21 novembre<\/a>. On parle beaucoup, on se congratule un peu, on s’interroge beaucoup et l’impression g\u00e9n\u00e9rale reste bien incertaine. (Les Q indiquent les questions des parlementaires. GD UK indique la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 General Dynamics au Royaume-Uni.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00abQ82 Mr Jones<\/em><\/strong>: Has US industry been lobbying hard for this?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbDr McGinnw<\/em><\/strong>: This is a national security priority for our two Governments. That is the perspective that we have taken. It was not done as an industry initiative so we do not want to get in front of the Governments. We have taken the approach where we had some initial conversations and now we want to wait until the implementing arrangements are complete and the Senate has had time to consider them, but we will very likely be strongly supportive with members in the US Senate.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbQ83 Mr Jones<\/em><\/strong>: That sounds like a No to me.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbDr Wilson<\/em><\/strong>: Could I give a perspective here?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbMr Godden<\/em><\/strong>: I will as well.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbDr Wilson<\/em><\/strong>: In the UK, GD UK has worked through the trade associations to get its point of view across, and we are doing exactly the same in the US. Underlying that, because we have specific issues on ITAR and TAAs, we have been lobbying quite hard for improvements to the system in a much more general sense than this specific Treaty. We have done that directly into the State Department at the normal governmental level and we have involved the UK MoD as well in that because they are things that affect us in the UK. I think we have been fairly even-handed in the way that we have approached this both in the US and the UK through the trade associations which is the right way to engage with government when it is a government-to-government deal.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbQ84 Mr Jones<\/em><\/strong>: Let us be honest, Mr Wilson, we saw the ITAR waiver and other things fail not because the two Governments did not agree but because the people on the Hill just did not want this and stopped this. Surely in terms of both trade associations and industry, if this is actually going to go through the Senate a hell of a lot of work has got to be done with the Senate because Senators I have talked to do not have a great deal of understanding of some of these issues. Although government-to-government relations might be good and everybody might be slapping themselves on their backs in the embassies saying how wonderful it is, if it does not get through the Senate, frankly, it is a waste of time, is it not?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbMr Godden<\/em><\/strong>: Can I comment having just come back from the US and discussing with the trade associations in the US this very point. I came back last week from Phoenix. My interpretation is that the associations are very active. Whether they are active enough, I cannot judge, but they are active, they are very positive about this Treaty and they are promoting the idea of the Treaty. I cannot say any more than that. I cannot comment not being on the Hill all the time but from the positive mood in SBAC’s equivalent association, the AIA, of which Jerry is a member, my observation is they are very positive and are campaigning for it.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbMr Havard<\/em><\/strong>: They are being very careful about who they bankroll to be the next President as well.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 1er d\u00e9cembre 2007 \u00e0 18H34<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Une question importante, primordiale, qui entoure le destin du trait\u00e9 de d\u00e9fense (transfert de technologies) entre les USA et le Royaume-Uni, qui retient aujourd’hui notre attention dans notre rubrique Faits & Commentaires, c’est l’attitude du Congr\u00e8s. Au travers des deux textes que nous citons dans notre F&C, on peut distinguer que l’attitude des lobbyistes divers… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[5224,3285,7273,4495,6196],"class_list":["post-69462","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-communes","tag-congres","tag-ratificzation","tag-traite","tag-uk-usa"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69462","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=69462"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69462\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69462"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69462"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69462"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}