DOCSLIB.ORG

10-19-17 House Hearing 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
10-19-17 House Hearing 1 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HOUSE VETERANS AFFAIRS & EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS COMMITTEE joint with the SENATE VETERANS AFFAIRS & EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS COMMITTEE and SENATE COMMUNICATIONS & TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE STATE CAPITOL HARRISBURG, PA NORTH OFFICE BUILDING HEARING ROOM 1 OCTOBER 19, 2017 9:03 A.M. PRESENTATION ON FIRSTNET HOUSE COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: HONORABLE STEPHEN BARRAR, MAJORITY CHAIRMAN HONORABLE GARY W. DAY HONORABLE MARK M. GILLEN HONORABLE BARRY J. JOZWIAK HONORABLE ZACHARY A. MAKO HONORABLE JIM MARSHALL HONORABLE KATHY L. RAPP HONORABLE WILL TALLMAN HONORABLE BRYAN BARBIN HONORABLE DOM COSTA HONORABLE MARIA P. DONATUCCI HONORABLE CAROL HILL-EVANS SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: HONORABLE RANDY VULAKOVICH, MAJORITY CHAIRMAN HONORABLE RYAN AUMENT HONORABLE SCOTT HUTCHINSON 2 1 HOUSE COMMITTEE STAFF PRESENT: RICK O'LEARY 2 MAJORITY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SEAN HARRIS 3 MAJORITY RESEARCH ANALYST LU ANN FAHNDRICH 4 MAJORITY ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 5 AMY BRINTON MINORITY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 6 HARRY BUCHER MINORITY RESEARCH ANALYST 7 IAN MAHAL MINORITY RESEARCH ANALYST 8 9 SENATE COMMITTEE STAFF PRESENT: NATE SILCOX 10 MAJORITY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RON JUMPER 11 MINORITY DEPUTY CHIEF COUNSEL CHARLIE O'NEILL 12 LEGISLATIVE OFFICE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF SENATOR VULAKOVICH 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 * * * * * * Summer A. Miller, Court Reporter 25 [email protected] 3 1 I N D E X 2 TESTIFIERS 3 * * * 4 NAME PAGE 5 MAJOR DIANE STACKHOUSE PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE....................8 6 JEFFREY BOYLE DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR 911, 7 PA EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY..............14 JOHN MacMILLAN 8 DEPUTY SECRETARY FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION....................19 9 DAVE BUCHANAN DIRECTOR OF CONSULTATION, FIRSTNET..........38 10 JIM BUGEL VICE PRESIDENT, AT&T........................44 11 DAVID KERR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, AT&T......................52 12 DECLAN GANLEY CEO, RIVADA.................................85 13 CHRIS MOORE HEAD OF PUBLIC SAFETY, RIVADA..............105 14 EDMOND VEA DIRECTOR OF INTEROPERABILITY, RIVADA.......113 15 TODD ROWLEY SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF BUSINESS, RIVADA..114 16 JEFFREY BLANK CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER, CONXX............150 17 BRIAN HENDRICKS HEAD OF POLICY & GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, 18 NOKIA......................................154 FRANK BUZYDLOWSKI 19 DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, VERIZON..159 DON BRITTINGHAM 20 VICE PRESIDENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY POLICY, VERIZON....................................160 21 22 SUBMITTED WRITTEN TESTIMONY 23 * * * 24 (See submitted written testimony and handouts online.) 25 4 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 * * * 3 SENATE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN VULAKOVICH: 4 Speakers that will be giving testimony, 5 stick to your three hours. I will stick to my five 6 hours and 23 minutes of questions. 7 All right, Representative Barrar. 8 HOUSE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN BARRAR: Thank 9 you. 10 I want to thank the members for staying 11 over for Thursday and being at the hearing today. I am 12 elated to see the turnout that we've gotten in the 13 audience there and the members, too. It's a very 14 interesting topic and it is going to be a very long 15 hearing, so I will be making comments throughout the 16 hearing with testifiers. 17 And I'm going to pass it on to the next 18 speaker. I guess Senator Aument. 19 SENATOR AUMENT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 20 In the interest of the time, I'll save 21 comments for questions throughout the morning, but thank 22 you to both chairmen for your leadership and for 23 convening this hearing and extending the invitation for 24 the Senate Communications and Technology Committee to 25 take part. I look forward to the discussion this 5 1 morning. 2 Thank you. 3 SENATE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN VULAKOVICH: 4 Thank you, Senator. 5 We also will get a few remarks -- I think 6 Representative Chris Sainato couldn't be here today. 