892 resultados para Prime ministers
Resumo:
In the autumn of 1997, Russian government was faced with media pressure when owners of the TV channels ORT and NTV joined forces against it. This study is based on media sources from October 1997 to December 1997. It shows clearly how the enormous power of the media was able to dictate what happened in Russia. In the mid-1990s Russians started to talk about political technology, which became a commonly used term by professionals, journalists, politicians and intelligence services. As a result of this action, two leading reformers in the government, Anatoliy Chubais and Boris Nemtsov, were dismissed from their highly influential posts as finance and energy ministers respectively, but retained their power as first deputy prime ministers. According to the correspondents, the real reason was to resolve a conflict within the parliament, which had demanded the dismissal of Mr. Chubais. This demand was presented after Chubais had accepted $90,000 as a reward for co-writing a book on privatization. Chubais was considered to be Russia’s “business card” towards the west – the"Authors’ case" (Delo avtorov) was only solved after President Boris Yeltsin took part in the public debate. According to the research, the media owned by powerful businessmen Boris Berezovsky and Vladimir Gusinski, was able to use its own security services to expose sensitive material (Russian term ‘kompromat’), if necessary, concerning any given person. The so-called Authors’ case can be considered as a part of the battle and the tip of the iceberg in arrangements designed to organize the funding of the Russian presidential election campaign in 2000. The reason why this particular incident was so widely covered on television was because several programs aimed to reveal to the public "hidden bribes" that, as they claimed, government officials had received. The political aspect, however, was quite mild, when the concrete issues of possible dismissals of Ministers were debated in the Parliament. Everything was dealt with as a “family matter” inside Kremlin. Yeltsin's "family" consisted of practically anybody from oligarch Berezovsky to Chubais, the father of Russia's privatization policy. Methods of critical history implementation analysis has been used in this research in determining the use of the source material. Literature and interviews have also provided a good base for the study. The study proves that any literature dealing with the subject has not paid enough attention to how the dismissal of Alexander Kazakov, deputy of President’s administration, was linked directly with Gazprom, the state gas monopoly. Kazakov had to leave Gazprom and lose his position as Chubais' ally when the influential ORT television company was deteriorated.
Resumo:
Priest, Andrew, Kennedy, Johnson and NATO: Britain, America and the Dynamics of Alliance, 1962-68 (New York: Routledge, 2006), wpp.xiv+222 RAE2008
Resumo:
In the past 15 years in the UK, the state has acquired powers, which mark a qualitative shift in its relationship to higher education. Since the introduction and implementation of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992, the Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998 and the Higher Education Act 2004, a whole raft of changes have occurred which include the following: Widening participation; the development of interdisciplinary, experiential and workplace-based learning focused on a theory-practice dialogue; quality assurance; and new funding models which encompass public and private partnerships. The transformation of higher education can be placed in the context of New Labour’s overall strategies for overarching reform of public services, as set out in the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit’s discussion paper The UK Government’s Approach to Public Service Reform (2006). An optimistic view of changes to higher education is that they simultaneously obey democratic and economic imperatives. There is an avowed commitment through the widening participation agenda to social inclusion and citizenship, and to providing the changing skills base necessary for the global economy. A more cynical view is that, when put under critical scrutiny, as well as being emancipatory, in some senses these changes can be seen to mobilise regulatory and disciplinary practices. This paper reflects on what kinds of teaching and learning are promoted by the new relationship between the state and the university. It argues that, whilst governmental directives for innovations and transformations in teaching and learning allegedly empower students and put their interests at the centre, reforms can also be seen to consist of supervisory and controlling mechanisms with regard both to our own practices as teachers and the knowledge/ learning we provide for the students.
Resumo:
In the build up to general elections there is invariably a wealth of discourse on constitutional and transitional issues and even on the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the civil service, but rarely is there any debate on the manner in which politicians manage the government machine. This article seeks to address this deficiency. It examines the operational factors common to the core executive, assesses the problems usually associated with the government as an organization and reviews alternative solutions. Finally, it offers managerially oriented advice, reasoning that it is the role of policy analysts to prescribe and that it is irresponsible to ignore this function. it is clearly emphasized that management solutions are not synonymous with business solutions. The article draws on universal principles of management, seeking to avoid normative suggestions and concentrating instead on practical considerations. Those considerations include personnel selection, collective responsibility, leadership style, organizational structure and team mentality. The conclusion is that strong managerially based leadership should not be dismissed as incompatible with the political constraints placed upon Prime Ministers but rather it should e the predominant impulse.
