NATO's Parlamentariske Forsamling 2010-11 (1. samling)
NPA Alm.del Bilag 10
Offentligt
STANDINGCOMMITTEE281 SC 10 EOriginal: English
NATO Parliamentary Assembly
SUMMARY
of the meeting of the Standing CommitteeThe Sejm and Senate of the Republic of PolandWarsaw, Poland
Monday 15 November 2010
International Secretariat
November 2010
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Attendance List1.2.3.Opening of the proceedingsAdoption of the draft agendaAdoption of the Summary of the Standing Committee Meeting held in Riga, Latvia, onMonday 31 May 2010 [155 SC 10 E]Presentation by H.E. Mr David Bakradze, Speaker of the Georgian Parliament,followed by a question and answer periodProcedural matters:Consideration of Proposed Candidates for the Bureau of the Assembly[236 SC 10 E]Organisation of the Plenary Sitting to be held on Tuesday 16 November 2010Assembly Activities and Subjects in 2010 and 2011 [258 SC 10 E]Relations with the Delegation from the Russian Federation [260 SC 10 E]Participation in the Parliamentary Transatlantic Forum [259 SC 10 E]Key points in the Assembly President’s Address to be delivered at the Summit ofNATO Heads of State and Government in Lisbon to be held from19-20 November 2010Finance:Draft budget for 2011 [118 FIN 10 E rev. 1] featuring the organisation chart forthe Assembly’s International SecretariatDraft amendments [233 SC 10 E] to the Financial Regulations[142 GEN 09 E rev. 1]Revised Implementing Rules and Procedures for Financial Transactions andBudget Execution (2010) [198 FIN 10 E]Future sessions and meetings:Distribution of Assembly Sessions and Standing Committee Meetings[175 SC 10 E]Sessions and Meetings from 2010 [018 GEN 10 E rev. 2]Meeting of the Standing Committee, Ponta Delgada, San Miguel Island, Azores,Portugal, 1-3 April 2011Spring Session, Varna, Bulgaria, 27-31 May 201157thAnnual Session, Bucharest, Romania, 7-11 October 2011Miscellaneous
ii11
4.
1
5.
3
6.7.8.9.
4555
10.
6
11.
7
12.
8
iiATTENDANCE LISTPresidentVice-PresidentsJohn TANNER (United States)Assen AGOV (Bulgaria)Jane CORDY (Canada)Jean-Michel BOUCHERON (France)Sven MIKSER (Estonia)Hendrik Jan ORMEL (Netherlands)José LELLO (Portugal)Karl A. LAMERS (Germany)David HOBBS
Former PresidentFormer Vice-PresidentSecretary GeneralMEMBERS AND ALTERNATE MEMBERSAlbaniaBelgiumBulgariaCanadaCroatiaCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandItalyLatviaLithuaniaLuxembourgNetherlandsNorwayPolandPortugalRomaniaSlovakiaSloveniaSpainTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
Leonard DEMIGent STRAZIMIRIDaniel BACQUELAINEPhilippe MAHOUXDobroslav DIMITROVKostadin YAZOVLeon BENOITJane CORDYKresimir COSICTomás DUBHelge Adam MOELLERJohn Dyrby PAULSENMati RAIDMASven MIKSERLoïc BOUVARDJosselin de ROHANKarl A. LAMERSUrsula SCHMIDTGeorgios Ernestos CHARALAMBOPOULOSNot representedRagnheidur E. ARNADOTTIRSergio DE GREGORIOAntonio CABRASImants LIEGISPetras AUSTREVICIUSAndrius MAZURONISMarc ANGELHendrik Jan ORMELMartijn van DAMErna SOLBERGJadwiga ZAKRZEWSKAJosé LELLOJosé Luis ARNAUTNot representedJuraj DROBABranko GRIMSJesus CUADRADORamon ALEUVahit ERDEMLord JOPLINGHugh BAYLEYJohn TANNER