7 So, Representative Donatucci, are you representing -- 8 REPRESENTATIVE DONATUCCI: Yes. 9 SENATE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN VULAKOVICH: 10 Yes. Would you like to say a few words? 11 REPRESENTATIVE DONATUCCI: No, I will 12 waive off. 13 SENATE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN VULAKOVICH: You 14 will waive off? Okay. Thank you. 15 All right. So let's get started. 16 (Inaudible.) 17 SENATE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN VULAKOVICH: 18 Yes, maybe we should do that. We have 19 them all over the place, I guess. 20 First off, are there any Representatives 21 or Senators that are sitting out there because of no 22 place up here? 23 (No response.) 24 SENATE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN VULAKOVICH: 25 There are none. Okay. Let's start at my 6 1 far left, down here, Representative. 2 REPRESENTATIVE RAPP: Representative 3 Kathy Rapp. And I represent Warren, parts of Forest and 4 Crawford Counties. 5 And thank you all for being here today. 6 I think we'll be hearing some good testimony. 7 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 8 SENATOR HUTCHINSON: State Senator Scott 9 Hutchinson, 21st Senatorial District, all of Clarion, 10 Venango, Forest, and Warren Counties, and a portion of 11 Butler County. 12 REPRESENTATIVE MAKO: Zach Mako, the 13 183rd, Lehigh and Northampton Counties. 14 REPRESENTATIVE BARBIN: Representative 15 Bryan Barbin. I represent Cambria and Somerset 16 Counties. 17 SENATE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN VULAKOVICH: 18 We've already introduced ourselves, so to 19 my right -- 20 MR. SILCOX: Nate Silcox, executive 21 director of the Senate Veterans Affairs and Emergency 22 Preparedness Committee for Senator Vulakovich. 23 MR. O'LEARY: Rick O'Leary, executive 24 director for Chairman Barrar. 25 REPRESENTATIVE TALLMAN: Bill Tallman, 7 1 parts of Adams and Cumberland Counties. 2 REPRESENTATIVE JOZWIAK: Barry Jozwiak, 3 Berks County. 4 REPRESENTATIVE GILLEN: Representative 5 Mark Gillen, Berks, Lancaster Counties. 6 SENATE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN VULAKOVICH: 7 Over to the far right, in the corner. 8 (Inaudible.) 9 SENATE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN VULAKOVICH: 10 Are you on? 11 MR. JUMPER: Ron Jumper, Senator Costa's 12 office. 13 MR. HARRIS: Sean Harris for the House 14 Committee. 15 MS. BRINTON: Amy Brinton, executive 16 director for Chairman Sainato. 17 (Inaudible.) 18 REPRESENTATIVE COSTA: Representative Dom 19 Costa, 21st District, Allegheny County. 20 SENATE MAJORITY CHAIRMAN VULAKOVICH: 21 And a member of my staff, Charlie 22 O'Neill, he's around here some place. 23 All right, let's get started with the 24 testimony. 25 Major Stackhouse, would you like to 8 1 begin? 2 MAJOR STACKHOUSE: Good morning, Chairmen 3 Vulakovich, Costa, Barrar, Sainato, Aument, and Haywood, 4 and Vice Chairmen Mensch and Regan, as well as members 5 of the Senate and House Veterans Affairs and Emergency 6 Preparedness and Senate Communications and Technology 7 Committees. 8 I am Major Diane Stackhouse, director of 9 the Bureau of Communications and Information Services. 10 In my role, I also serve as Pennsylvania's single point 11 of contact for the FirstNet project. 12 Seated with me is State Police Captain 13 Sean Georgia, who is also a member of the PA FirstNet 14 team. 15 The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job 16 Creation Act of 2012 created the First Responder Network 17 Authority, also known as FirstNet. FirstNet is charged 18 with overseeing the construction, operation, and 19 maintenance of the country's first interoperable, 20 nationwide public safety broadband network. The 21 FirstNet network will provide mission critical high 22 speed data services such as live streaming videos, 23 pictures, texts, maps, in-building blueprints to name 24 just a few. 25 On January 13 of 2016, FirstNet released 9 1 a request for proposal to select an experienced vendor 2 in the first of its kind, private-public partnership. 3 In March 2017, FirstNet announced its private partner, 4 AT&T. 5 I'd like to underscore the importance of 6 this private-public partnership because it has the 7 ability to leverage private-sector infrastructure which 8 enables the national public safety broadband network to 9 be deployed quickly, efficiently, and cost-effectively. 10 However, the legislation that created 11 FirstNet affords each state's governor the opportunity 12 to opt in or opt out of participating in how the radio 13 access network will be deployed within a state. 14 Opt-in means FirstNet AT&T deploys, 15 operates, and maintains the RAN, and in an opt-out 16 scenario, the state takes on the responsibility. 