influence its best buy advice.
• SITE is run by a staff of 42.
How To Earn Money Online With You Tube - pressbox.co.uk
Added: (Fri Jun 01 2012)
Pressbox (Press Release) - To earn money online through the internet you need to work wiser, not difficult. With so many approaches available, you got to try the one that suits you. In the beginning, the income earned is pretty low. But once you understand the smart way to earn, there is no looking back.
YouTube is one of the most powerful tools ever developed. It is a larger than life form of internet. Just like internet lets two people from remote part of the world speak with each other, YouTube goes a step further and lets people share their videos with the entire world.
If you noticed, YouTube has started posting ads on the videos and on the video pages, which are specific to the video's content. That kind of ad is a pay per click ad. Recruiting an advert on your channel is something you can sign up for and get paid. Basically you get paid through adsense.
Yet another great way to earn money online through YouTube is using YouTube as a platform to encourage your site, products and services. You can use it like a video blog and promote. If you have a great video, chances are there people might want to visit your website as well. Producing traffic on your YouTube page and diverting it to your website or blog is an excellent, time tested method to earn money.
This method involves NO INVESTMENT and can be used by anybody who owns a YouTube channel along with a blog or website.
How does this work?
Strategy is to create a amazing video with loads of information that will go viral and attract people. By that you are undertaking traffic on your YouTube page. Once you have a nice assortment of good videos with good number of views, you can sign up for YouTube's partner program.
YouTube partner program
Once you apply, YouTube will review your videos and hits for each of your videos. Make sure your videos are 100% original and not a copied content. You will receive verification regarding the approval (or disapproval, as the case may be). If you are not approved, maybe YouTube thinks your traffic is not worth enough to split their ad revenue with you. So make a juicy collection that YouTube cannot resist.
The ads that display below the video and besides, both are powered by Google adsense. Just like adsense pays per click in a blog or a website, it does exactly the same with the video content as well.
How do I get paid?
Mostly through check or PayPal. If you are using any other Google adsense program (on your website or blog), that earning along with your YouTube earning will be viewable on your payment page. YouTube takes a tiny part of that revenue as its share and leaves the rest for you to enjoy!
Indirect payment would be upon sales of your product and through referral links.
How do I make the most out of it?
By combining YouTube with other moneymaking schemes, you can earn a steady income through internet. Use other social networks to promote your videos. Make good videos. Here are some tips on making engaging videos for your viewers.
1. Be genuine and be yourself. Faking will never help and by being sincere, you will be providing content that is true to the tee.
2. Produce videos of very good quality. This goes without saying. If your video quality is poor, it is going to be a big turn off.
3. Post videos at regular intervals. People get bored of watching the same video, no matter how great it is. To keep their attention, post videos at least once or twice a month.
4. Try to restrain yourself from doing personal remarks on religion and politics. Stay away from sensitive issues. This could lead you from being banned from the partners program.
5. If you are placing a copyrighted content, you have to specifically mention that in the information part of the video. Else, YouTube will out rightly remove the video.
6. It is all about etiquette and creativity. Make sure you include a decent setup to make a video in and that your content speaks of originality.
All these are indirect factors, but they might impact your earnings nevertheless.
Success stories
Mathew developed a proven program to earn money through social networking back in 2007. His smart thinking helped him because he earns a 5 figure salary per month now. In this video he gives proof that his method works and offers to become a mentor for all those who need help earn money through YouTube. His sales figure rose three-way the time in just one month after he posted his video regarding his services and products.
The most acclaimed story is about Lauren Luke who started her YouTube channel as an expert in beauty niche. She left her job as a taxi dispatcher in 2007 to sell beauty products on eBay. She was sorted after for her advice on makeup and cosmetics. This led her to start her own YouTube. Her videos went viral, gathering massive views in just a week. It was her casual way of training make up that appealed to most. She did things from her heart and was completely truthful with what she knew. This is what paved her way to success. Read her story here
Celeb exercise trainer Sarah Dussault signed up for YouTube partnership in 2007 with her channel Diet Health. She hosts videos on how to diet properly and remain fit and healthy. With this fitness niche channel, she is considered a guru according to the hits that her videos get.
Michelle Phan is a makeup artist who became partners with YouTube in 2008. With her success on YouTube and the income that she generates through the system, she is one of the featured success stories in YouTube's
You can add your story too by making good videos and earning money by becoming a partner with YouTube!
Ferrari auction to raise money for Italy quake - YAHOO!
Italian luxury sports carmaker Ferrari said Thursday it was organising a rare online auction to raise funds for victims of two earthquakes that left 23 people dead and thousands homeless in Italy.
"Ferrari has decided to collect funds to help the families of victims of the quakes which hit the Emilia Romagna region with a big online auction open to bidders internationally," the famous automaker said in a statement.
Among the "important and rare" items up for auction will be a Ferrari 599XX Evo, the latest of the luxury racing line's track-only specials, usually only driven by select customers as part of the brand's development process.
