John Durie has a piece in today's Australian noting that in that speech Billson stressed that it is the Harper Review, not the Agriculture Green Paper, that is the «key tool in
setting competition policy».
Not exact matches
It's supposedly a move to protect the US steel industry from foreign
competition, but in practice, it makes no sense as
policy — instead
setting up the United States for a disadvantaged economy and a trade war.
The two men take nearly opposite approaches to trade: According to Lighthizer, American jobs and businesses must be protected from what he views as unfair global
competition, while Froman has expressed that negotiating free trade deals helps America to
set the standards for international trade
policies that benefit American economic growth.
If achieved, the «united industry» approach would be markedly different from the current climate in the UK, where liberalist, free -
competition policies allow individual processors to
set their own farmgate prices.
His report, known as the Hilmer report,
set the agenda for
competition policy in Australia for the two decades that followed.
Competition policy refers to the «set of policies and laws that protects, enhances and extends competition» (Harper Review Issues Paper
Competition policy refers to the «
set of
policies and laws that protects, enhances and extends
competition» (Harper Review Issues Paper
competition» (Harper Review Issues Paper para 1.7).
The IG also found that, despite those promises of price
competition, many co-ops had
set premiums higher than
policies sold by commercial insurers.
Showing out of
competition, Masked and Anonymous (aka the Dylan movie), directed by Larry Charles and pseudonymously written by Charles and Bob Dylan, is
set in the near future when the U.S. resembles a crumbling Banana Republic — a concept given a certain credibility by the current administration's loot «n» pollute
policies.
The exorbitant costs of broadband would make subsidizing broadband unsustainable (Marwell thinks that reaching lower price points would actually require increasing
competition among telecom providers and a broader
set of federal E-Rate
policy reforms).
Ten decided not to participate in Round 1, including Texas, which called the
competition a federal intrusion on its right to
set education
policies.
The problems with just this 25 %
policy, however, and as he writes, include the following: the «
policy reflects the view that teachers are inadequately motivated to do their jobs;» this implies, without any evidence that only an arbitrarily
set «25 % of a district's teachers deserve a raise;» this facilitates a «culture of
competition [that] kills the collaboration that is integral to effective education;» «[t] he idea that a single teacher's influence can be isolated [using VAMs] is absurd;» and just in general that this
policy «reflects a myopic approach to reform.»
The list of finalists is supposed to reflect U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan's promise that he would
set a very high bar for this education - reform
competition, which has become one of the Obama administration's most high - profile
policy levers.
The
Competition and
Policy Analysis Division serves as the source of analytical input to the Department's aviation and international affairs policy setting fun
Policy Analysis Division serves as the source of analytical input to the Department's aviation and international affairs
policy setting fun
policy setting function:
If the business is big enough and resilient enough they can weather the storm and out - last the
competition, after which they can
set whatever price /
policy they like because they have a monopoly (or near monopoly).
Factors that could cause Blizzard Entertainment's actual future results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward - looking statements
set forth in this release include, but are not limited to, sales of Blizzard Entertainment's titles, shifts in consumer spending trends, the seasonal and cyclical nature of the interactive game market, Blizzard Entertainment's ability to predict consumer preferences among competing hardware platforms (including next - generation hardware), declines in software pricing, product returns and price protection, product delays, retail acceptance of Blizzard Entertainment's products, adoption rate and availability of new hardware and related software, industry
competition, rapid changes in technology and industry standards, protection of proprietary rights, litigation against Blizzard Entertainment, maintenance of relationships with key personnel, customers, vendors and third - party developers, domestic and international economic, financial and political conditions and
policies, foreign exchange rates, integration of recent acquisitions and the identification of suitable future acquisition opportunities, Activision Blizzard's success in integrating the operations of Activision Publishing and Vivendi Games in a timely manner, or at all, and the combined company's ability to realize the anticipated benefits and synergies of the transaction to the extent, or in the timeframe, anticipated.
Notwithstanding the above, recognition and enforcement has been refused on grounds of public
policy for the following reasons: the award was obtained by fraud (see Westacre Investments Inc v Jugoimport - SPDR Holding Co Ltd [1999] 2 Lloyd's Rep 65 (CA) and Tamil Nadu Electricity Board v ST - CMS Electric Company Private Ltd [2008] 1 Lloyd's Rep 93); the award was tainted by illegality (Soleimany v Soleimany [1998] 3 WLR 811); the underlying agreement was contrary to principles of EU law, in particular
competition law as
set out in Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU (Eco Swiss China Time Ltd v Benetton International NV (1999)(Case C - 126 / 97); and the award was unclear as to the obligations imposed on the parties (Tongyuan (USA) International Trading Group v Uni-Clan Ltd (2001, unreported, 26 Yearbook of Commercial Arbitration 886).
For the purposes
set out in Article 2, the activities of the Member States and the Community shall include, as provided in this Treaty and in accordance with the timetable
set out therein, the adoption of an economic
policy which is based on the close coordination of Member States» economic
policies, on the internal market and on the definition of common objectives, and conducted in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free
competition.