A More Positive Tone? (So much catching up still to do)
German Mittelstand wants 'soft Brexit'.
Germany's "Mittelstand" of small and medium-sized firms (SMEs) could lose billions of euros if the UK is shut out of the single market, an industry representative has warned. The boss of the BVMW, which represents more than 270,000 SMEs, told the BBC "a hard Brexit would harm both sides". Mario Ohoven added that negotiations should be "guided by economic sense and not by political ideologues". The remarks diverge from the position taken by other leading German voices. In September last year, the head of the BDI, a powerful German business lobby whose members are larger companies, told the BBC it was "better to have a hard Brexit that works". German politicians have almost unanimously underlined that the UK cannot have unfettered access to the single market unless it allows for the free movement of EU citizens. In her letter to the EU last week, Theresa May said the UK would "not seek membership of the single market" in the upcoming negotiations. But Mr Ohoven emphasised that the close economic ties between the UK and the German Mittelstand - which makes up the bulk of the country's economy - meant a Brexit deal without single market access would be damaging to both countries. "Germany exported goods worth 89bn euros to the UK alone in 2015, almost half of it was exported by 150,000 German SMEs," he said, adding that many more companies traded indirectly with the British market, as well as relying on UK research and development. "In the end, a soft Brexit should be reached. It is important that the UK stays in the single market, or that the UK joins an agreement similar to the the EFTA (European Free Trade Association), similar to Norway or Iceland. The worst result would be if the EU and the UK did not reach an agreement in time," he added.
Theresa May and Donald Tusk 'seek to lower Brexit tensions'.
Theresa May has met European Council President Donald Tusk ahead of the start of Brexit talks and stressed the "positive" tone shown by both sides. After this week's row about Gibraltar, an EU source said they would "seek to lower tensions that may arise". Downing St said the PM "made clear" that "there would be no negotiation on the sovereignty of Gibraltar without the consent of its people". Mrs May formally triggered two years of Brexit talks last week. A Downing Street spokesman said: "The PM reiterated the UK's desire to ensure a deep and special partnership with the European Union following its exit and noted the constructive approach set out by the council in its draft guidelines published last week. Both leaders agreed that the tone of discussions had been positive on both sides, and agreed that they would seek to remain in close touch as the negotiations progressed”. He added that Mrs May had made clear "the UK would seek the best possible deal for Gibraltar as the UK exits the EU". Downing Street said they had also discussed the agenda for the next EU Council meeting as the UK remained a "full and engaged member" of the EU. Mr Tusk has warned the Brexit negotiations could become "confrontational" at times.
UK 'must be ready to vote against EU measures'.
Ministers must continue to scrutinise - and be prepared to vote against - new EU measures while it remains a member of the EU, a committee of MPs has said. EU proposals should be considered by the UK both as an EU member state, and in terms of their Brexit implications, the European Scrutiny Committee said. Policies would affect the UK up to, and in some cases after, Brexit, it said. The government has said it "will continue to negotiate, implement and apply EU legislation" until Brexit. Until then, the committee points out, the UK continues to take its place in negotiations on EU legislation at the European Council and in the Council of Ministers. Brexit Secretary David Davis has pledged to "exercise our influence over what we think is the best interests of the European Union until the moment we leave". But the committee heard from the UK's former ambassador to the EU, Sir Ivan Rogers, who said, in the six months after the EU Referendum, he "saw a diminution of Whitehall attention and effort on day-to-day dossiers". He also suggested that other EU member states may already be preparing for life after Brexit as new legislation goes through: "Others are, frankly, looking at opportunities in the next couple of years to land things in directives and regulation that they know are going to cause us difficulty."
Brexit: Bank urges City to 'plan for all eventualities'.
The Bank of England has written to the UK's biggest financial firms, urging them to plan for "all eventualities" from the UK leaving the European Union. Bank governor Mark Carney said the "vast majority" of City firms already had contingency plans in place. However, he said that some financial firms still needed to prepare in case of a "more extreme" outcome. In a speech, Mr Carney urged the UK and EU to recognise each other's bank rules after Brexit. In the letter, it says some companies may not be ready for the "most adverse potential outcomes". That would happen if a trade deal and interim arrangements were not in place when the UK leaves. Mr Carney said: "Prudent planning means that you have to also plan for a shorter time horizon and a more extreme outcome. That in no way shape or form is saying that that's what our expectation is, and certainly we'll be absolutely clear that is not in the best interest of the EU 27 or the United Kingdom or the global system as a whole." Asked if firms should move now, he said: "No, that's not the most prudent. It's prudent to be in a position to continue operating after the UK leaves." The central bank has indicated it is largely happy with the large foreign banks' planning, but says the standard of contingency planning across the sector is uneven.
House price growth at lowest for four years, says Halifax.
The growth in house prices across the UK showed a significant slowdown in the year to March, according to the country's biggest lender. Prices rose by 3.8%, the lowest rate since May 2013, and down from 5.1% in the year to February, said the Halifax. The inflation rate is now less than a half what it was a year ago. Last week, the Nationwide said that house prices had actually fallen in the last month. The Halifax said prices had been flat since February. The average price of a home in the UK is now £219,755, it said. "The annual rate of house price growth has more than halved over the past 12 months," said Martin Ellis, Halifax's housing economist. "A lengthy period of rapid house price growth has made it increasingly difficult for many to purchase a home, as income growth has failed to keep up, which appears to have curbed housing demand."
