Welcome to Japan Images, a rapid fire blog where all the main topics are convered including Business, Entertainment, The Family and Lifestyle Issues.
We follow that up with articles on Money (of course), Pets, General Info, Real Estate and Technology.
Last but not least we have up to date World News, the Environment plus everyones favourite, Travel .
Thanks for visiting and hope you come back soon.
admin on May 29, 2009 | Filed Under Business, Entertainment, Environment, Family, General, Lifestyle, Money & Finance, Pets, Real Estate, Technology, Travel & Holidays, World News | Leave a Comment
The Observer
by Edris Kiggundu
07 February 2010
Insights into the tightly guarded oil production and sharing agreements signed by the government and international companies have finally leaked.
The 40-page report titled: Contracts Curse: Uganda’s Oil Agreements Place Profit Before People, that extensively quotes the agreements the government has kept under wraps, reveals that oil firms will reap extra-ordinary profits.
The report by PLATFORM, a London-based organization, says that as a result of this, extraction of millions of barrels of crude oil on Block 3A is most likely going to exacerbate poverty, increase human rights violations, entrench the power of military forces and distort the Ugandan economy.
The drilling on Block 3A is being undertaken by Tullow Oil which is seeking to acquire the entire stake by buying out Heritage Oil’s shares in a deal reported to be worth $1.35 billion.
In coming up with the report, PLATFORM says it reviewed the agreements and spoke to several people in Uganda and abroad, who are knowledgeable about the agreements. Last week court dismissed a petition filed by two journalists of The Daily Monitor seeking to access the oil production, prospecting and exploitation agreements. The case was brought under the Access to Information Act, the law that allows citizens free access to information.
Dismissing the case, the Nakawa Court Chief Magistrate, Deo Ssejjemba, said certain documents need to be kept confidential for proper functioning of the public service. The report that analyses clauses of the entire agreements concludes that the oil firms stand to reap more from the oil than the government or its citizens when oil production starts late this year.
SIGNATURE BONUS
Government will receive $300,000 (Shs 570 million) as signature bonus for signing the agreement. But the report notes that even if this represents hard cash paid up front, this money is little. “The Congo (DRC) government received a $3.5 million bonus upon signing Production and Sharing Agreements (PSA) for Block 1 in 2008,” the report notes.
REVENUE SHARING
According to the agreement, the government and oil firms will share the revenue according to the barrels of oil produced. According to the report, Uganda has come out with two models that cover two different scenarios.
Under the first model, government will take 68% of the revenue, leaving 32% to the firm if an oil field can generate a total of 800 million barrels of oil. Where a field can generate 1,500 million barrels, government’s share of the revenue will rise to 73%. The revenue could fall if the price of a barrel of oil drops and the reverse is true.
Such agreements, PLATFORM says, are highly profitable for the participating oil companies. In the most likely scenarios, Tullow Oil could make a 30-35% return on its investment. “This represents a very high profit level for the oil industry, even for risky projects.”
In the report, Reuben Kashambuzi, Uganda’s Commissioner at the Petroleum Exploration and Production Department, is quoted as accepting that that the existing PSAs damage Uganda’s national interest. He says: “We agree that the PSAs were not structured to take advantage of runaway oil prices being experienced worldwide today. Several attempts [to renegotiate] have not succeeded because of the perception that Uganda’s PSAs are very tough.’’
ROYALTY FEES
As for royalty fees, which is a set amount of money that the oil firm must pay to government annually as a percentage of its gross sales, where the production does not exceed 2,500 barrels of oil per day, the oil firm will pay a royalty of 5% and where production exceeds 2,500 barrels but does not reach 5,000 barrels, government will be paid a royalty of 7%.
Interestingly, the agreements make no mention of what the Bunyoro Kitara Kingdom, where the oil wells are located, will get. This matter has long been contentious. According to the contract, the Ugandan government could choose to participate in the oil developments with a 15% stake, without providing upfront investment.
The benefits of this option are that Uganda receives a greater proportion of revenues, shares in the private company’s profitability while ensuring a more even sharing of the potential ‘upsides’ - the chance that the project succeeds. However, the report notes that it appears government will not exercise this right.
“By refusing this possibility, the government is effectively handing over a significant portion of revenues to the private companies,” the report notes.
