The backgrounds of up to 500,000 people are being scrutinised in an unprecedented security screening designed to stop the Olympic Games being disrupted by criminals or terrorists, the Guardian has learned.
In what is understood to be the biggest vetting process since the second world war, the Home Office has so far refused about 100 applications for Games accreditation, mostly because of concerns about the extent of people's criminal records.
However, some people have been denied accreditation on the advice of MI5, which has to assess whether a person might pose a significant threat to national security.
The 500,000 figure includes anyone seeking employment at the Games, as well as athletes, coaches and officials from more than 200 competing nations.
The Guardian has been told the threshold for refusing accreditation has been set high, which means some of those working at the Olympics this summer will have "come to the notice of" the police or MI5 in the past.
"To be rejected, they have to pose a significant potential threat to the safety of the Games," said a source. "They won't be rejected on the basis that information is held about them.
"A judgment has to be made, not on the basis that there is an official record, but does this person pose a significant threat to security."
Police and MI5 have been taking a careful look at all those who may end up working at the Olympic sites. It is an obvious way for would-be terrorists to gain access to venues, and police are aware that terrorists may masquerade as casual workers looking for temporary jobs.
However, those involved in the security of the Games say they have found no evidence so far that al-Qaida sympathisers have tried to infiltrate the civilian workforce.
The vetting process began in earnest last October and officials are more than two-thirds of the way through the process, which is expected to be completed in the coming weeks.
It has been one of the core tasks of counter-terrorism officials but the scale of the operation, and the depth of the checks required, has made it a drawn-out affair.
Among those still to be vetted are many of the 10,000 security guards who will be employed by G4S, the private firm which is contributing 23,700 personnel at the Olympic venues.
A big recruitment drive was launched by G4S when the number of guards it was expected to provide grew from 2,000 to 10,000, after it emerged that the Games organisers, Locog, had seriously underestimated the number required. The 70,000 volunteers recruited by Locog, who are considered crucial to the success of the Games, are also being screened.
Home Office officials said that many of the 10,500 athletes taking part in the Games and those accompanying them were used to travelling to international events and were unlikely to pose any security problems.
There remain outstanding questions surrounding a handful of high-profile individuals, including members of the Syrian Olympic committee with close links to the Assad regime.
It is believed that discussions are continuing over whether to bar General Mofwaq Joumaa, the president of the Syrian national Olympic committee, from entering the UK.
Scotland Yard and MI5 are understood to have hundreds of investigations "live", with the Olympic security operation likely to reach a new pitch as teams arrive for training before the event.
It is understood that the security service has not set up a separate Olympic security unit, believing it would be wrong to draw a distinction between terrorism and Olympic terrorism.
The security service is said to be bracing for a possible deluge of intelligence from foreign police forces and intelligence agencies, who will not want to sit on any information just in case it reveals a potential threat to the Games. MI5 remains confident it will be able to cope, and the Home Office said it will leave nothing to chance when it comes to security.
"We are undertaking stringent checks on all those seeking accreditation," a Home Office spokesman said. "This rigorous process has been designed to ensure those working at the Games are fit to do so. We will leave nothing to chance in our aim to deliver a safe and secure Games that London, the UK and the whole world will enjoy."
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
London Luxury-Home Price Gains Slow After Property-Tax Increase - Bloomberg
Luxury-home prices in central London rose the least in nine months in May, after the British government increased a tax on purchases of 2 million pounds ($3.1 million) or more, Knight Frank LLP said.
Values of houses and apartments costing an average of 3.7 million pounds climbed 10.7 percent from a year earlier, the London-based broker said in a report today. That was the smallest gain since August 2011. Prices rose 0.7 percent from April, bolstered by buyers from mainland Europe.
Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne raised the tax, known as stamp duty, to 7 percent from 5 percent in March. The threshold for the new tax rate is now the average asking price of a home in Kensington and Chelsea, one of London’s most affluent neighborhoods, property-listings website Rightmove Plc said when the government announced the change.
“The market has absorbed the 7 percent duty rate fairly well,” Liam Bailey, head of residential research for Knight Frank, said in the report. Prices for homes valued at more than 2 million pounds rose 1.6 percent in the past two months, while those for all luxury properties gained 2.7 percent, he said.
Europe’s debt crisis has prompted overseas investors to acquire real estate in London to preserve their wealth. Luxury- property prices in the city have increased about 12 percent since the market’s peak in 2008, including 4.7 percent this year, as a scarcity of homes for sale drove up values.