All details above from BBC News website.
[It would appear that reality really is starting to bite now. The government’s unrealistic ideas for our Brexit stance are unravelling as we keep insisting that we want to leave but [PLEASE!] can we still have the benefits for a further two years so our economy doesn’t completely crash and burn. Not surprisingly the two opposing factions in the Tory party are falling on each other like wolves and the PM is hanging onto her position like grim death…. It was wasn’t so bloody obvious and bloody ridiculous I’d be laughing about now!]
8 comments:
On the bright side, your PM isn't involved in a tweet war with a bunch of overpaid babies, and threatening to evoke nuclear war against another overpaid baby. I'm fine with laughing at DC, but Puerto Rico should have switched gears completely.
I keep expecting that fellow from the Monty Python sketches to interrupt the news -- "All right, too silly! "
Yes......... Our idiots really aren't in the same league as your prime idiot. This whole kneeling/standing thing is both bemusing and rather hilarious over here. Do you think that Trump can *ever* actually act like a President for more that 3 minutes together. I can't help but wonder if your political system will ever really recover from his election.
According to the establishment, he was presidential when he dropped that enormous bomb on Syria. It's somewhat telling that they think mass destruction -- prompted, he says, by seeing reports of gassed Syrians on television-- is presidential.
As far as our political system goes...I think genuine Republican government was over by the early 20th century, and that since then we've had an administrative empire with a republican veneer -- rather like Rome, which still had "senators" and "consuls" even after decades of Imperial rule. I'm sure the DC system will be there after Trump, but how it will manage the chaos is another. The fact that people voted in and support someone like Trump is a testament not to their narrowmindness, but to their utter LOATHING of the system. I no longer believe the United States is a country -- just a collection of increasingly polarized and segmented groups raging at one another. The only thing that could have united multiple ethnic groups, classes, etc -- Americanism, the old civil culture -- is now automatically dismissed.
(This why I needed to listen to the Desiderata a few times..)
i'm afraid Stephen might be right; i've rarely heard it expressed so concisely... re brexit, i think it will never happen: it would devastate all of of Europe and maybe the world... eventually, i think they'll just carry on as usual and call things by other names...
@ Stephen: Indeed. Bombing people and invading other countries is the sign of a Leader - actually a STRONG Leader!
Do you think the problem is between the idea of the American Dream and the reality where most people fail to achieve it? Is it a case that you have (like many other countries but much more so) a few super-rich and many who are progressively worse off year by year and generation by generation or is it simply that a continent sized country is just too big to govern from a single point - Washington? Rather than a *United* States should you have a Federated States of America instead - either without a single capital, multiple capitals (West, East, Central maybe) or with each state being purely autonomous. Could such a thing even be achieved by agreement???
With some of the shock results around the world - Trump & Brexit being the two biggies - it seems that some people at least have finally ditched the idea of 'business as usual'. With shifts generally to the Right I think we're in for some potentially dangerous times ahead.
@ Mudpuddle: It's certainly possible that Brexit might not happen. The government certainly seem to be hedging their bets with a 2 years transitional period. I wonder whatever happened to the hard-line 'Brexit means Brexit' stance - oh, yeah, they LOST the election..... (practically). On balance I think we'll leave - probably without any kind of deal. When our economy recovers in about 15-20 years we'll ask to rejoin and probably be let in as long as we behave ourselves. Afterall just think of all that hungry cheap labour available to boost the European economy.
The way the economy has developed certainly drives some of the fracturing, in part because so many places have been hollowed out by globalization and automation.
I don't know if the US's political problem is a question of its geographic size as it is its internal balance. We began with a federal system: the national government only handled defense, inter-State commercial disputes, and foreign affairs. After 1865 -- after the creation of a massive army and massive taxes -- the central government began gaining ever-more power, until by the 20th century, and especially after Roosevelt, Wilson, and Roosevelt, it snowballed. Now, everything happens in DC -- states have no autonomy, and even municipal affairs are heavily influenced by dicta from DC. The control isn't necessarily direct: instead, DC withholds funds if local governments don't choose this policy or the other.
It'd be easy to write a book, but the jist is that instead of people having control over most of their lives, now everything depends on the imperial center -- and it is malfunctioning, and has been for a few decades, because it's simply too big and too complicated. Now we have very week states and a federal government that consists mostly of depts with no constitutional role: that is, they weren't planned for, they have no counterbalances, no kind of accountability. So the Executive branch keeps putting more and more and more of the running of the country in the hands of these departments, and at this point they're so large even the president doesn't have effective control of them. They have an institutional inertia of their own now, with decades of set policies.
An important factor is the death of civil culture, which can be blamed on everything from suburban sprawl, identity politics, and the individual consumer culture. The bottom line is that Americanism used to mean "I believe in THIS kind of liberty from the government", and now being an American means "The government owes me THIS".
Stephen: astute commentary; if you decide to write a book; i'd buy it...
@ Stephen: It sounds like that before the Civil War Washington was much more of an administrative centre than a political one. After the War it took more power to the centre to prevent something like that happening again - strengthen the Central Government and weaken the States.... and this process has been growing ever since. Is that about right? It does seem to follow a pattern though - the US having it's own special circumstances. Once power is concentrated in one place it grows - like a Black Hole - sucking in power from elsewhere. Apart from destroying the centre I'm not sure how you stop that... [muses]
Obviously my knowledge of US history is somewhat limited... You guys know *way* more about it than I do!
Post a Comment