Silke Goldberg's guest appearances

Silke Goldberg

FSR Energy & Climate

Inside Asia Podcast

Weijian Shan

Massimo Tavoni

Martin Weitzman

Adam Schwarz

Parag Khanna

Rich Robinson

Josh Roberts

David Hoffman

Guy Turner

Mark Clifford

Kristian Ruby

James Barrat

Josh Tetrick

Hunter Lovins

Cindy Hook

OwlTail

Iain Donald

What a difference an election makes. Or at least, that’s the hope. It’s as if the world has been holding its breath and now – after no shortage of political drama – Joe Biden has emerged as the new President of the United States. Why’s that important? Because the world is suffering – environmentally, socially, and economically. The US can’t change all that, but it does bode well for a new era of greater international cooperation. As the world’s second largest polluter and the single largest economy, the US is instrumental if any progress is to be made. It’s track record on the environment, however, is less than inspiring. When things got messy some 40 years ago, exporting the problem seemed like a good idea. From the 1980s onward, US industrialists sent their polluting problems overseas, with China as a favored destination. Trump’s four-year war on the environment hasn’t helped. What we’re left with is lost time and little action. Our planet has reached a breaking point. And thanks to a well-spring of activist investors and an increasingly well-informed consumer class, pressure is mounting for governments and companies alike to drive change or lose favor. In this episode of Inside Asia I speak with two global specialists in the field of ESG. That stands for Environment, Social, and Corporate Governance. It’s catching on – now more than ever – as our dance with disaster draws closer and the private sector being called upon to do more. Iain Donald is U.S. and Canada Country Manager for Control Risks. Silke Goldberg is a Partner with London-based law firm, Herbert Smith Freehills. They joined me in a recent live discussion organized by GetGlobal. If you’re a CEO, CFO or hold any C-suite position within your organization, this episode of Inside Asia is meant for you. Here’s our discussion.

What a difference an election makes. Or at least, that’s the hope. It’s as if the world has been holding its breath and now – after no shortage of political drama – Joe Biden has emerged as the new President of the United States. Why’s that important? Because the world is suffering – environmentally, socially, and economically. The US can’t change all that, but it does bode well for a new era of greater international cooperation. As the world’s second largest polluter and the single largest economy, the US is instrumental if any progress is to be made. It’s track record on the environment, however, is less than inspiring. When things got messy some 40 years ago, exporting the problem seemed like a good idea. From the 1980s onward, US industrialists sent their polluting problems overseas, with China as a favored destination. Trump’s four-year war on the environment hasn’t helped. What we’re left with is lost time and little action. Our planet has reached a breaking point. And thanks to a well-spring of activist investors and an increasingly well-informed consumer class, pressure is mounting for governments and companies alike to drive change or lose favor. In this episode of Inside Asia I speak with two global specialists in the field of ESG. That stands for Environment, Social, and Corporate Governance. It’s catching on – now more than ever – as our dance with disaster draws closer and the private sector being called upon to do more. Iain Donald is U.S. and Canada Country Manager for Control Risks. Silke Goldberg is a Partner with London-based law firm, Herbert Smith Freehills. They joined me in a recent live discussion organized by GetGlobal. If you’re a CEO, CFO or hold any C-suite position within your organization, this episode of Inside Asia is meant for you. Here’s our discussion.

The New ESG Movement (w/ Iain Donald and Silke Goldberg)

The Euratom Treaty, signed in Rome on 25 March 1957, established the European Atomic Energy Community, alongside the European Economic Community (EEC). Its function is to provide a regulatory and cooperative framework which governs the development of nuclear energy and its trade across Europe, a kind of ‘nuclear common market’, which also funds cross-border research and development projects, upholds safety standards and procedures, notifies the potential impact of activities on other Member States, and ensures that nuclear materials are not deployed for military use. Euratom has established nuclear cooperation agreements with third countries, including Canada, Japan, and the USA, and sets out provisions for international compliance with nuclear safeguards. Euratom also reports to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). While a separate legal entity from the EU, it is tied to its laws and institutions, and subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). No country is a full member of Euratom without being a full member of the EU. On 29 March 2017, the triggering of Article 50, signalling the UK’s departure from the EU, also incorporated the UK’s withdrawal from the Euratom Treaty of which they had been members since they joined the EEC in 1973. While legal opinion is divided as to whether exiting the EU also forced an exit from Euratom, as a concomitant requirement of leaving the bloc, Theresa May argued for its inclusion on the grounds of ending the supremacy of EU law over domestic law. What are the possible repercussions of exiting the treaty for both the UK and the EU? Given the UK’s commitment to a nuclear future, as evident by the recent investment in Hinkley Point, and the UK’s deep-seated integration in the EU nuclear energy market, how might the UK attempt to establish itself independent of the legislation, regulatory expectations and terms of compliance set out by Euratom? During the European Union (withdrawal) bill debate on 13 December 2017, the Minister of State for Courts and Justice, said that the UK government intended to retain a close association with Euratom. Could associate membership, à la Switzerland and Ukraine, be an option? How would that be reconciled with an absolutist position on ECJ interference? What does it mean for the research projects dependent on funding from Euratom members, such as that at Culham Oxfordshire? Could the UK be sidelined from lucrative nuclear trade agreements with third parties? With replacement provisions yet to be determined, industry warnings suggest that the UK’s exit from Euratom could cause a major disruption to the entire nuclear fuel cycle. In this podcast, Silke Goldberg from Herbert Smith Freehills discusses the UK’s position, the legal terms of their exit, and the potential consequences of their withdrawal.

Brexit and the Euratom Treaty | Silke Goldberg