German Buyers
“We are now seeing a noticeable uptick in interest from France, Italy, Spain and even German-based purchasers,” Bailey said in the report. That contributed to the 19th monthly price increase in a row.
The crisis, now in its third year, threatens to destroy Europe’s 17-nation currency union as Greece contemplates exiting the euro and Spain sees its bond yields rise and banking industry falter. The euro zone’s collapse could cause prime central London property values to fall as much as 50 percent, Development Securities Plc (DSC) said in a May 31 report, as capital flows out of the city to less expensive markets.
“The ‘safe-haven’ effect has clearly played its role in attracting foreign money into London’s most desirable post codes,” Chief Executive Officer Michael Marx said in the report. “However, the property industry knows -- perhaps better than most -- that nothing goes on forever.”
Foreign Residents
Foreign buyers accounted for about 60 percent of home purchases in London’s most expensive districts in the four years through 2011, according to London-based Development Securities. As a result, more than half of the residents of Kensington and Chelsea and the City of Westminster are from outside the U.K.
House prices across the country rose in May for the first time in three months as a lack of homes for sale supported values, Nationwide Building Society said May 31. Values gained 0.3 percent from April and fell an annual 0.7 percent to an average of 166,022 pounds.
Knight Frank compiles its luxury-homes index from its own appraisal values of a sample of the same properties in the 13 most expensive neighborhoods of central London, including Belgravia and Knightsbridge.
To contact the reporter on this story: Chris Spillane in London at cspillane3@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Andrew Blackman at ablackman@bloomberg.net.
Source: www.bloomberg.com
Safe-haven seekers propel prime London house prices to new highs - The Independent
Last month's increase means the prices of prime London houses are now 47.3 per cent higher than at their post-credit crunch low in March 2009, according to research from Knight Frank, the estate agent.
The increase came despite an increase in the stamp duty rate to 7 per cent for properties worth £2m or more.
Liam Bailey, Knight Frank's head of residential research, said: "While it looks very much that the surge in Greek buyers has fallen off sharply since the beginning of the year – those who have had the funds to buy have done so – we are now seeing a noticeable uptick in interest from France, Italy, Spain and even German-based purchasers looking at the prime London market.
"If the crisis in the Eurozone leads to a break-up, will this flow of funds continue to London? The final form of the break-up will dictate that," Mr Bailey added.
Any country that seems to be at imminent risk of ejection from the Eurozone is likely to see a massive outflow of capital, some of which is ending up in expensive bricks and mortar in London, says Mr Bailey.
Last month's 0.7 per cent jump in prices means that prices are now 10.7 per cent than a year ago. It follows a 1.1 per cent increase in April and leaves prices 12.1 per cent above their previous peak in March 2008.
Analysts said the figures presented further evidence that the London property market was one of three safe havens for cash, alongside gold and the swiss franc.
On Saturday, upmarket estate agency Savills reported that it has seen web searches from France increase by 16 per cent, compared with six months ago, with Spain up 10 per cent and Italy rising by 9 per cent.
Furthermore, the falling value of the euro against the pound, making property purchases relatively more expensive, seems to have had little impact on rising prices, analysts said. Rupert des Forges, a partner at Knight Frank, said: "Recent weeks have seen an even greater influx of European buyers looking to purchase property in the Prime London market.
"We have recently sold examples including two substantial flats in a premier Knightsbridge block with asking prices in excess of £15m.
We have also seen a sharp rise in interest from French investors looking to move quickly before [new president François] Hollande's newly proposed wealth tax."
Source: www.independent.co.uk
Divorce, Facebook style - Evening Sun
A recent report states that Facebook was mentioned in one-third of all divorce cases in 2011. Oddly, the story didnt say what was mentioned in the other two-thirds of divorces. I would guess drinking, drugs, cheating, gambling and violence popped up quite a bit, with an occasional mention of man caves, tattoos, topless bars, video games, secret second families, unemployment, child endangerment, immaturity, desertion and irreconcilable differences (as if all the other reasons are reconcilable).
So, obviously, Facebook is the No. 1 problem. Say you learn that your husband is cheating on you from a friend on Facebook. Is Facebook really the problem? Of course it is. Your husband wouldnt have cheated if he knew you would find out about it so soon. He was hoping you would find out years from now, after the affair was over, so he could say: Stop digging up the past. Its over; its time to move on. That was years ago. I have a completely new girlfriend now. Why is Facebook trying to wreck our happy home?