iiiCOMMITTEE CHAIRSDefence and SecurityEconomics and SecurityScience and TechnologyMediterranean and Middle EastSpecial GroupJoseph A. DAY (Canada)Hugh BAYLEY (United Kingdom)Jan Arild ELLINGSEN (Norway)Vahit ERDEM (Turkey)
SECRETARIES OF DELEGATIONAlbaniaBelgiumBulgariaCanadaCroatiaCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandItalyLatviaLithuaniaLuxembourgNetherlandsNorwayPolandPortugalRomaniaSlovakiaSloveniaSpainTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited StatesDritan DELIJAFrans van MELKEBEKEDessislava NAKOVA(acting)Jim LATIMERMaroje KATALINICIva MASARIKOVAFlemming Kordt HANSENTania ESPEFrédéric TAILLET (Assemblée nationale)Etienne SALLENAVE (Sénat)Claudia RATHJEN (Bundestag)Annemarie BÜRSCH (Bundesrat)Vassiliki IOANNIDOUNot representedArna Gerdur BANGAlessandra LAISandra PAURASnieguole ZIUKAITEPia BISENIUSArjen WESTERHOFFHenrik MALVIKMichal GARGANISZPatricia GRAVEIrina BOJINJarmila NOVAKOVATamara GRUDEN-PECANMercedes ARAUJOYesim USLUSarah IOANNOUNot represented
ACCOMPANYING THE DELEGATIONSGermanyHarald BERWANGERAndrea BOU-SAIDWaltraud Anna WEILANDElena di PANCRAZIOGiuseppe IOPPOLOPia CALIFANOWilma KOOIJMANLisbeth Merete STOCK
Italy
NetherlandsNorway
281 SC 10 E
iv
INTERNATIONAL SECRETARIAT
Isabelle ARCISAndrius AVIZIUSSébastien BOTELLAHelen CADWALLENDERValentina Di FOLCAValérie GEFFROYPaul COOKChristine HEFFINCKSusan MILLARJacqueline PFORRRuxandra POPAGill RAWLINGSteffen SACHSZachary SELDENSvitlana SVETOVAAlex TIERSKYVincent VIVESClaire WATKINS
281 SC 10 E
1
1.
Opening of the proceedings
The President,John Tanner (US), opened the meeting at 09.10. He thanked the leader of thePolish delegation, Jadwiga Zakrzewska, for the Delegation's hosting of the Annual Session and forthe previous evening's reception.Jadwiga Zakrzewska(PL) responded to thank the President.The Secretary General,David Hobbs, welcomed new heads of delegation to the meeting andnoted former colleagues who had left their delegations and parliaments. He also informed themeeting of the apologies for absence he had received from heads of delegation.2.Adoption of the draft Agenda [257 SC 10 E]
President Tanner outlined the draft Agenda. It was unusual to have a guest speaker at suchmeetings, but on this occasion David Bakradze, Speaker of the Georgian Parliament, had beeninvited in recognition of the particular relationship between the NATO PA and Georgia.He also proposed deferring consideration of item 7, “Relations with the Delegation from theRussian Federation”, to the Committee’s next meeting. The Bureau felt that this matter would bebetter addressed when it would be possible to take into account any developments in NATO-Russia relations stemming from the forthcoming Lisbon Summit.The President’s proposal was accepted and the draft Agenda was adopted with thatmodification.
3.
Adoption of the summary of the Standing Committee meeting held in Riga, Latvia, onMonday, 31 May 2010 [155 SC 10 E]
The summary of the previous Standing Committee held in Riga was adopted.
4.
