Monday, July 11, 2005
LexisNexis(TM) Academic - Document
LexisNexis(TM) Academic - Document
Copyright 2005 The Financial Times Limited
Financial Times (London, England)
July 1, 2005 Friday
London Edition 2
SECTION: COMPANIES INTERNATIONAL; Pg. 29
LENGTH: 409 words
HEADLINE: Congress to vote on ways to limit China bid OIL AND GAS:
BYLINE: By EDWARD ALDEN and STEPHANIE KIRCHGAESSNER
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
BODY:
Political pressure surround-ing CNOOC's Dollars 18.5bn unsolicited bid for Unocal, the California oil company, was stepped up a notch yesterday as Washington lawmakers prepared to vote on two measures seeking to stymie the Chinese bid.
The votes represent the latest in a series of moves by a group of bipartisan lawmakers to scupper the proposed deal in the face of growing frustration with the US-China relationship. But the Bush administration has so far taken an even stance on the proposed deal and it is unclear whether any attempts by Congress to interfere would have an impact.
One amendment by Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, a Democrat from Michigan, would stop the Treasury Department, which chairs the committee that reviews foreign acquisitions of US assets on national security grounds, from using federal funds to recommend an approval of CNOOC's bid.
Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the house, spoke in favour of her proposal, calling CNOOC's bid "compelling evidence of America's strategic energy vulnerability".
"This is not a free-market transaction," she said, adding that, if the acquisition was critical to the Chinese, "they would probably allow the bid to be increased to any level to seal the deal".
A separate resolution, sponsored by congressman Richard Pombo, would require an agreed takeover of Unocal by CNOOC to be reviewed "immediately" by President George W. Bush.
Todd Malan, executive director of the Organisation for International Investment, which represents US subsidiaries of foreign companies, said a move by Congress to block the deal outright would send a message that US rhetoric about open investment rules "is a one-way street".
Mr Pombo, a California Republican, first raised concerns about the CNOOC offer in a letter to Mr Bush days before the bid was announced.
The resolution attacks the bid on the grounds that energy is a vital component of US security interests, that an acquisition by CNOOC would result in "strategic assets" being allocated to China, and that a deal would give CNOOC access to Unocal's "sensitive dual-use technologies" that could have other commercial and military applications.
CNOOC yesterday rejected nearly every assertion in the resolution, saying Unocal's US production accounted for less than 1 per cent of US oil and gas consumption.
The company also said it did not believe Unocal possessed any classified military technology or had any fuel supply contracts with the US armed forces.
LOAD-DATE: June 30, 2005
Copyright 2005 The Financial Times Limited
Financial Times (London, England)
July 1, 2005 Friday
London Edition 2
SECTION: COMPANIES INTERNATIONAL; Pg. 29
LENGTH: 409 words
HEADLINE: Congress to vote on ways to limit China bid OIL AND GAS:
BYLINE: By EDWARD ALDEN and STEPHANIE KIRCHGAESSNER
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
BODY:
Political pressure surround-ing CNOOC's Dollars 18.5bn unsolicited bid for Unocal, the California oil company, was stepped up a notch yesterday as Washington lawmakers prepared to vote on two measures seeking to stymie the Chinese bid.
The votes represent the latest in a series of moves by a group of bipartisan lawmakers to scupper the proposed deal in the face of growing frustration with the US-China relationship. But the Bush administration has so far taken an even stance on the proposed deal and it is unclear whether any attempts by Congress to interfere would have an impact.
One amendment by Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, a Democrat from Michigan, would stop the Treasury Department, which chairs the committee that reviews foreign acquisitions of US assets on national security grounds, from using federal funds to recommend an approval of CNOOC's bid.
Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the house, spoke in favour of her proposal, calling CNOOC's bid "compelling evidence of America's strategic energy vulnerability".
"This is not a free-market transaction," she said, adding that, if the acquisition was critical to the Chinese, "they would probably allow the bid to be increased to any level to seal the deal".
A separate resolution, sponsored by congressman Richard Pombo, would require an agreed takeover of Unocal by CNOOC to be reviewed "immediately" by President George W. Bush.
Todd Malan, executive director of the Organisation for International Investment, which represents US subsidiaries of foreign companies, said a move by Congress to block the deal outright would send a message that US rhetoric about open investment rules "is a one-way street".
Mr Pombo, a California Republican, first raised concerns about the CNOOC offer in a letter to Mr Bush days before the bid was announced.
The resolution attacks the bid on the grounds that energy is a vital component of US security interests, that an acquisition by CNOOC would result in "strategic assets" being allocated to China, and that a deal would give CNOOC access to Unocal's "sensitive dual-use technologies" that could have other commercial and military applications.
CNOOC yesterday rejected nearly every assertion in the resolution, saying Unocal's US production accounted for less than 1 per cent of US oil and gas consumption.
The company also said it did not believe Unocal possessed any classified military technology or had any fuel supply contracts with the US armed forces.
LOAD-DATE: June 30, 2005
# posted by Eastlaw @ 8:27 AM 