Trashing Facebook is a story that almost writes itself, whereas writing about people who should never have gotten married in the first place is a little more difficult. Married and pregnant at 16 and it didnt work out? Blame Facebook. Life didnt become a fairy tale after marrying the boss, who still treats you like an employee? Blame Facebook.
Writing about the evils of Facebook is easy, especially for those people who can see no earthly reason to be on Facebook. I already have plenty of friends, is an oft-heard comment.
I, too, have a problem with Facebook, even though I use it and even though I suffer from OCD (obsessive computer disorder), a malady that makes me check the balance of my IRA 10 times a day and my email 10 times an hour. But if my marriage ever goes south, it will be because I am a jerk and not because I started posting pictures of cute cats on Facebook.
Theres plenty to criticize FB for its huge invasion of privacy, for one. If your friends dont already know your birthday, are they really your friends? Or are they identity thieves? Why would you broadcast this kind of information to strangers on the Internet? If Facebook asked for mothers maiden names and Social Security numbers, there is no doubt most users would willingly provide them.
The hype over Facebooks initial public offering was also disturbing. Facebook already has 900 million members. Look how fast it has grown, my stock-buying friends say. But do you really think there is someone out there who wants to be on Facebook but just hasnt had time to sign up? Facebook has all the members (within a few hundred million) it is ever going to get. It is not going to grow. As a matter of fact, it is going to shrink as other, more discriminating social networks proliferate.
You may already have plenty of friends, but do you have the right friends? Even with the iffy IPO, Facebook will make scads of money. It has only 3,500 employees. Compare that to the 200,000 at General Motors or the 500,000 at the U.S. Post Office. Facebook lets its computers do all the work; its not the kind of business that needs a lot of hot bodies. It will make a ton of money on advertising, but that doesnt mean the Johnny-come-lately IPO investors will make any money. Its Apples and Googles.
So does Facebook cause divorce? The spouses who mention Facebook in their filings would have gotten divorced anyway, Im sure. But I wonder how many people have caught up with old flames on Facebook and gotten married? How many weddings have taken place because of Facebook and other social networks? Should there be two sides to this story?
No, of course not. Whatever was I thinking?
Jim Mullens newest book, How to Lose Money in Your Spare Time At Home, is available at amazon.com. You can follow him on Pinterest at pinterest.com/jimmullen.
Source: www.evesun.com
Divorce settlement causes pain - Brisbane Times
PROMOTERS of the billion-dollar divorce and property settlement proposal for Brickworks and Washington H. Soul Pattinson seem to have missed how finicky Tax Office chief Michael D'Ascenzo is about giving investors relief from capital gains tax.
Fund manager Perpetual's push to have the two investment groups, and their coalmining associate New Hope Corporation, undo their cross-shareholdings seems to have been running longer than the Survivor television series - with none of the players managing to find immunity from the ATO.
With a few billion dollars worth of assets potentially in play, the two sides have been trading shots over the past week on the back of a break-up plan devised by Charlie Green's Brisbane-based broking house Hunter Green.
Where Green thinks the tax effect on Brickworks would be minimal if it first raises some cash by flogging some of its 42.85 per cent holding in WHSP, and then distributing the rest to Brickworks shareholders on a pro rata basis - Brickworks' advisers beg to differ.
Brickworks actually sent a letter to shareholders last week saying that work done by PricewaterhouseCoopers calculated that instead of the $46 million in tax that Green theorised would be payable, the accounting group had come up with a $277 million cost.
That figure is roughly the 30 per cent of capital gains tax payable by Brickworks on the difference (some would call it profit) between the current $13.18 market price of its WHSP shares and the $3 a share that they cost way back when.
A cautious and sensitive PwC (do not mention the costly Centro settlement) spent some time vetting the Brickworks taking of its name before allowing it to go public last week. Insider understands the whole of PwC's advice is unlikely to be made public.
Perpetual investment chief Matt Williams may, though, get a look at it as early as today because Insider hears that he is meeting with Brickworks and its advisers to see if they cannot find a way of unravelling the group cross-shareholdings to mutual benefit.
Already this week those in the Perpetual camp have been arguing that for Brickworks to distribute its WHSP shares would be like Amcom Telecommunications' pro rata distribution to its shareholders last year of its 20 per cent stake in internet provider iiNet, where it did not trigger a capital gains tax (CGT) event.
Insider understands, though, that the problem with the argument is that the ATO only grants relief from CGT when the entity distributing the shares is deemed to control them.
In this case the feeling is that WHSP's cross-holding of 44.48 per cent in Brickworks would have the ATO shaking its head and treating the handing over of the stock as a ''sale''.