Presentation by H.E. Mr David Bakradze, Speaker of the Georgian Parliament, followedby a question and answer period
The President welcomed David Bakradze.David Bakradzeoutlined recent political developments in Georgia. Two key processes were underway: reform of the Constitution, and reform of the electoral system.Amendments to the current Constitution were being adopted. Mr Bakradze noted that in the last20 years, three Presidents had been unable to complete their constitutional term. The politicalsystem had been incapable of resolving political crises through constitutional means. He believedthat the reason for this instability had been the concentration of power in the hands of thePresident: alternative centres of gravity were needed in the political system in order to redistributepower. The new constitutional proposals would distribute power among three centres: thePresident, Parliament, and government.The constitutional reform process had been initiated by the President in 2008, and consultationshad been broad, including the opposition.The role of Parliament in the Constitution would be qualitatively strengthened with, for instance, theformation of the government being the responsibility of the majority party in Parliament rather thanthe President. The new system would lead to better checks and balances and greater political
281 SC 10 E
2
stability. The motivation for politicians operating under the new system would be to gain as manyvotes as possible in parliamentary elections. This would make the political system in Georgia morestable and inclusive.Reform of the electoral system was also proceeding. David Bakradze had recently metrepresentatives of 14 opposition parties: nine of these parties had formerly boycotted elections andhad participated in demonstrations. A special working group on electoral reform had beenestablished, which would consider a redesign of the electoral system and reforms to the ElectionCourt. Fifteen parties were now around the table: they would not be able to agree on everything,but they would be able to agree on the process for reform. An open and inclusive political systemwith a legitimate role for opposition parties was a prerequisite for stability.On security issues, the Georgian government had adopted an engagement strategy with theoccupied territories. It was unwilling to recognise their independence but had begun to work withlocal communities on social and economic matters. It was also working with Russia, and theposition of the international community on this engagement was critical. Russia had not gainedanything from its policy towards Abkhazia and South Ossetia, despite expending substantialpolitical capital, and so would have to adopt a new stance. This was not just a Georgian-Russianprocess: it touched on basic principles of international security. Russia had attempted to changeGeorgia's borders by force, and that had been illegitimate and unacceptable. Georgia was ready tobe part of a dialogue and to negotiate with Russia; dialogue was the only way through whichproblems could be resolved. There was no alternative.Georgia's prospective membership of NATO was key to ongoing democratisation and politicalreform. It was a comprehensive issue and more important than simply that of membership of amilitary alliance. Georgia was grateful for the work of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.The President thanked David Bakradze and opened the debate.Petras Austrevicius(LT) noted that Mr Bakradze had said that only 25% of the former populationof South Ossetia remained in the territory: he asked what had happened to the other 75% andwhat the socio-economic situation was similar.David Bakradze explained that the proportion of the former population remaining in Abkhazia andin South Ossetia was similar. The ethnic Georgian population had been forced to flee as a result ofthe conflict. The territories had previously been ethnically diverse, but a form of ethnic cleansinghad forced them out. Many had also been driven out by economic hardship. The territories hadbeen economically devastated and were lawless, with local paramilitary groups operatingunchallenged. There had also been some cases of smuggling of nuclear materials.José Lello(PT) asked what the international community needed to do in order to reassure Russia.David Bakradze understood that resolution of the situation would take time and that consistencyand continuity were essential. Non-recognition of the occupied territories was an essential part ofthe international approach. Moscow well understood the costs and benefits of its policy and surelyhad to see that there was no benefit to its unilateral recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia:therefore in time it would start to look for ways to change the situation. Georgia was happy to helpRussia find a way out and had no interest in humiliating the Russians. It was important tounderstand what Russia's interests were in the South Caucasus: Russia had so far not made thisclear. Russia seemed to regard Georgia as part of its "near abroad" rather than an independentsovereign State. Georgia was willing to negotiate on almost every issue, but would notcompromise its independence and autonomy.Jadwiga Zakrzewska said that she had visited Georgia in the spring of 2010 and had noted manychanges in the Georgian army. She asked David Bakradze to update the Committee on thepresent situation in the army.