17 As part of the PA FirstNet team's due 18 diligence, we released a FirstNet opt-out option RFP on 19 July 7th, 2017, and to seek alternative solutions to 20 FirstNet AT&T's opt-in plan. The evaluation of the 21 proposed responses remains an active procurement and I 22 cannot comment on the results of this process. 23 On September 29th, 2017, the PA FirstNet 24 team received FirstNet AT&T's final state plan, which 25 will be scrutinized by state and local stakeholders. 10 1 The PA FirstNet team will present to Governor Wolf an 2 assessment of both the opt-in and opt-out options prior 3 to the 90-day decision-making window on December 28th, 4 2017. 5 Opt-in -- so what's opt-in? If 6 Pennsylvania opts in or takes no action within 90 days 7 of receiving the state plan, FirstNet AT&T will begin 8 deployment of the RAN at no cost. By opting in, there 9 is no financial risk to the Commonwealth because it does 10 not have to build its own RAN and AT&T will be 11 responsible for operating and upgrading the network. 12 The Commonwealth is not obligated to 13 purchase FirstNet AT&T services. This low-risk option 14 will also support fast delivery of services to 15 Pennsylvania's public safety community and help create 16 an interoperable network. To date, approximately half 17 of the states have opted in with FirstNet AT&T.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report 2007
    Office of the Attorney General Annual Report 2007 Incorporating the · Second Progress Report on Implementation of Statement of Strategy 2006 – 2008, and · Third Progress Report on Implementation of Merrion Street Office’s Client Service Guide 2005–2007 and Chief State Solicitor’s Office Customer Action Plan 2005–2007 1 Contents Foreword by the Attorney General Introduction by the Director General Chapter 1: Roles and Functions Chapter 2: Mission Statement and Goals To pursue Mission as set out in the Statement of Strategy 2006–2008 Chapter 3: Main Developments in 2007 Part I Legal Developments Part II Organisational Developments Chapter 4: Progress Achieved in reaching Goal 1 – Advisory Counsel To support and advise the Attorney General in carrying out the duties of his office and provide specialist Advisory Counsel services in areas of law of importance to Government demonstrating responsiveness, efficiency and effectiveness. Chapter 5: Progress Achieved in reaching Goal 2 – Parliamentary Counsel To provide a professional legislative drafting service to the Government. Chapter 6: Progress Achieved in reaching Goal 3 – Chief State Solicitor’s Office To deliver a high quality specialist solicitor service to the Attorney General, the Departments and Offices in the areas of litigation, provision of legal advice and in property and transactional matters. Chapter 7: Progress Achieved in reaching Goal 4 – Business Support Services Merrion Street Office and CSSO To provide modern and professional corporate and business support services that
    [Show full text]
  • Updating the Debate on Turkey in France, Note Franco-Turque N° 4
    NNoottee ffrraannccoo--ttuurrqquuee nn°° 44 ______________________________________________________________________ Updating the Debate on Turkey in France, on the 2009 European Elections’ Time ______________________________________________________________________ Alain Chenal January 2011 . Programme Turquie contemporaine The Institut français des relations internationales (Ifri) is a research center and a forum for debate on major international political and economic issues. Headed by Thierry de Montbrial since its founding in 1979, Ifri is a non- governmental and a non-profit organization. As an independent think tank, Ifri sets its own research agenda, publishing its findings regularly for a global audience. Using an interdisciplinary approach, Ifri brings together political and economic decision-makers, researchers and internationally renowned experts to animate its debate and research activities. With offices in Paris and Brussels, Ifri stands out as one of the rare French think tanks to have positioned itself at the very heart of the European debate. The opinions expressed in this text are the responsibility of the author alone. Contemporary Turkey Program is supporter by : ISBN : 978-2-86592-814-9 © Ifri – 2011 – All rights reserved Ifri Ifri-Bruxelles 27 rue de la Procession Rue Marie-Thérèse, 21 75740 Paris Cedex 15 – FRANCE 1000 – Brussels – BELGIUM Tel : +33 (0)1 40 61 60 00 Tel : +32 (0)2 238 51 10 Fax : +33 (0)1 40 61 60 60 Fax : +32 (0)2 238 51 15 Email : [email protected] Email : [email protected] Website: Ifri.org Notes franco-turques The IFRI program on contemporary Turkey seeks to encourage a regular interest in Franco-Turkish issues of common interest. From this perspective, and in connection with the Turkish Season in France, the IFRI has published a series of specific articles, entitled “Notes franco-turques” (Franco-Turkish Briefings).