PIPELINE
The agreements give the oil companies the right to construct an export pipeline through Uganda and Kenya, to take crude oil to the port from where it can be collected by tanker. According to the report, while the contract explicitly states the oil companies’ rights to construct a pipeline and the government’s obligation to support such a plan, it does not include the opposite responsibilities.
That is, the contract does not state that the oil companies will conduct adequate impact assessments or strategic environmental plans or construct the pipeline to certain standards. Nor does it include a contractual right for the Ugandan government to investigate and oversee proposals prior to approval.
“Given the very high projected returns of 20-34% for the oil companies developing the fields along Lake Albert, there is a risk that the oil companies constructing the pipeline will aim for a similar return. The companies exploring for oil have consistently used the apparent need for a pipeline to justify their excessively favourable terms.
They have argued that because Uganda is a landlocked country, they are compelled to invest in oil transportation infrastructure and that this will affect their margins.”
TRAINING LOCAL STAFF
This agreement sets out a responsibility for the oil companies to train Ugandan citizens to gradually replace expatriate staff and to train government personnel in oil operations. In many oil producing countries, contracts will set out strict percentage targets for local as opposed to expatriate employment, specifying necessary quotas for unskilled, semiskilled and skilled jobs.
However, Uganda’s contracts set no specific timetable or quota targets, merely stating “the Licensee will gradually replace its expatriate staff” (emphasis added). It appears that the government and the companies have created unrealistic expectations around the employment opportunities that will follow from oil extraction in Uganda.
While the oil exploration and production industry is capital intensive, it employs proportionately far lower workers than almost every other industry. While a number of unskilled workers will be needed during the development stages to construct roads, buildings and other infrastructure, these will mostly be short term, insecure and low-paid positions.
PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT
The report notes that the environmental impacts of oil and gas extraction are particularly serious along Lake Albert, as this is the most species-rich eco-region for vertebrates and one of the most bio-diverse areas on the African continent. However, Uganda’s Production Sharing Agreements reviewed by PLATFORM carry few specific or enforceable safeguards.
According to the agreement, where an oil company that causes environmental damage or fails to otherwise comply with these terms, the government’s sole resort is to “take action […] to ensure compliance” and “recover […] expenditure incurred in connection with such action”. This means that there are no fines at all for causing environmental destruction.
“Deterrent fines are widely recognized as crucial to preventing regular and large oil spills. A US academic study found that a fine increase from $1 to $2 per gallon for large spills decreased spillage by 50%. The 1990 Oil Pollution Act in the US laid out fines of up to $1,000 per barrel discharged.”
“That the contracts provide no basis for fines, while Uganda simultaneously lacks an effective regulatory regime for the oil industry, clearly represents worst practice.”
RESOLVING DISPUTES
Disputes between the oil companies and the government shall be referred to arbitration in London, according to the rules of the UN Commission for International Trade. This means that a conflict between the Ugandan government and a private oil company operating on Ugandan soil will be resolved not in Ugandan courts, but by an international investment tribunal.
Moving the resolution of disputes to London undermines Ugandan sovereignty, treats the Ugandan state as a commercial entity of equal standing to a private corporation, removing concepts of public interest, responsibility or sovereignty.
HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS
The agreements, according to PLATFORM, are silent on the relationship between the oil companies and the military or police forces. Thus it is unclear what promises and guarantees the Ugandan government has made to ensure security and what rights the oil companies have been awarded.
This leaves open critical questions, including: Do oil company security or private military contractors have the right or authority to arrest, injure or kill those they perceive as a threat? Do oil companies’ security have the authority to deal with protest or opposition to oil extraction projects?
Do the contracts include indemnification of the company against liability for any human rights abuses arising? Do military contractors have the right or authority to interact with foreign forces? Has the Ugandan government promised to ensure security? Is the Ugandan government financially liable if there is a breach in security?
Is the Ugandan government incentivised to prioritise security interests over the human rights of local populations? At the moment, the report notes that a battalion of the elite Presidential Guard Brigade is responsible for Uganda’s oil region. The report also notes that a new military base will be constructed on ten square miles in Hoima District.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the report notes that oil contracts in Uganda do not provide enforceable protection standards regarding the environment or the human rights of Ugandan citizens, relying on the oil companies to operate reasonably and altruistically.