281 SC 10 E
3
David Bakradze noted that the Georgian army had been revolutionised over the last decade. In2000, Georgia had no effective army at all, since all who could afford to buy themselves out ofservice had done so. Now it had a professional army with a very small element of conscription, andhad sent full-sized brigades to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan. The interoperability between theGeorgian army and other NATO forces was good, and the Georgian contribution to NATO effortshad been commended by General David Petraeus. Georgian armed forces had been rebuilt fromscratch, and this had meant that several high-ranking officers had had to be dismissed. This hadnot been an easy process, and there had been some resistance, which had given rise to politicalmanoeuvring. The reforms made to the Georgian police and Georgian army had been recognisedas positive: there was now 80% trust in the Georgian police.Lord Jopling(UK) referred to the draft Resolution adopted by the Committee on the CivilDimension of Security (CDS) for which he had been Rapporteur, and noted that an amendmenthad been proposed by the Lithuanian delegation to acknowledge the significant contribution madeby Georgia to the NATO mission in Afghanistan: 950 troops had been committed, and sixservicemen had been killed in the last month. He had noted some dissent in the Georgian publicopinion where questions had been raised about the commitment of armed forces overseas whileRussian troops were at Georgia's front door. He had also noted dissent, particularly from theOrthodox Church, over moves towards greater Georgian participation in the Euro-Atlantic area,and asked for an update on public opinion levels.David Bakradze thanked Lord Jopling for a good and balanced draft Resolution, and was alsograteful for the sentiments behind the Lithuanian amendment. He acknowledged that the majorityof the Georgian population did not support military action overseas: this was the same in manyother countries. However, he reported consistent 70% popular support for Georgian NATOmembership, a figure which had risen to 85% just before the Bucharest Summit.Sergio De Gregorio(IT) wondered whether the American rethinking of attitudes towards Russiamight delay Georgian accession to NATO.David Bakradze saw no problem in improving US-Russia relations, as long as the issue ofGeorgia-Russia relations was not forgotten. He noted with approval that the matter was still raisedas unresolved at all relevant meetings. Russian engagement with the EU and the U.S. was anopportunity for better relations with Georgia, as an isolated and disengaged Russia wasdangerous. In its draft Resolution, the Assembly was sending an important signal that theGeorgian issue was still unresolved. If there were better relations between NATO and Russia, thenit was more likely that Georgia would enter NATO sooner rather than later, although there could beno compromise on Georgian principles.The President thanked David Bakradze on behalf of the Assembly.5.Procedural matters:Consideration of Proposed Candidates for the Bureau of the Assembly [236 SC 10 E]Organisation of the Plenary Sitting to be held on Tuesday 16 November 2010
The President had appreciated the opportunity to serve as President of the ParliamentaryAssembly. He told the Standing Committee that there was only one nomination as a candidate tosucceed him. Thus, Dr Karl A. Lamers could be elected by acclamation at the Plenary sitting. Ofthe Vice-Presidents, only Jean-Michel Boucheron was eligible for re-election. The candidates forthe four other vacancies were Petras Austrevicius, Jadwiga Zakrzewska, Hugh Bayley andMike Ross. According to the Rules of the Assembly, the Vice-Presidents had to be of differentnationalities, and one had to come from the Canadian or U.S. delegations. The nominationscomplied with the Rules.