As well as the snazzy car -- which has a commercial value of 1.3 million euros ($1.6 million) -- racing suits and helmets donated by current Formula One drivers Fernando Alonso and Felipe Massa will also go under the hammer.
Items for sale will be offered on the Ferrari store website from next week.
"As soon as news about the earthquake came out, Ferrari clients and collectors from around the world spontaneously contacted the Maranello headquarters to offer their contribution," the company said.
Ferrari, which belongs to the Fiat group, is based in Maranello near Modena. The region was hit by a fatal quake on Tuesday, sparking panic and misery in an area severely damaged by another deadly tremor on May 20.
mg/ide/boc
EU finance ministers haggle over bank rules - Yahoo Finance
BRUSSELS (AP) -- European Union finance ministers are to meet in in Brussels Tuesday to hammer out an agreement over how high banks should build their defenses against future financial shocks, with the U.K. running the risk of being isolated over who should set the height.
The EU's 27 members agree on the need to increase capital reserves of banks, following an international agreement called Basel III, which was negotiated by the world's largest economies to avoid another financial meltdown such as the one brought on by the collapse of U.S. investment bank Lehman Brothers in 2008.
But the U.K. wants national regulators to be able to set requirements significantly higher than those of the EU — a position opposed by almost all other EU members, who fear investors might then prefer UK banks and flee from those in other countries.
On his way into the meeting Tuesday morning, George Osborne, the British chancellor of the exchequer, was non-committal about the possibility of reaching an agreement.
"This is a time of considerable uncertainty in the eurozone economies," he said, referring to the 17 countries — the U.K. not among them — that use the euro currency. "And that uncertainty is undermining the entire European recovery. And I think we're reaching a point where we've got to make a decision to see the eurozone stand behind their currency. A very important part of that, of course, is strengthening the entire European banking system. And that is what we intend to do today."
Once enacted, Basel III would require lenders to increase their highest-quality capital — such as equity and cash reserves — gradually from 2 percent of the risky assets they hold to 7 percent by 2019. An additional 2.5 percent would have to be built up during good times. All members of the G-20 have agreed to implement Basel III; if the European Union succeeds, it would become the first entity to institute the new requirements.
The U.K. is arguing that, because national taxpayers have to bail out banks when they fail, national authorities should be able to set more stringent requirements to guard against such failures. A compromise proposal offered by the Danes, who hold the rotating presidency of the European Union, would allow national authorities some leeway to increase requirements beyond those called for in the Basel III agreement. That proposal has broad support — except, so far, from the U.K.
The finance ministers can approve the compromise proposal without British support, through what is known as qualified majority voting, in which member countries have different numbers of votes according to their populations. However, there is a tradition in the EU that changes that would affect an industry in a particular country — such as the banking sector in the U.K. — are not forced into effect over the objections of that country, and consensus is sought.
"I think there should be a unanimous decision on such an important issue," Swedish Finance Minister Anders Borg said on his way into the meeting.
Forex: USD/CAD back to 1.0400 - FXStreet.com
Forex focus: let's not kid ourselves about the pound - Daily Telegraph
With the the Olympics following hot on the heels of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, he thinks UK consumers will start spending again. "Ticket sales alone for the Olympics are going to add 0.2pc to the GDP in the third quarter of the year. Things are set to get a lot better in the UK."
Simon Smith of FxPro is cautiously optimistic, pointing to the low yield on UK gilts and saying: "There's little doubt that the pound has benefitted from events in the eurozone. I would expect the pound to continue to appreciate vs. the euro as this effect continues, pushing EUR/GBP to new lows for the year."
However, many consider it is just a race for the bottom between the two currencies with the single currency definitely winning.
"We should be clear that this is not due to any inherent strength in the pound – just the euro's abject weakness," believes David Kerns of Moneycorp.
The pound is also being talked down. Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, has suggested the UK base rate should be cut further below its current record low of 0.5pc while the Bank of England is yet again considering pumping more money into the economy.
Jeremy Cook of World First thinks the Bank could bring in more quantitative easing as early as this month but he doesn't believe it will have much of an impact.
"We would prefer to see the Bank take on some form of 'credit easing' – the purchase of corporate debt as opposed to that of the government. The fact is that the liquidity that the banks are receiving is not making it through to businesses and consumers."
The UK certainly can't afford to be complacent and imagine we can get away with sitting on the sidelines.
Charles Purdy of Smart Currency Exchange says: "There is a great possibility that the UK could run into trouble. The UK has been masterful in its management of international investment sentiment as it convinces the international market to finance our debt at a fraction of the cost of that of Spain or Italy. If this changes then we are in the same position as the southern states of the eurozone."
And Smith adds: "The eurozone crisis is ultimately a banking crisis. We remain a nation still very much reliant on banking and financial services. Therefore, it can't be dismissed."
The situation in the eurozone is creating a vortex threatening to suck everyone into it. It is hoped that the drawn out debacle in Athens has bought sufficient time to work out how to limit the damage.