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of the Irish Referendum on Lisbon Treaty, June 2008
    Evaluation of the Irish Referendum on Lisbon Treaty, June 2008 Markus Schmidgen democracy international is a network promoting direct democracy. Our basic goal is the establishment of direct democracy (initiative and referendum) as a complement to representative democracy within the European Union and in the nation states. We also work on the general democratisation of the European Union, democratic reform and more direct and participatory democracy worldwide. http://www.democracy-international.org Written by Markus Schmidgen Layout: Ronald Pabst Proof-reading (contents):, Gayle Kinkead, Ronald Pabst, Thomas Rupp Proof-reading (language): Sheena A. Finley, Warren P. Mayr Advice: Dr. Klaus Hofmann, Bruno Kaufmann, Frank Rehmet Please refer all questions to: [email protected] Published by democracy international V 0.9 (4.9.2008) Evaluation of the Irish Referendum on Lisbon Treaty, June 2008 I Introduction This report examines the process of the Irish CONTENT referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon. The referendum was held on June 12, 2008 and was the only referendum on this treaty. The evaluation is I INTRODUCTION .......................................... 3 based on the criteria set by the Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe (IRIE). These criteria are internationally recognized as standards to II SETTING...................................................... 4 measure how free and fair a referendum process is conducted. This enables the reader to compare the II.1 Background ................................................... 4 Irish Lisbon referendum to other referendums and to identify the points that could be improved as well II.2 Actors ............................................................. 4 as those that are an example to other nations. II.3 Evaluation...................................................... 7 We at Democracy International and our European partners have already published a series of reports on the EU constitutional referenda of 2005: Juan III CONCLUSION.........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Last Chance for Lisbon: Ireland's EU Referendum
    LAST CHANCE FOR LISBON: IRELAND’S EU REFERENDUM By Hugo Brady Ireland will hold a second referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon on October 2 nd . Most opinion polls in the run-up to the vote show that a majority of Irish voters now back the EU treaty they rejected in June 2008. However, despite Ireland having subsequently won a special deal on the treaty, and despite the country’s economic dependence on the Union, the result of the referendum is far from certain. The government is the most unpopular since Ireland won its independence, the public mood is volatile amidst a deep recession and many voters remain unconvinced and confused about the treaty’s merits. At stake is much more than the credibility of Ireland’s already enfeebled government. A Yes vote would allow the EU to improve the way it makes decisions, particularly in foreign policy. A No vote would lead to recrimination, policy paralysis and probably a freeze on further EU enlargement. The EU’s leaders – divided on what to do next – would be distracted from the many urgent tasks that face the Union, ranging from responding in an effective and co-ordinated manner to the economic crisis, to making a success of negotiations on climate change, to putting in place a new European Commission. Not in the bag Ireland’s voters shocked EU governments on June 13 th 2008 by rejecting the Lisbon treaty by 53 to 47 per cent. 1 Despite the fact that the country’s businesses, media and political mainstream are almost uniformly 1 See Annex, pages 5-7, for a break - pro-European, the government failed to assuage the fears – mostly spurious – down of the treaty’s principal reforms.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Economic Battle Plan