281 SC 10 E
4
José Lello pointed out that he had not been elected Vice-President of the Political Committee in2006, as stated on the list.Karl A. Lamers(DE) said that the Political Committee (PC) had the previous day agreed that theRapporteurs should be switched between its two Sub-Committees.The Secretary General said that the document had been put together very quickly: membersshould inform the Secretariat of any other inaccuracies.Hugh Bayley(UK) informed the Standing Committee that one officer of the Economics andSecurity Committee (ESC) elected on Saturday has subsequently resigned. He suggested thatJan Dziedziczak be re-appointed Vice-Chair of the Sub-Committee on East-West EuropeCo-operation and Convergence, as a continuation of his previous mandate rather than as a newmandate.The Committee agreed to the proposed candidatures and changes.David Hobbs outlined the arrangements for the Plenary session and listed the speakers. Theelection of Officers of the Assembly and other business would take place after the addresses. Heanticipated consideration of the draft Resolutions in the afternoon.6.Assembly Activities and Subjects in 2010 and 2011 [258 SC 10 E]
President Tanner noted that the future activities of the Assembly were significantly different tothose in previous years and drew the Standing Committee's attention to the document which hadbeen circulated.David Hobbs said that the document had been revised in light of the co-ordination meeting onFriday 12 November. It had been agreed at the Riga Session to look at a greater use of jointactivities as a way to reduce costs. He noted that there had also been a 20% decline inparticipation in Committee and Sub-Committee activities over recent years. The goal was to matchpolitical priorities with resources, and resources meant not just finance, but also the calls onmembers' time. He was optimistic about the draft Programme for 2010 because, although theoverall number of activities would be reduced, this had been achieved through joint meetings sothat the number of activities for each Committee, Sub-Committee and seminar programme wouldbe undiminished.The proposed Rose-Roth programme would include a seminar in Georgia, a seminar in Norway(on the High North) and a seminar in London (on Afghanistan). The activities for the Mediterraneanand Middle East Special Group (GSM) included seminars in Greece and Italy, and a visit toDjibouti. Two special visits to Afghanistan were anticipated in 2011. ISAF was keen for membersof the Assembly to see the situation on the ground, but the visits had to fit operational constraintsand the logistics were complicated. He was cautiously optimistic that the visits would take place asplanned.David Hobbs noted that the sessions in Bulgaria and Romania in 2011 would both be shorter thanusual. Two days of Committee meetings would be immediately followed by the Plenary Sitting, sothat both sessions would take place on Saturday, Sunday and Monday only.He concluded by making explicit mention of proposals to hold meetings outside of the Assembly’s“traditional” partners. For 2011, these included a joint meeting of the ESC and the GSM inDjibouti, and a joint Defence and Security Committee (DSC) and PC meeting in China.Vahit Erdem(TR) fully supported the calendar of activities, which maintained the geographicalrange of the Assembly's activities without diminishing their scope. He noted that it might be
281 SC 10 E
5
practical for the visit to Djibouti to be augmented by a visit to Ethiopia and that this would be ofinterest to the GSM.Ragnheidur E. Arnadottir(IS) thanked the Secretary General for his work in reducing the lengthof the 2011 sessions, since it was difficult to justify the length of such visits abroad.Hendrik Jan Ormel(NL) said that members of the CDS had noted the intention of the DSC andPC to visit China. The CDS was also interested in participating in a visit to China, and he askedthat the Standing Committee should consider making this visit a joint activity of three Committees.This proposal was discussed at some length.Joseph A. Day (CA), Helge Adam Moeller (DK),Lord Jopling, José Lello,Marc Angel (LU),Karl A. Lamers, and David Hobbs all commented.
The Committee agreed to the draft list of activities as presented.
7.
Relations with the Delegation from the Russian Federation [260 SC 10 E]
This item was deferred until the next meeting of the Standing Committee.
8.
Participation in the Parliamentary Transatlantic Forum [259 SC 10 E]
President Tanner said that the Standing Committee had agreed to limit participation in the Forumto member countries only, the background for which decision was set out in the document whichhad been circulated. However, the Swedish and Finnish delegations had asked that theirparticipation be reconsidered. If this was done, he believed that it should only be done on a clearbasis, such as their membership of the European Union. Mixed views had been expressed in theBureau, so it had been decided to refer the issue to the Standing Committee.Erna Solberg(NO) supported the participation of Sweden and Finland, as they were bothmembers of the EU.Imants Liegis(LV) endorsed the participation of Sweden and Finland, as they were importantcontributors to the NATO operation in Afghanistan and both countries had a special relationshipwith the Alliance.Petras Austrevicius also supported the proposal.Helge Adam Moeller supported the proposal and suggested that it might even lead Sweden andFinland to seek membership of NATO.The Committee agreed to the participation of Associate Member delegations from EUnations.