Resumo:
The Falkland Islands War of 1982 was fought over competing claims to sovereignty over a group of islands off the east coast of South America. The dispute was between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Argentina claims the islands under rights to Spanish succession, the fact that they lie off the Argentine coast line and that in 1833 Great Britain took the islands illegally and by force. The United Kingdom claims the islands primarily through prescription--the fact that they have governed the islands in a peaceful, continuous and public manner since 1833. The British also hold that the population living on the islands, roughly eighteen hundred British descendants, should be able to decide their own future. The United Kingdom also lays claim to the islands through rights of discovery and settlement, although this claim has always been challenged by Spain who until 1811 governed the islands. Both claims have legal support, and the final decision if there will ever be one is difficult to predict. Sadly today the ultimate test of sovereignty does not come through international law but remains in the idea that "He is sovereign who can defend his sovereignty." The years preceding the Argentine invasion of 1982 witnessed many diplomatic exchanges between The United Kingdom and Argentina over the future of the islands. During this time the British sent signals to Argentina that ii implied a decline in British resolve to hold the islands and demonstrated that military action did more to further the talks along than did actual negotiations. The Argentine military junta read these signals and decided that they could take the islands in a quick military invasion and that the United Kingdom would consider the act as a fait accompli and would not protest the invasion. The British in response to this claimed that they never signaled to Argentina that a military solution was acceptable to them and launched a Royal Navy task force to liberate the islands. Both governments responded to an international crisis with means that were designed both to resolve the international crisis and increase the domestic popularity of the government. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was facing an all-time low in popularity for post-War Prime Ministers while Argentine President General Galtieri needed to gain mass popular support so he could remain a viable President after he was scheduled to lose command of the army and a seat on the military junta that ran the country. The military war for the Falklands is indicative of the nature of modern warfare between Third World countries. It shows that the gap in military capabilities between Third and First World countries is narrowing significantly. Modern warfare between a First and Third World country is no longer a 'walk over' for the First World country.
Resumo:
The Falkland Islands War of 1982 was fought over competing claims to sovereignty over a group of islands off the east coast of South America. The dispute was between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Argentina claims the islands under rights to Spanish succession, the fact that they lie off the Argentine coast line and that in 1833 Great Britain took the islands illegally and by force. The United Kingdom claims the islands primarily through prescription--the fact that they have governed the islands in a peaceful, continuous and public manner since 1833. The British also hold that the population living on the islands, roughly eighteen hundred British descendants, should be able to decide their own future. The United Kingdom also lays claim to the islands through rights of discovery and settlement, although this claim has always been challenged by Spain who until 1811 governed the islands. Both claims have legal support, and the final decision if there will ever be one is difficult to predict. Sadly today the ultimate test of sovereignty does not come through international law but remains in the idea that "He is sovereign who can defend his sovereignty." The years preceding the Argentine invasion of 1982 witnessed many diplomatic exchanges between The United Kingdom and Argentina over the future of the islands. During this time the British sent signals to Argentina that ii implied a decline in British resolve to hold the islands and demonstrated that military action did more to further the talks along than did actual negotiations. The Argentine military junta read these signals and decided that they could take the islands in a quick military invasion and that the United Kingdom would consider the act as a fait accompli and would not protest the invasion. The British in response to this claimed that they never signaled to Argentina that a military solution was acceptable to them and launched a Royal Navy task force to liberate the islands. Both governments responded to an international crisis with means that were designed both to resolve the international crisis and increase the domestic popularity of the government. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was facing an all-time low in popularity for post-War Prime Ministers while Argentine President General Galtieri needed to gain mass popular support so he could remain a viable President after he was scheduled to lose command of the army and a seat on the military junta that ran the country. The military war for the Falklands is indicative of the nature of modern warfare between Third World countries. It shows that the gap in military capabilities between Third and First World countries is narrowing significantly. Modern warfare between a First and Third World country is no longer a 'walk over' for the First World country.