In this context, it is clear that extracting the oil discovered in the Albertine Graben is highly unlikely to bring overall benefits in terms of economic development, let alone environmental protection or human rights to the region. The Ugandan government and companies have repeatedly criticised comparisons with Nigeria, Angola, Ecuador or other oil producing countries in the global south, asking why the focus is on those countries with negative social & economic outcomes from oil.
Yet despite their promises of corporate responsibility, the oil companies’ foremost legal responsibility is to maximize profits for their shareholders – other commitments can be sacrificed to achieve this. This is made explicit in Heritage’s 2008 Prospectus to potential shareholders.
The failure of the contracts to protect Uganda is compounded in that national law and oil policies do not currently provide “enough specific and enforceable obligations to promote responsible regulation of [the oil & gas] sector, especially with regard to protection of the environment.
While the government claims that it will present a “new oil law” to parliament imminently, there is as yet no sign of it. Current negotiations over development plans with the oil companies continue to place the cart before the horse.
For further info:
http://www.platformlondon.org/carbonweb/showitem.asp?article=375&parent=9
Réseau International des Femmes pour la Démocratie et la Paix (RIFDP)
Réf : L/1du 6 février 2010
Secrétaire Général des Nations Unies
1st Avenue, 46th Street
New York NY 10017
Amnesty International
1 Easton Street
London, WC1X 0DW, UK
Human Rights Watch
64-66, rue de Lausanne
1202 Genève, Suisse
Membres du Corps Diplomatique à Kigali (Tous)
Les ONG
Les médias
Objet : Note de protestation à la suite de l’agression contre Mme Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, Présidente des Forces Démocratiques Unifiées (FDU) et Candidate aux élections présidentielles d’août 2010 au Rwanda.
Mesdames,
Messieurs,
Le 3 février 2010, Madame Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, présidente des Forces démocratiques unifiées et candidate aux élections présidentielles d’août 2010 au Rwanda, a été agressée et dépouillée de ses documents d’identité par des individus dont on peut affirmer, sans se tromper, qu’ils étaient en mission commandée par le pouvoir en place à Kigali.
En effet, sur invitation des autorités locales, Mme Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza s’était rendue au bureau du secteur Kinyinya/Kigali pour retirer des attestations en vue de parachever l’enregistrement de son parti politique. Arrivée sur place en compagnie de son collaborateur, M. Joseph Ntawangundi, elle a été brutalement attaquée par un groupe de gens embusqués à l’intérieur même de l’enclos du bureau municipal. Avec l’aide de son chauffeur, Mme Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza a pu se soustraire des mains de ses agresseurs tandis que son collaborateur a été sauvagement battu et déshabillé.
Nous, Réseau International des Femmes pour la Démocratie et la Paix (RIFDP), avons été d’autant plus choquées par cet acte de barbarie qui s’est déroulé dans un pays où le régime dirigeant se targue d’être le promoteur des droits de la femme. Nous condamnons énergiquement et de vives voix ces pratiques barbares de violence indignes de notre siècle.
Il est très regrettable que le FPR de Paul Kagame n’ait pas encore saisi dans toute sa profondeur le message de la paix que Mme Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza apporte aujourd’hui au Rwanda. Rentrée récemment d’exil, elle a été aussitôt la cible des médias et des organisations proches du pouvoir de Kigali qui l’accusent de négationniste, de divisionniste, d’ethniste et de véhiculer l’idéologie génocidaire. C’est là tout un arsenal destiné à décourager toute voix discordante, quelle qu’elle soit.
Pourtant, la mission de Mme Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza est toute autre et claire. Elle est rentrée dans son pays au nom de la paix, de la démocratie, du dialogue inter-rwandais et de la réconciliation nationale. Telles sont les valeurs, parfaitement louables, qu’elle incarne et véhicule dans tous ses discours. S’attaquer à elle, c’est s’attaquer à ces valeurs ; c’est se tromper d’époque.