9.
Key points in the Assembly President’s Address to be delivered at the Summit ofNATO Heads of State and Government in Lisbon to be held from 19-20 November 2010
President Tanner invited his successor-elect, Dr Karl A. Lamers, to address the Committee.Karl A. Lamers said that he would address four points at Lisbon. The first, was that theParliamentary Assembly was a Euro-Atlantic Parliament and the democratic arm of the Alliance.The second, was the relevance of the new Strategic Concept and the contribution of theParliamentary Assembly thereto. The third, was the need to recognise the contribution to the
281 SC 10 E
6
comprehensive approach in Afghanistan. The fourth, was the critical importance of publiccommunication by NATO.10.Finance:Draft budget for 2011 [118 FIN 10 E rev. 1] featuring the organisation chart for theAssembly’s International SecretariatDraft amendments [233 SC 10 E] to the Financial Regulations [142 GEN 09 E rev. 1]Revised Implementing Rules and Procedures for Financial Transactions andBudget Execution (2010) [198 FIN 10 E]
President Tanner noted that Senator Pierre Claude Nolin could not be present, on account ofillness, and called Jane Cordy to speak in his place.Jane Cordy(CA) conveyed Senator Nolin's apologies for his absence. She was seeking approvalof the draft budget for 2011. Member delegations had been satisfied with the draft presented inRiga, but there had been some changes to reflect the restructuring of the session format, with thePlenary Sitting the day after Committees and no excursions in order to reduce costs. The proposedbudget would increase by only 0.45% overall compared with the current year. This was even lowerthan the figure of 1.15% in the draft presented in Riga, and well below the estimated inflation ratein Belgium of 3%.As far as the current financial year was concerned, everything was going according to plan.The draft budget was approved.Christine Heffinck,Deputy Secretary General for Management, drew the Standing Committee'sattention to the draft amendments to the Financial Regulations. The auditors had given theAssembly a clean bill of health in Riga but recommended that the Standing Committee insert in theFinancial Regulations more information on the accounting principles used by the NATO PA. Theaccounting principles were already included in an appendix to the financial statements but theproposed amendments would include these in the Financial Regulations as well.The Revised Implementing Rules and Procedures for Financial Transactions and BudgetExecution had been distributed for information only: the only change was the reference to thepower of signature for the Deputy Secretaries General, as there was no longer a Deputy to theSecretary General for and Partnerships and External Relations.The draft amendments to the Financial Regulations were approved.David Hobbs requested the approval of the Standing Committee to a change in staffing of theInternational Secretariat. Zachary Selden had served as Deputy Secretary General for Policy forthree years, but would leave in February 2011 to take up an academic position at the University ofFlorida.The Standing Committee expressed its gratitude to Zachary Selden for his service to theAssembly.David Hobbs proposed Ruxandra Popa, Director of the Committee on the Civil Dimension ofSecurity, as Deputy Secretary General for Policy from March 2011.The proposal was approved by acclamation.David Hobbs noted that Andrius Avizius, Director of the Science and Technology Committee, hadexpressed an interest in taking over as Director of the Committee on the Civil Dimension of
281 SC 10 E
7
Security. A new Director of the Science and Technology Committee would be appointed in duecourse.Lord Jopling congratulated the Secretary General on his choice and congratulated Ruxandra Popaon her appointment.11.Future sessions and meetings:Distribution of Assembly Sessions and Standing Committee Meetings [175 SC 10 E]Sessions and Meetings from 2010 [018 GEN 10 E rev. 2]Meeting of the Standing Committee, Ponta Delgada, San Miguel Island, Azores,Portugal, 1-3 April 2011Spring Session, Varna, Bulgaria, 27-31 May 201157th
Annual Session, Bucharest, Romania, 7-11 October 2011