    [Economic patriot score: 85) EP13 5G, The next economic boom URGENT: AMERICA MUST WIN THE 5G WAR We are in a battle with China for high tech and who will be the superpower for the 21st century. The key driver in the race is whoever controls the dominant platform for 5G wireless, or Fifth-Generation telecommunications. The future is dependent on 5G. Whoever establishes the dominant 5G platform infrastructure will determine not only how technology transfers information, but who has access to the system. Imagine the impact on Defense systems, utility grids, intellectual property, and the Internet of Things. China has been working aggressively to build the infrastructure and finance 5G for countries around the world. America is behind, but hopefully now waking up to this threat. This is a major national security and economic challenge that needs America’s attention now! page 1 [Economic patriot score: 85) EP13 5G, The next economic boom 5G is not an incremental change in communications, it is a giant leap. It is up to 100 times faster and a denser available network than 4G. It will revolutionize products and infrastructure for the next 30 years. YOUR MISSION: To understand the potential of 5G and the threat that exists if the primary infrastructure is made in China. Contact your representatives and ensure they are putting pressure on allies that they need to develop a better plan for 5G than one made in China. Look now for investment opportunities with the 5G economic revolution. “Through the ‘made in China 2025’ plan, the Chinese communist party has set it’s sites on controlling 90 percent of the worlds most advanced industries, including robotics, bio technology, and artificial intelligence including 5G.” –Mike Pence, Vice-President of the United States page 2 [Economic patriot score: 85) EP13 5G, The next economic boom (OSINT)– Open Sourced Intelligence Briefing Open Sourced Intelligence Briefing - Kevin Freeman, CFA and Declan Ganley.
    [Show full text]
  • JCER Special Commentary Series
    472 JCER JCER Special Commentary Series The 2009 Irish Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty Ben Tonra University College Dublin The Context and Issues The result of the 2008 Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty came as a considerable shock to the Irish body politic. The Irish electorate had, yet again, broken with the established political consensus on Europe. The vote on 13 June 2008 was based on a strong turnout (at over 53 percent) and a comparatively decisive result (53. 4 percent ‘no’ as against 46.6 percent ‘yes’). However, as the only EU member state ratifying the treaty by way of referendum, the electorate’s decision placed the Government in an immediate quandary. In the first instance, it was abundantly clear that there was no willingness among Ireland’s EU partners either to reopen negotiations or to abandon the treaty altogether. The issues to be addressed, the proposed solutions and the balance of interests and arguments among the member states was the same as it had been when the Lisbon Treaty was signed on 13 December 2007. Second, the ratification process was already well advanced with over a dozen member states already having ratified the treaty. Finally, it was not clear precisely on what the Irish electorate’s verdict had been based. The Government’s reaction to the defeat first centred on identifying the issues which had led to the ‘no’ vote. As part of this analysis, the Government commissioned Milward Brown IMS to conduct a detailed quantitative and qualitative survey with preliminary results published in September (Millward Brown IMS 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • Spotlight Europe # 2009/05 – May 2009 It's Hip to Be a Euro-Critic
    spotlight europe # 2009/05 – May 2009 It's hip to be a euro-critic Isabell Hoffmann [email protected] Franziska Brantner [email protected] In the area of European policymaking, established parties are nowadays also confronted with pressure from the left-wing and right-wing fringes of the political spectrum. The fact is that, try as they might, they cannot ex- plain away all the negative results of EU policymaking. Instead of fighting a communications war from their entrenched positions, the supporters of European integration should recognize that there are contradictions in European policies which need to be dealt with frankly on a political level. Some people point out that the European And in fact after the referendum in Ireland Union was built on the basis of consensus, the European governments and the ad- whereas others warn that it needs contro- ministration in Brussels have tried to do versy, or else will lose its legitimacy. Jür- what they are best at: waiting until things gen Habermas and Günther Verheugen, have calmed down, conducting discreet two proponents of these opposing posi- talks, and preparing for another referen- # 2009/05 tions, crossed swords in the politics sec- dum. However, at the same time the de- tion of the Süddeutsche Zeitung in June bate on European policy, has already been 2008. “Politicize the debate,” demanded taken out on the streets. Not by the gov- the former. “Bring in the citizens.” “That ernments and the established political par- won’t work,” retorted the latter. “Europe is ties, but by players who do not have very based on consensus, and not on contro- deep roots in the system.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Irish Referendum on the TSCG (June 2012)