La présidente des FDU n’a rien de tout ce que ses détracteurs veulent faire croire. Au contraire elle est pour la vérité et la justice pour tous. Elle est pour le bien-être de tout le peuple rwandais dans toutes ses composantes. C’est d’ailleurs ce qu’elle affirme dans son discours du 16 janvier 2010 à son arrivée à Kigali : « Nous voulons une politique qui protège chaque Rwandais pour que plus personne ne perde sa vie à cause de ses origines, de sa région, de sa religion ou de ses opinions politiques ». Mme Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza invite les Rwandais à une marche de fierté, une marche « tous ensemble » pour construire un Rwanda plus solidaire, plus harmonieux et plus juste.
A l’instar de l’intérêt manifesté par la communauté internationale à l’endroit de l’opposante birmane Aung San Suu Kyi, notre organisation souhaiterait voir ladite communauté réserver les mêmes attentions à Mme Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza puisque les deux leaders politiques mènent des combats en tous les points semblables à savoir la démocratie, la paix et la défense des droits de l’homme.
Convaincues que vous pouvez aider les Rwandais à se sortir d’une situation de « ni guerre ni paix » qui perdure depuis 15 ans, nous vous demandons d’user de toute votre influence pour convaincre les autorités rwandaises à renoncer à des méthodes qui s’apparentent à un terrorisme d’État. Une action rapide dans ce sens s’impose car on ne devrait pas tergiverser devant quiconque voudra plonger une fois encore le Rwanda dans l’horreur. Ce faisant, vous aurez rendu un grand service à son peuple et au monde entier.
Pour le Réseau International des Femmes pour la Démocratie et la Paix (RIFDP),
Perpétue Muramutse,
Pétronille Muhawenimana,
Clémence Uwimana.
David Foot: “Brilliant marketing strategy.” Photograph by: Aaron Lynett/National Post, Aaron Lynett/National Post Maybe it has to do with my age or the period during which I grew up, but somewhere in my brain an advertising firm managed to plant the idea of Freedom 55, a uniquely Canadian slogan.
Back in the day when I played video games my favourite was Sonic the Hedgehog, that was way back when Sonic first made his debut with Sega. Since then Sonic the Hedgehog has moved on quite a bit, and into the mobile arena as a mobile game.
Well now according to an article over on intomobile, the next sequel in the Sonic the Hedgehog mobile series, Sonic the Hedgehog 4 will be coming to the iPhone this summer.
Sega is to launch Sonic the Hedgehog to the Playstation 3, Xbox 360, the Wii and a fourth platform which now turns out to be the iconic iPhone.
Apparently the fourth version will maintain the 2D platform look and feel but with enhanced graphics and gameplay. So just so you can see what to expect we have a short demonstration video for your viewing pleasure below…enjoy.
The New Vision
7 February 2010
By Ibrahim Kasita
Eni, the Italian firm that showed interest in Uganda’s oil fields, has withdrawn its bid after Tullow exercised its right of first option. Two oil fields, blocks 1 and 3A in western Uganda, are owned by Heritage and Tullow in a 50-50% joint venture.
The firm’s spokesperson was quoted in the media on Friday as saying: “Eni today revoked the sale and purchase agreement for the acquisition of Heritage’s 50% interest in blocks 1 and 3A in Uganda, for which Tullow has recently exercised its pre-emption right.”
Tullow is selling part of its own stake to allow for the entry of bigger oil companies that have the capacity and experience to build a refinery and pipeline.
The company of Irish origin last week announced it preferred working with the Chinese state-owned oil company CNOOC or France’s Total.
Meanwhile, CNOOC said it is paying $2.5b for a stake in Tullow’s Ugandan oil assets. According to Hong Kong media, the purchase was expected to be signed in London last Friday.
“We are still receiving all proposals from the licensed companies (Tullow and Heritage) to sell part of their stakes and it is a normal process,” Ernest Rubondo, the commissioner in the petroleum and exploration department, said yesterday.
Rubondo did not want to comment on Eni’s withdrawal. He, however, said Heritage was determined to sell its interest and he was convinced they would get a buyer because “many companies are interested in Uganda’s oil”.
“Once we have scrutinised all the proposals and found the best company with Ugandan interests at heart, we shall inform the public.”
Meanwhile, President Yoweri Museveni over the weekend met Russian-based oil company Lukoil and encouraged the firm to invest in Uganda’s oil exploration and refining sector.
Andrei Sapozhnikov, the Lukoil vice-president for business development, handed over his company’s investment proposal to the President, according to a statement from State House.