Resumo:
The Loyal Orange Association of British America is a Protestant fraternal society. The Loyal Orange Association originated in Ulster, Ireland during the late eighteenth century. Its purpose was to promote Protestant rights and privileges. The association was exclusively Protestant, fraternal, democratic, and benevolent. Orange principles were brought to Upper Canada by Protestant Irish settlers after 1815. The first Canadian Orange Lodge was formally established in Brockville, Leeds County, 1830. By the late 19th and early 20th century, the Loyal Orange Association of British North America had gained considerable popularity and political influence. Many prominent politicians, including several prime ministers, were members. Orangemen were particularly concerned with issues such as separate school funding, language rights, immigration, religious freedom and conscription. Further, they demanded the execution of Louis Riel and opposed the Jesuits Estates settlement. Administrative sketch courtesy Archives of Ontario.
Resumo:
Dr. James A. Gibson was born in Ottawa on January 29, 1912 to John W. and Belle Gibson. At an early age the family moved to Victoria, B.C. where John W. Gibson was a director of the Elementary Agricultural Education Branch, Department of Education. Gibson received his early education in Victoria, receiving a B.A. (honours) at UBC in 1931. In 1931 he was awarded the Rhodes scholarship and received his B.A., M.A., B.Litt and D. Phil at New College, Oxford. This was to be the beginning of a long and dedicated relationship with the Rhodes Scholar Association. Upon his return to Canada, Dr. Gibson lectured in Economics and Government at the University of British Columbia. In 1938 he was married to Caroline Stein in Philadelphia, and the same year joined the staff of the Department of External Affairs as a Foreign Service officer. Within twenty minutes of his arrival he was seconded to the Office of the Prime Minister and Secretary of State for External Affairs, W. L. Mackenzie King in charge of War Records and Liaison Officer. This was a critical time in the history of Canada, and Dr. Gibson experienced firsthand several milestones, including the Royal Visit of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth in 1939. Dr. Gibson was present at the formation of the United Nations in San Francisco in 1945, being part of the Prime Minister’s professional staff as well as attending conferences in Washington, Quebec and London as an advisor to the Canadian delegation. Gibson contributed many articles to the publication bout de papier about his experiences during these years. After his resignation in 1947, Gibson joined the staff of the fledgling Carleton College, as a lecturer. In 1949 he was appointed a professor and in 1951 became Dean of Arts and Sciences. Dr. Gibson acted as President from 1955 to 1956 upon the sudden death of Dr. MacOdrum. In 1963 Dr. Gibson accepted the invitation of the Brock University Founders’ Committee, chaired by Arthur Schmon, to become the founding president. Dr. Gibson guided the new University from a converted refrigeration plant, to an ever expanding University campus on the brow of the Niagara Escarpment. Dr. Gibson remained firmly “attached” to Brock University. Even after official retirement, in 1974, he retained the title President Emeritus. Gibson’s final official contribution was an unpublished ten year history of the University. In retirement Gibson remained active in scholarly pursuits. He was a visiting scholar at the Center of Canadian Studies, University of Edinburgh; continued his ongoing research activities focusing on W. L. Mackenzie King, the Office of the Governor General of Canada, and political prisoners transported to Van Dieman’s Land. He remained active in the Canadian Association of Rhodes Scholars, becoming editor from 1975 to 1994 and was appointed Editor Emeritus and Director for Life in 1995 in honour of his dedicated and outstanding service. In 1993 he was awarded one of Canada’s highest achievements, the Order of Canada. Gibson retained close ties with Brock University and many of its faculty. He maintained an office in the Politics Department where he became a vital part of the department. In 1996 Brock University honoured Gibson by naming the University Library in his honour. James A. Gibson Library staff was instrumental in celebrating the 90th birthday of Gibson in 2002, with a widely attended party in the Pond Inlet where many former students, including Silver Badgers. The attendees also included former and current colleagues from Brock University, Canadian Rhodes Scholars Association, family and friends. Gibson was later to remark that the highlight of this event was the gift of his original academic robe which he had personally designed in 1964. In 2003 Dr. Gibson moved to Ottawa to be near some of his children and the city of his birth and early career. In that year “two visits to Brock ensued: the first, to attend a special celebration of the James A. Gibson Library; his late to attend the 74th Convocation on Saturday, October 18, 2003. A week later, in Ottawa, he went for a long walk, returned to his residence, Rideau Gardens, went into the lounge area, took off his coat and folded it up, put it on the back of his chair, sat down, folded his hands in his lap, closed his eyes, and died”. With sources from: Carleton University The Charlatan, Gibson CV, and Memorial Service Programme
Resumo:
Joseph Pope was born in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island in 1854. He was the private secretary to Sir John A. Macdonald from 1882-1891. He worked as the assistant clerk to the Privy Council and undersecretary of state for Canada from 1896-1909. He was appointed a Companion of the Order of St. Michael and St. George in 1901. He was later knighted as a Knight Commander of the same order. Joseph Pope was the first permanent head of the Department of External Affairs (now Foreign Affairs and Internal Trade) 1909-1925. He was an advisor to Prime Ministers from Macdonald to King. He died in Ottawa, in 1926. As well as Confederation, Pope also penned: Memoirs of Sir John A. Macdonald : A Chronicle of the First Prime Minister of the Dominion; The Day of Sir John Macdonald; Jacques Cartier, his life and voyages; Traditions and Sir John A. MacDonald vindicated : a review of the Right Honourable Sir Richard Cartwright's reminiscences as well as other books Pope’s son, Maurice Arthur Pope wrote a book about Joseph entitled Public Servant: the Memoirs of Sir Joseph Pope”.