"Hopefully the time spent will have allowed the authorities to build up an adequate firewall to protect the other 16 members of the euro," says Alistair Cook of Currencies Direct. "If not, then we're in real trouble."
Money, misbehavior gushing in elections process - Worcester Telegram & Gazette
John Edwards is acquitted of using campaign cash as hush money. There's an explosion of high-dollar super political action committees in the presidential race. It's all stoking criticism of revisions and regulatory loopholes in a system that was intended to keep better control of political money after Watergate.
Loosening the law has made it easier for politicians to butt up against the legal line — if not cross it — and for wealthy Americans to influence who wins office, from the White House on down.
All told, the immense amount of money in American campaigns, the cozy relationships between candidates and their financial backers — and now, too, a seeming lack of accountability for alleged rule-breakers — is fueling the public's long-standing distrust of its politicians and doubts about the credibility of the system.
"There's not much for voters to have faith in," says Trevor Potter, a former Federal Election Commission member and a proponent of campaign-finance reform. "We don't have much of a campaign-finance system at this stage, and we are wide open to the possibilities of corruption."
Spanning many weeks, the Edwards trial in North Carolina showcased what prosecutors said was a classic case of misusing campaign funds: Here was a former presidential candidate, they said, who channeled large sums of money from a deep-pocketed donor to cover up a love child and a mistress. But jurors acquitted Edwards, in part because the statute he was charged under required him to know he was breaking the law.
Jurors said the government didn't prove that. Said one, Sheila Lockwood: "I just felt that he didn't receive any of the money, so you can't really charge him for money that he got."
Campaign finance laws have changed remarkably since Edwards ran for the White House four years ago.
Had he been a candidate this year, and had his backers wanted to help him, they could have established a super PAC and donated unlimited amounts of money that could have been used in any number of ways. It's unclear if that still would have been legal for the uses in his case, although the super PACs have been able to take more risks than the campaigns they support. Super PACs are barred from coordinating with a candidate.
But it doesn't seem that clarity is coming anytime soon. The FEC can't agree on new regulations.
Take last December, when a Republican super PAC asked commissioners if it could "fully coordinate" with a Senate candidate. The commission deadlocked on a 3-3 vote after a heated discussion.
Michael Toner, a Washington lawyer and election law expert, said it would be a mistake to conclude that the failed prosecution of Edwards means that campaign finance violations will not be prosecuted.
"There's no question that there were relatively unique facts in the Edwards case," he said, and that there are other areas in campaign law where wrongdoing is clear cut — such as contributions from foreigners.
It's not just the FEC. A divided Congress has shown no appetite to take up the issue in earnest despite calls for an overhaul by Democrats after a series of federal court rulings — including the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision in 2010 — started to deregulate the system.
Political gridlock and regulatory ambiguity have paved the way for an unprecedented amount of spending from outside groups and special interests. Campaigns, political parties and super PACs supporting President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney have raised more than $400 million apiece, figures that put the election on track to cost more than $1 billion.
Despite claims of independence, super PACs have incredibly close ties to the candidates they're working to help elect.
Restore Our Future, supporting Mitt Romney, shares office space with the same consultants who help Romney's own campaign. The groups insist there is a "firewall" — the workspaces are separated, they have said, by a conference room. A former White House spokesman, Bill Burton, runs the Priorities USA Action super PAC with its goal of helping Obama win a second term.
The fuzzy rules have super PACs pushing the limits. Many have nonprofit arms that legally don't have to disclose their donors. Some mega-donors — notably casino mogul Sheldon Adelson — have said they will be giving their money to these shelters to avoid public scrutiny.
"That's exactly what the laws we have are supposed to prevent," Potter said, "that one candidate for public office is not completely beholden to an individual and his interests."
We've been here before.
Congress began to change how Americans fund their elections in the mid-1970s after slush funds and cover-ups forced Richard Nixon's resignation.
"I believe that one of the crucial factors in determining whether or not we consider a government democratic is not how much power public officials have, but rather how public officials secure and retain their offices," Lawton Chiles told his colleagues on the Senate floor in April 1974.
Since then, there's been no shortage of instances of questionable relationships between politicians and the people who bankroll their candidacies.
On the Democratic side, hundreds of Obama's major backers have had repeated access to his top advisers or have attended glamorous state dinners. The White House has declined to offer complete details on those meetings. And on the Republican side, GOP super PACs have faced their own troubles in disclosing donors required under existing rules. Some major contributors have been listed in federal data with ambiguous addresses or shell corporations.
Situations like those have fueled voter distrust of both parties.
Republican Sen. John McCain, a major player in campaign-finance reform, has warned the current system is so influenced by wealthy donors that it will require "major scandals" before it is fixed. Conversely, anti-reform advocates have said campaign-finance deregulation is more faithful to free-speech protections afforded by the First Amendment.
One thing certain in an otherwise uncertain campaign finance landscape is that no changes are imminent. This will be the system at least through the November election.
No comments:
Post a Comment