“Sapozhnikov expressed interest in the oil exploration, refinery and the training of local manpower to facilitate the development of the sector,” said the statement.
Lukoil, according to the firm’s website, is Russia’s largest oil company and the second largest private oil company worldwide by proven hydrocarbon reserves.
The company has about 1.1% of global oil reserves and 2.3% of global oil production. Lukoil dominates the Russian energy sector, with 18% of Russian oil production and 19% of oil refining.
Most of its exploration and production activity is located in Russia, and its main resource base is in Western Siberia.
However, it is also carrying out projects in Kazakhstan, Egypt, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, Colombia, Venezuela, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana and Iraq.
Its petroleum products are sold in Russia, eastern and western Europe, and the US.
Present at the meeting with the Lukoil delegation was state minister for investment Aston Kajara, the boss of the Uganda Investment Authority, Maggie Kigozi, Uganda’s ambassador to Russia, Moses Ebuk, and the Russian ambassador to Uganda.
Reuters
7 February 2010
By Mohamed Ahmed and Abdi Sheikh
Mogadishu - Ethiopian troops in armoured vehicles crossed into two border towns in south-central Somalia and seized the family of a man with alleged links to al Shabaab insurgents, residents said on Sunday.
They said troops went to El-Barde and Yeed on Saturday seeking the man. Washington claims al-Shabaab is al-Qaeda’s proxy in the region and has declared loyalty to al-Qaeda.
“Ethiopian troops entered El Barde yesterday and arrested several people today. They were on-board armoured vehicles and were searching for a well-known local man who also works with al Shabaab,” a town resident, Hussein Ronow, told Reuters.
“The man escaped, but they took with them his wife and three children. They also took the escaped man’s brother and family. The troops have now gone but I understand they are in the outskirts of the town.”
Ethiopia invaded its Horn of Africa neighbour with tacit US support at the end of 2006 to oust an Islamist movement that was running the capital Mogadishu and much of the south.
The Ethiopian military officially withdrew in January last year.
Officials in Addis Ababa routinely deny that Ethiopian soldiers are on Somali soil, although they say they are providing security advice and training for Somalia’s forces.
“Our enemies, the Ethiopians, have entered our towns and terrified residents. I understand they were searching for some of the residents,” Sheikh Aden Yare, head of al Shabaab’s administration in Bakool region, told Reuters.
Somali government officials could not be immediately reached for comment.
Somalia has not had an effective central government for close to two decades, spurring the rise of warlords, heavily armed criminal gangs and pirates who have been terrorising shipping off its coastline.
The international community and neighbouring countries are worried about the wider threat posed by al Shabaab insurgents who control a large part of Somalia and are fighting its fragile government.
For weeks, the government has been promising to launch an offensive against al Shabaab and Hizbul Islam.
Daily Monitor
By Tabu Butagira
February 8 2010
The development comes shortly after ENI s.P.a, the Italian oil giant, announced withdrawal of its bid to buy Heritage Oil & Gas company’s stakes in Ugandan oil field after Tullow, invoked its pre-emption rights to buy from the UK firm.
————————————————————————————-
The second major prospecting firm in Uganda’s oil fields, the British company Tullow Oil plc, is expected to announce this week that it will sell half of its stakes in Uganda to a Chinese company at $2.5 billion (Shs4.7 trillion), the Sunday Times reported yesterday.
The development comes shortly after ENI s.P.a, the Italian oil giant, announced withdrawal of its bid to buy Heritage Oil & Gas company’s stakes in Ugandan oil field after Tullow; a co-investor in the Albertine region, invoked its pre-emption rights to buy from the UK firm.
Minister unaware
The Sunday Times, a weekend sister publication of UK’s respected The Times, did not divulge the source of the story but reported that the largely Chinese government owned, China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) has agreed to the deal.
In Kampala, State Minister for Energy Simon D’Ujanga, said last night that the government is yet to receive Tullow’s proposal and preferred co-investor in the country’s fledgling oil industry.
“There are 18 companies that have interest in buying Tullow shares. The company is supposed to assess all of them and select a few and bring a proposal to the government for consideration,” he said, adding: “As far as we are concerned, Tullow is still assessing and I shall not speculate until they bring their proposal but the government has the final approval.”