Resumo:
En el actual contexto de globalización y con el comienzo de la era de la información, cada vez más Estados han buscado proyectar una imagen favorable con el objetivo de atraer atención y crear una reputación que permitan cumplir objetivos de política exterior y fomentar el desarrollo económico, logrando de esta manera un posicionamiento en el sistema internacional mediante estrategias novedosas, que incluyen elementos tanto diplomáticos, políticos, económicos, como comerciales y culturales. Para Japón, Nation Branding y la diplomacia pública han sido dos de las principales herramientas para lograr este reposicionamiento internacional, resaltando atractivos como las tradiciones culturales, el turismo, los incentivos para negocios, y trabajando en conjunto entre el gobierno nacional, el sector privado y la sociedad civil para crear relaciones entre el país y gobiernos y sociedades a nivel internacional.
Resumo:
En el año 2010 el gobierno de Canadá pública su estrategia de política exterior hacia el Ártico, en la cual manifiesta que esta región es una de las principales prioridades del Gobierno de Stephen Harper en materia de política exterior. Así las cosas, a partir de la perspectiva teórica del realismo neoclásico la investigación se enfoca en analizar por qué la seguridad nacional y la prosperidad económica son los principales intereses de este Gobierno en la zona.
Resumo:
O presente estudo volta-se à análise da atuação das unidades de entrega no contexto da implementação de políticas públicas. Inicialmente, buscamos apresentar como se desenha o cenário da política pública e como as unidades de entrega se inserem nesse contexto, para logo em seguida examinar e comparar três estruturas organizacionais de monitoramento de projetos prioritários diferentes: do PAC - Programa de Aceleração do Crescimento, do governo federal, do Estado de Minas Gerais e da PMDU – Prime Minister´s Delivery Unit, da Inglaterra, com o fim de extrair lições ao adequado funcionamento das Unidades de entrega em geral.
Resumo:
As a result of EEAS-led facilitated dialogue, on April 19th the prime ministers of Serbia and Kosovo reached their first agreement on the principles governing the normalisation of relations. The agreement handed Catherine Ashton a diplomatic victory she badly needed and offered proof of the added value of the European External Action Service (EEAS) as a new EU foreign policy actor.
Resumo:
The policy of rapprochement with Russia that President Victor Yanukovych and his entourage had been actively promoting in the first months of his presidency has slowed down notably. One of the reasons for this lowered pace is that current talks between Russia and Ukraine concern the spheres in which Kyiv is not ready to make concessions to Russia. Despite numerous top-level meetings, recent months have failed to bring a breakthrough in energy issues of key importance. First of all, no compromise was reached in gas issues where the divergence of interests is particularly large and where Ukraine has adopted a tough stance to negotiate the best conditions possible. Even though some agreements were signed during the October session of the inter-governmental committee presided over by the prime ministers (the agreement on linking the two states’ aircraft production and on the joint construction of a nuclear fuel production plant), these resulted from prior agreements. Economic negotiations will continue in the coming months but the observed deadlock is not likely to be broken any time soon. The results of these talks are likely to reflect the interests of both Russia and Ukraine, as well as the competition among Ukrainian business groups, some of which opt for closer cooperation with their Eastern neighbour. Ukraine’s consent to send oil to Belarus along the Odessa-Brody pipeline shows that the government in Kyiv is ready to engage in projects they consider profitable, even those that run counter to Russian interests. Ukraine’s adoption of this stance may trigger irritation in Moscow and lead to a cooling in bilateral relations.