If that is right, Brickworks would be up for a tax bill that far exceeds the cash it has, quite probably triggering the sale of more assets and discomforting its bankers.
Buying back one another's shareholdings would seem to create worse problems, in Insider's view, with Brickworks needing $680 million to do that and WHSP $1.3 billion. While Brickworks' cost is wiped out by virtue of the cash it would get from WHSP, assuming the deals were done simultaneously, the latter would be $680 million out of pocket. And even though WHSP's balance sheet suggests that it has $1.6 billion in cash on deposit, that is really New Hope's money that it has been saving for a rainy day - or developing its coal assets.
Robert Millner, who chairs all three companies, almost had a solution when he put New Hope on the market last year - but had to kill off the sale in February without a bid on the table.
Had someone bought out New Hope at the mooted $6 billion asking price, then 60 per cent of that money - or $3.6 billion - would have flowed to WHSP (of which Brickworks' share would have been about $1.5 billion) and everybody would have been happier, most likely including the Tax Office.
That, though, is history and the simple fact is that Perpetual is seemingly way overweight with $806 million tied up in the three companies (almost 5 per cent of its total Australian equities under management by Insider's calculation) at a time of increasingly shaky financial markets - and no easy way to quickly cash it in without depressing the share prices.
GR finally reveals hit
GR ENGINEERING Services finally revealed yesterday afternoon that it has been hit with a $25 million legal claim hanging over its head from work it did on Allied Gold Mining's Solomon Islands mine - and the result will not be known until November.
Its shares fell more than 10 per cent to 93¢ on the news, dropping the company's market worth below $140 million, compared with the $345 million peak last July.
As Insider pointed out yesterday, GR Engineering had given no previous indication of any sizeable claim against it. The claim over its work on Allied's Gold Ridge mine seems to be claiming that the GR-designed and built plant and gold recovery circuit were inefficient.
It did, though, only land on May 18 (just two days after GR Engineering issued a profit warning), but was only admitted by the arbitrator of the case yesterday - hence the announcement.
It was a counterclaim to GR Engineering's own suit against the mine over $4.5 million of unpaid work. GR Engineering tried to argue yesterday that the reason it had said nothing specific before was because the legal action was a ''confidential'' matter, and that it had made ''general references'' to claims, and that a $1.5 million doubtful debt provision in last year's results related to this.
Insider thinks the claims do not wash, and that in the context of GR Engineering's size, even the initial $4.5 million claim was a material matter. The market clearly agrees.
Source: www.brisbanetimes.com.au
BUMGARDNER: Divorce doesn't have to derail your financial security - News-Herald
Divorce is rarely a life event that one plans for, but while many couples live happily ever after, some undoubtedly will go their separate ways. A divorce can be emotionally devastating, but it doesn’t have to derail your long-term financial security. If you’re facing a divorce, consider these steps to protect and claim what’s yours:
•Understand your assets. A divorce can be expensive, especially if you fail to spend the appropriate amount of time reviewing and discussing your finances as you go through the process. Educate yourself by examining investment and bank statements, qualified plan and pension information, tax returns, mortgage information and insurance policies.
Before you can begin to split the assets you’ve accumulated as a couple, you should know your total net worth so that you’ll be able to assess how the divorce will impact your financial goals.
•Consider the big picture. When deciding how to split the nest egg, it helps to look into the future and think about how your lives will look postdivorce. Will you have short-term needs — like buying a home and furniture, new or continued child care costs or paying an attorney — that require immediate funding? Will you be able to replenish your retirement assets if you must use them to pay for these unexpected expenses?
Develop a detailed written financial plan as a soon-to-be single so that you can act in your best interest when deciding which assets will best fit your needs.
•Think about tax consequences. Most retirement plans are made up of pre-tax dollars, meaning your contributions won’t be taxed until you withdraw them. This can be beneficial if you believe your income and tax rate will be lower in retirement — but it also means the amount of cash you’ll be able to use to meet your day-to-day expenses will be less than what you actually withdraw.
Be sure you’re aware of how taxes can affect your retirement income as you divide assets with your former spouse. Trusted financial, tax and legal advisers are especially valuable as you make such important decisions.
•Follow the rules. If you decide that it makes sense to divide funds from you and your former spouse’s 401(k) plans and individual retirement accounts, it’s important to carefully follow state and local guidelines. This process is complicated, so be sure that your divorce settlement states specifically how assets are to be divided and transferred.
Dividing a pension or 401(k) plan might require a qualified domestic relations order, which allows funds to be withdrawn without penalty and deposited into a separate retirement account. Make sure that you discuss preparation of such an instrument with your attorney.