News of the negotiation breakthrough, part of Tullow’s farm-out arrangement, comes 10days after President Museveni met a CNOOC delegation led by company Chief Executive Officer Fu Chengyu at State House Entebbe on January 26.
Museveni blessing
“President Museveni expressed happiness with the investment proposal (of the Chinese) in the oil exploration sector in Uganda,” a statement issued by State House then quoted Mr Museveni as having said.
The Sunday Times reported that final details of the sale were being worked out at the weekend with Total SA, the French oil group, which could become an equal partner in the fields with the Chinese and participate in their development. “Tullow is expected to announce the deal after Yoweri Museveni, the President of Uganda, gives it his blessing, which is expected this week,” the newspaper said in its article.
“The sale of the three blocks, worth between $4.5 billion and $5 billion, in the Lake Albert basin will be part of a larger development plan.”
Daily Monitor was unable to reach Brian Glover, the Uganda country manager of Tullow, to offer more details of the expected deal as he could not answer repeated telephone calls.
Mr Elly Karuhanga, the company president here, who reportedly brokered last month’s meeting between CNOOC and Mr Museveni, said he was aware of a deal in the offing. “That is great news,” he said by phone last night.
“Tullow is fully aware that after they finish negotiations, the government will have to be informed and give its consent.”
I got my fifteen minutes of fame this week. Reporter Sam Dolnick of the New York Times saw my blog about debarking my shelties. He had never heard of such a thing, so he contacted me and wrote a thoughtful article about the subject after interviewing people on both sides of the debate. We spoke several times, and I gave him some names of vets and others he could interview. He quotes me at the end of the article:
Terry Albert, of Poway, Calif., said her life revolved around dogs: she boards them, rescues them, and even paints portraits of them. And she refuses to give them up. She has had two dogs debarked.
“You may think it’s horrible,” she said. “But if I had to give up my dog or get the surgery, I would choose the surgery.”
I’ve been amazed at how many people I know who saw the article and contacted me. The good news is most people seem to agree with me, though I have also been
soundly ridiculed on a few blogs. Such is life.
AFP
7 February 2010
By YURAS KARMANAU and SIMON SHUSTER
Editor’s Note: This is preliminary and may very well be accurate, but with numerous allegations of corrupted polls, the reader should exercise some caution. Here’s to hoping this won’t poison the well and the numbers are all in good order.
An exit poll predicted Sunday that opposition leader Viktor Yanukovych has been elected Ukraine’s next president, with voters apparently favoring a leader who will steer the country away from the pro-Western course set by the 2004 Orange Revolution.
The National Election Poll expected the Russia-leaning Yanukovych to finish first in Sunday’s runoff ballot, capturing 48.7 percent of the vote to 45.5 percent for Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, with other voters mostly choosing “Against all.”
The stone-faced political leader from Ukraine’s Russian-speaking east fought hard against Tymoshenko, whose impassioned leadership of the 2004 Orange protests made her an international celebrity. But Sunday’s vote appeared to be much closer than the first round Jan. 17, where Yanukovych had a 10 percentage point lead over Tymoshenko.
Tymoshenko has vowed to challenge a vote she claims was rigged. Yanukovych supporters have been camped out in front of the Central Election Commission headquarters in Kiev in an apparent effort to prevent Tymoshenko supporters from blockading the building.
Yanukovych has pledged to restore order and says he will try to balance ties to east and west. But he represents the hopes of many in eastern Ukraine, who feel they have been relegated to second-class status by their countrymen in western Ukraine.
Tymoshenko sought to depict herself as a populist whose appeal crossed Ukraine’s east-west divide. But she bore the scars of five years of political battles with Yanukovych and her sometime Orange ally, outgoing President Viktor Yushchenko, and has struggled to cope with Ukraine’s severe economic crisis.
Yanukovych was accused of massive vote fraud in the 2004 president ballot, which was thrown out by the courts. Later that year he was trounced by Orange forces in a revote as foes cast him as a Kremlin lackey. But he battled back, serving for a time as prime minister under his Orange adversary, Yushchenko.
Yanukovych’s rise from the political ashes came as voters said they were weary of broken promises, a dysfunctional economy and political chaos under the Orange government.
Staying on track to a comfortable retirement isn’t only about taking care of your finances and your health.