    Review of the Irish referendum on the TSCG (June 2012) Caption: Review published by the European Movement Ireland in June 2012 on the referendum held in Ireland for the ratification of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union. Source: European Movement Ireland. Fiscal Stability Treaty: Referendum Review. June 2012. [ON LINE]. [Dublin]: European Movement Ireland, [01.11.2013]. http://www.europeanmovement.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/EM-Ireland- Referendum-Review.pdf. Copyright: (c) European Movement Ireland URL: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/review_of_the_irish_referendum_on_the_tscg_june_2012-en-68ae458c-1147-4155-9b6f- a922a46e5ab7.html Last updated: 28/01/2015 1 / 21 28/01/2015 Fiscal Stability Treaty Referendum Review European Movement Ireland June 2012 2 / 21 28/01/2015 3 / 21 28/01/2015 Referendum Review Table of Contents Background .............................................................................................. 4 Role of European Movement Ireland ..................................................... 5 The Campaign ......................................................................................... 6 Polling Data ............................................................................................ 13 Results ..................................................................................................... 14 Conclusions ............................................................................................ 16 3 European Movement Ireland 4 / 21 28/01/2015 Referendum
    [Show full text]
  • Confronting Terrorism the Club De Madrid Series on Democracy and Terrorism Volume II
    Confronting Terrorism The Club de Madrid Series on Democracy and Terrorism Volume II THE INTERNATIONAL SUMMIT ON DEMOCRACY, TERRORISM AND SECURITY 8 11March2005Madrid THE INTERNATIONAL SUMMIT ON DEMOCRACY, TERRORISM AND SECURITY 8 11March2005Madrid Confronting Terrorism The Club de Madrid Series on Democracy and Terrorism Volume II The opinions expressed in individual papers are based on the discussions of the working groups at the International Summit on Democracy, Terrorism and Security. They reflect the views of their authors, but not necessarily those of the Club de Madrid or any of its members. The Club de Madrid Series on Democracy and Terrorism is available in Spanish and English. To order additional copies, please write to: Club de Madrid Felipe IV, 9 – 3º izqda. 28014 Madrid Spain Tel: +34 91 523 72 16 Fax: +34 91 532 00 88 Email: [email protected] © Club de Madrid, 2005 Series editor: Peter R. Neumann Editorial Assistance: Henrik A. Lund and Milburn Line Production: ESC/Scholz & Friends Contents Introduction by Kim Campbell 5 Confronting Terrorism Policing By Jürgen Storbeck 7 Intelligence By Brian Michael Jenkins 13 Military Responses By Lawrence Freedman 21 Terrorist Finance By Loretta Napoleoni and Rico Carisch 27 Science and Technology By David Ucko 33 The Club de Madrid Mission and Activities 39 List of Members 40 The Madrid Summit 43 The Madrid Agenda 45 Introduction to the Club de Madrid Series on Democracy and Terrorism Dear friend, I am delighted to introduce the Club de Madrid Series on Democracy and Terrorism. The policy papers that can be found in this volume are the result of an unparalleled process of debate which culminated at the International Summit on Democracy, Terrorism and Security in Madrid in March 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the 2009 European Parliament Elections
    Understanding the European Parliament Elections BRIEFING PAPER 2 Analysis of the 2009 European Parliament Elections The Results The European Parliament has shifted to the right with the European People’s Party winning a simple majority of seats. This makes it more likely that EPP-backed José Manuel Barroso will win a second term as European Commission President. With 35.9% of the vote EPP now have more seats than the Socialists (PES) and Liberals (ALDE) put together and remain the largest group. The Socialists lost the biggest number of votes across Europe falling from 27.6% to 21.9%. Liberals (ALDE) also saw their vote fall, something which will disappoint their leader Graham Watson who is a candidate for the President of the European Parliament. The Greens (Greens/EFA) increased their vote and have become the fourth largest group in the European Parliament. The French Greens