President Tanner noted that firm offers had been received to host each Assembly session up toand including the Annual Session in 2012, but that the Assembly was actively seeking hosts for theSpring Session from 2013 onwards. Host parliaments generally needed two years or more to planthe hosting of a session. There were no hosts for either session in 2013 at present. The Assemblyrequired particular conference facilities, and large numbers of hotel rooms, for each session. TheSecretariat could advise interested delegations on the burden required of host countries, and wasprepared to discuss any adjustments which might be necessary to enable hosting to take place.José Lellobriefed the Standing Committee on the arrangements for the meeting of the StandingCommittee in Ponta Delgada, San Miguel Island, Azores, Portugal from 1 to 3 April 2011.Dobroslav Dimitrov(BG) briefed the Standing Committee on the arrangements for the SpringSession in Varna, Bulgaria, from 27 to 31 May 2011.José Luis Arnaut(PT) noted that Committees would be meeting on different days and wastherefore concerned about the schedule. Members would have one day with no activities, whichcould lead to unwelcome press coverage. He asked if it was possible for all Committees to meeton one day.Secretary General Hobbs indicated the background to discussions surrounding scheduling ofCommittee meetings. He said that members were encouraged to participate in other Committeemeetings on the day when their own Committee was not meeting. The option of all Committeessitting on one day had been examined, but there were several logistical difficulties and costsavings were not inevitable because, for instance, additional staff would be required to handle fouror even five simultaneous meetings. Similarly, some potential host countries might have difficultyfinding the larger facilities required.José Lello underlined the point that countries who might consider hosting Spring Session underexisting arrangements might not have the capacity to host five meetings concurrently.Assen Agov(BG) said that the Standing Committee had been discussing this issue since it hadmet in Vilnius in 2009. The Varna Session would be the first organised according to the newschedule where one day had already been cut from the traditional format. The Assembly shouldwait and see how that session, and the subsequent session in Bucharest, proceeded beforechanging the format again. He proposed that the Treasurer report on any effect on costs in 2011.President Tanner drew the Committee's attention to the dates for the Annual Session in 2012,which include 11 November.
281 SC 10 E
8
Lord Jopling pointed out the difficulties for the UK delegation of attending on the week-end ofRemembrance Sunday.Jean-Michel Boucheron(FR) noted that President Sarkozy had not been able to attend all theG 20 Summit because of unbreakable commitments in relation to Armistice Day commemorations.Secretary General Hobbs outlined the factors to be taken into account in choosing dates for theAnnual Session. In an even year, these had to take place after the United States Congressionalelections. He recognised that many delegates had commitments associated with 11 Novemberwhich made it difficult for them to attend, but on occasion session dates including 11 Novemberwere the only dates which would work for the host parliament and for the U.S. delegation: therewere also occasions when the availability of venues dictated the session dates.The President asked if any delegations would consider hosting future sessions.Hendrik Jan Ormel said that the Dutch delegation would offer to host the Annual Session for 2014,subject to approval from its Parliament.Petras Austrevicius conveyed an invitation from the speaker of the Lithuanian Parliament to hostthe 2014 Spring Session.Imants Liegis noted that Latvia would be willing to consider hosting the meeting of the StandingCommittee in Riga in 2014, subject to discussions with the authorities of the Saiema.12.Miscellaneous
Jane Cordy, speaking on behalf of the Standing Committee and the Bureau, thankedPresident Tanner for his contribution to the Assembly's work, and particularly thanked him andBetty Ann Tanner for their hosting of the Standing Committee meeting in Memphis in 2010.The Standing Committee expressed its appreciation to President Tanner.President Tanner thanked the Standing Committee, and again thanked Jadwiga Zakrzewska forthe hospitality of the Polish delegation during the Annual Session.The meeting closed at 11.55 a.m.___________________