•Update your financial accounts. Once your divorce is final, revise the beneficiaries on your checking and savings accounts, investments, retirement plans and life insurance. Also re-evaluate your insurance policies and confirm that you still have adequate coverage for you and any dependents. Nothing can undermine your financial security faster than an uninsured accident or illness. Once the dust has settled on your divorce, create a new will or update the existing document to reflect your new marital status. Continued...
Source: www.thenewsherald.com
BP's Good Divorce Better Than a Bad Marriage - Moscow Times
BP surprised analysts Friday when it informed AAR, its Russian joint-venture partner in TNK-BP, that it would consider selling its 50 percent stake. Another surprise had come three days earlier when TNK-BP co-owner Mikhail Fridman announced his intention to resign from the joint venture. AAR, which has preferential rights to purchase BP's shares, has already announced its readiness to buy out the BP stake. The TNK-BP alliance has been plagued with serious troubles from its founding in 2003. In such cases, it is often said that a good divorce is better than a bad marriage.
Friday's announcement is just the latest chapter in a long history of internal conflicts between the two joint-venture partners. Today, TNK-BP does not even have a functioning board of directors, and the ongoing conflicts have made it difficult to agree on strategic plans for development.
At the same time, however, BP's investment in Russia has been its most lucrative in recent history. While BP invested about $8 billion to set up TNK-BP with AAR in 2003, it has reaped $19 billion in dividends since then, and the value of its stake has increased by more than four times. Moreover, after the disastrous BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, it was the company's Russian partners that helped it through its financial difficulties by purchasing BP assets in Brazil and Venezuela at market prices.
The current escalation of the internal TNK-BP conflict is apparently a direct result of last year's heated quarrel, when BP wanted to enter into a partnership with state-controlled to gain access to Russia's Arctic shelf. But AAR felt the proposed deal had violated its exclusivity agreement with BP to develop other projects in Russia and challenged the BP-Rosneft agreement in the International Court of Arbitration.
To the surprise of many, then-Prime Minister Vladimir Putin did not intervene on the side of his ally, Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin, who had close ties to Rosneft. Putin let the terms of the BP-AAR investment agreement determine the outcome. In the end, the BP-Rosneft deal collapsed. For his part, Sechin rejected a bid by the AAR consortium to partner with Rosneft in developing the Arctic shelf. Rosneft later formed an alliance with ExxonMobil.
Most likely, if the TNK-BP divorce is completed, it could lead to the state strengthening its control over the oil industry. Only two domestic companies have the resources to buy the BP stake, valued at $30 billion to $35 billion. One is . Although its management structure is opaque, the company has the available funds to buy out BP's stake. The other purchaser could be Rosneftegaz, which owns 75 percent of Rosneft and 10 percent of Gazprom, and is closely linked to Sechin. Although Sechin is not a member of Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev's new government, Putin wasted no time in signing orders that place an enormous part of the country's fuel and energy complex under his control.
Through Rosneftegaz's purchase of BP's shares in TNK-BP, the Kremlin could create a state-owned mega oil company along the lines of Gazprom, the state's giant gas monopoly. Sechin is also said to oppose the new privatization of the Russian energy sector. If Rosneftegaz expanded its market position by buying out the BP stake, it would provide yet another dangerous example of heavy government intervention in the economy and would likely spark a continuation of capital flight and a further worsening of the investment climate.
If the state is looking to increase its control over the oil industry, it will not allow AAR to snatch up the BP stake. On the contrary, the authorities will surely bring enormous pressure to bear on AAR to convince it to step aside. For example, the state has already had success in using its "environmental weapon" against BP, citing trumped-up charges of violations to force the company to pay almost $1 billion to clean up Samotlor, Russia's biggest oil field. Few in the government seemed to care that the site was heavily polluted during the Soviet period — long before BP entered the picture.
In another possible scenario, if Rosneft trades shares for the BP stake in the consortium, BP could use that roundabout approach to finally obtain its coveted access to the Arctic shelf through some form of partnership with Rosneft.
In any case, by announcing its readiness to leave the partnership with TNK, BP has showed how fed up it is with the problems of working in Russia's difficult business environment. At this point, state intervention in the deal is inevitable. Knowing this, it would make sense for BP to negotiate directly with the country's leadership. If BP plays its cards right, one visit to President Putin's office could be enough to solve all of its problems.
Georgy Bovt is a political analyst.
Source: www.themoscowtimes.com
No comments:
Post a Comment