won 14 seats contributing to this significantly. Fringe parties tended to do well both on the far right and the far left. 1 GUE/NGL – Confederal Group of Number of MEPs elected to different European the European United Groups Left – Nordic Greens PES – Socialist Group -4 seats -9 seats Greens/EFA – Group of the -9 seats Greens/European Free Alliance +10 seats -24 seats EPP EPP - Group of the PES European People’s Party Others ALDE UEN – Union for -20 seats Europe of the Greens/EFA Nations Group UEN Ind/Dem – GUE/NGL Independence/Demo Ind/Dem cracy Group In crease or +63 seats decrease in seats compared to 2004 -56 seats 1European Parliament, Results of the 2009 European Election, available at: http://www.elections2009- results.eu/en/index_en.html , 22/06/09 Page 1 of 3 What the election results will mean for the new Parliament The relative success of smaller parties means that 40% of the Parliaments MEPs will not sit in either of the two largest groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Gricard-Nihoul-Note Europeanelections.Indd
    EUROPEAN DEMOCRACY IN ACTION EUROPEAN ELECTIONS: FIVE REFLECTIONS FOR DISCUSSION GAËTANE RICARD-NIHOUL JULY 2009 GAËTANE RICARD-NIHOUL IS SECRETARY GENERAL OF NOTRE EUROPE. SHE HOLDS A DEGREE IN POLITICAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF LIÈGE AND AN MPHIL AND A DPHIL IN EUROPEAN POLITICS AND SOCIETY FROM OXFORD UNIVERSITY. HER RESEARCH FOCUSED ON POLICY FORMATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION, AND MORE PARTICULARLY ON EDUCATION POLICY. SHE IS THE AUTHOR OF SEVERAL STUDIES: « THE FRENCH ‘NO’ VOTE OF 29 MAY: UNDERSTANDING, ACTION » AND «THE REVISION OF THE EUROPEAN TREATIES: THE CONVENTIONMOMENT». EUROPEAN ELECTIONS: FIVE REFLECTIONS FOR DICUSSION - 1 1. Is abstention intractable? the progress made by this idea since 1998. But given the fall in turnout, we can only regret that once again the idea has not been put into practice. Average turnout across the EU for these elections of June 2009 was assessed at 43.2%. It was 45.5% in 2004 and 62% in 1979. The paradox Of course, the situation is not entirely gloomy. Participation increased in 8 of European elections persists: for 30 years participation has fallen with member states and remained stable in 7. But such increases or stability are each election, while in parallel the European Parliament’s competencies relative to 2004 figures which were somewhat low – or in certain cases very have grown significantly. The Parliament was already a major winner of the low. It is interesting to note the rising participation in two Scandinavian treaties of Maastricht, Nice and Amsterdam; if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified it countries where opinion has seemed increasingly favourable to European will become co-legislator, with the Council, in a large majority of the Union’s integration in recent years (59.52% against 47.89% in 2004 in Denmark; policy areas, and will have blocking power throughout the budget negotia- 43.8% against 37.85% in Sweden).
    [Show full text]
  • The Anti-Americans (A Love/Hate Relationship) Directors’ Cut Transcript
    The Anti-Americans (a love/hate relationship) Directors’ Cut Transcript [White Cholera music starts.] [Title: The Center for New American Media presents] [Visuals: Montage of images of American culture] [Visuals: White Cholera performing.] White Cholera: (singing) This is a rogue state. We’re doing business, business. This is a rogue state. You’re on my hit list, hit list. I’m dealing with the Arabs and the Jews as well. I tell them how it is or they can go to hell. White skin, dark skin, it doesn’t matter But if you try and cross me it’s your head upon a platter. Cause this is a rogue state. This is a rogue state. You’re on my axis of evil. You may be knock kneed and feeble. You’re on my axis – so there! David McWilliams: Welcome. Welcome to Leviathan, thank you all very much for turning out; this week why do Europeans, why are we so ungrateful to a country that has never threatened us? That’s one view. The other view is; why should we snuggle up to an imperialist war- mongering power? Narrator: It was our first evening in Europe, and we were in a Dublin pub, listening to people talk about America. David Norris: I love Bugs Bunny, the original Dixieland Jazz Band, New Orleans, the fall in Vermont, all these kind of things, but I feel I am entitled to distance myself from the atrocity and the stupid atrocity that is American foreign policy... The Anti-Americans [Directors’ Cut] - page 2 Narrator: It had been billed as a debate, but almost everyone seemed to be in agreement.
    [Show full text]