East left out in the cold?
Gone are the days when Gordon Brown would whisk into Brussels at the last possible moment and leave as soon as he could. He was here bright and early to meet commission president Barroso to discuss the plan to reform the regulation and monitoring of the global economy.
But first they will have to soothe the fears of the New East, particularly the Czechs, that the current plan on the table will leave them behind. They are worried about "capital flight": that people will take money out of their banks to put it in those in the West, which are guaranteed. I have promised myself not to use any cliche containing the word "bouncing", but there is clearly a worry the smaller, if more dynamic, economies of the East may go in a different direction to those big economies of the West.
There's also a concern that the EU may water down its commitment to the free market, with talk of punishing fat cats and increasing regulation.
Tightening global belts will have other knock-on effects. The environment commissioner is suggesting the ambitious EU plans on climate change may have to be cut back, partly to satisfy the Poles.
President Barroso said that the plans were not an aperitif or digestif to be taken when everyone was feeling good, but essential. However, he seemed unaware of his commissioner's interview with the BBC when I asked him about it. He suggested he would strongly resist any dilution of the plan, saying that it would be a "complete mistake" for Europe to go cold now, because that would send the wrong signals out to the world and make a final deal less likely. He said he would ask the EU's prime ministers and presidents over dinner tonight if they wanted short termism or to show ethical responsibility.
Welcome to my 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~20~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
If there is any benefit from this credit crunch financial crisis, it will be the quiet jetisoning of pointless and expensive policies to 'combat' climate change.
Complain about this comment
Death to the green agenda. Wonderful!
Complain about this comment
1. Regarding "flight of capital", in terms of ordinary peoples' savings in Eastern Europe, the local central banks are all guaranteeing deposits of upto 50,000 EUR and have had such schemes in place (albeit at a lower level) from some time. The local ultra rich eg the Russian oligarchs moved there monies out a long time ago. Here in Poland the current guarantee level of 22,000EUR covers well over 90% of savers and interest on savings is higher.
2. I think you will find few Europeans happy with the "American Wild West" form of banking prevalent in the USA and to a degree in the UK. Regulation to control the "fat cats" and punish those who have caused the mess in the first place is vitally necessary to try to ensure it doesn't happen again. Banks are the repositories of ordinary peoples' savings and those need to be protected as the first priority, and not the generation of "easy, quick profits" as exemplified by the so-called investment "banks" or "investment banking" divisions.
3. With regard to climate change and CO2 emission controls, it should be noted that the Earth is in a constantly changing climatic cycle, controlled by changes in its orbit , Sun activity, Earth volcanic activity etc etc. That is evident over the past millenia. Human economic activity associated with the Industrial and post-industrial revolution does contribute to this but to what degree is very uncertain. It should be pointed out that the Earth has been going through a rapidly warming cycle since well BEFORE the start of the European Industrial Revolution, when the mini-Ice Age terminated in the 18th century. Current attempts by West European ecology groups to enforce tight, indeed punitive CO2 limits within a very short timescale are all very well for the non-coal electricity generating based economies of France, the BeNeLux, Great Britain and Scandinavia and even Germany, but are grossly punitive for the countries of Eastern Europe which do not have alternative renewable resources such as wind (distance from the ocean), hydro electric power (fully exploited or worse still blocked by ecology groups) or sun power. Eastern Europe is dependent on coal burning, imported Russian gas and nuclear power (also hated by the ecology groups). The current proposals are clearly unacceptable and need adjustment to a far more pragmatic solution. Changes in electricity generation need massive investment in new facilities eg new nuclear power stations but will the ecologists allow them? The current financial and economic crisis does not help matters as resources are diverted away from infrastructure investment into saving irresponsible banks and so-called "bankers"......And if Mr Barroso thinks that the USA, China, India and Russia (the biggest generators of CO2) will follow his lead then he is naively mistaken, particularly in the current economic crisis....
Complain about this comment
From a European perspective, it is interesting to note that the UK Government could not have acted as it has if we had joined the Euro. Having an independent Bank of England is crucial.
As for Brown, his Government is responsible for creating the mess in the first place - borrowing and spending far too much during the years of growth and failing to regulate the housing, finance and mortgage markets correctly.
Complain about this comment
That's because he's keeping an enemy closer still...in the House of Lords where he can see what he's up to.
Complain about this comment
Do I smell a whiff of panic in the "Old Europe" that the new 14 EU Members might push for a new direction of the EU.
Clearly there is a dysfunctional lack of communication between the EU Commission President and Mr Dimas, the Envronment Commissioner?
I think it is a good thing that the EU has expanded to 27 member states and I think it is potentially a very healthy thing that the former Warsaw Pact bloc countries use their leverage to break the mould of the EU by taking the control of the EU from France and Germany with their influence over Brussels and develop a more european-wide approach to EU decision making.
I certainly welcome the apparnet change in focus of the EU from the singular topic of the Environment given that the world has issues of equal importance to worry about.
Complain about this comment
AND who was it that removed house price inflation from the headline inflation figure, thus not giving the bank of England the tools to deal with the bubble in the property market before it happened?
AND who benefited from the Banks risky risk taking to the tune of billions in tax revenue from corporation tax and taxes on the bonus culture of the banks?
No wonder Brown is running around the world playing statesman, he has a very lot of questions to answer when he gets back home to reality.
Complain about this comment
He has a very lot of questions to answer when he gets back home to reality.
No-one will ask them though and even if they did, he wouldn't answer them.
Where's the accountability gone.
Complain about this comment
#3 mikewarsaw
Russia hates green agenda but keeps to it.
We don't make as much CO2 as is the allocation to Russia. We are eager to sell our extras - but no one willing to buy!
Complain about this comment
#1 MaxSceptic
#2 WhiteEnglishProud
wrote, and agreed (unless you were being sarcastic?) with:
"quiet jettisoning of pointless and expensive policies to 'combat' climate change"
But I think it would be wise to check that any home you buy is over 50 m above sea level - just in case!
I do tend to think that the attempts to modify our behaviour to 'combat' climate change will fail. I am not convinced that the rise in CO2 is the 'cause' of climate change, rather it is perhaps a symptom of climate change. Nevertheless it seems that the World is getting warmer on average and that glaciers are retreating and ice is melting on land. So I think it may be wise to move to higher ground!
I also think that cleaning up the pollution cause by burning coal (and worse still brown coal) would benefit us all and the earth we depend on (same goes for oil sands).
#3 mikewarsaw
I note the problems of landlocked Eastern Europe that he describes and tend to think that the ecology groups need to come to terms with reality and insist that the cleaner energy sources are used if possible - even if this causes them to have to put-up-with nuclear as I recall seeing the devastation of the environment caused by coal use in the past.
#4 crowdedisland
I don't think that I can entirely agree with either of your points.
For in the first place: the Bank of England did very little indeed to counter the Credit Crunch - the actions have been taken by the government. So I do not see it would have mattered being in or out of the Euro.
And secondly: I am not sure that it is entirely Gordon Brown's fault that the financial markets collapsed. I see it this way - there is an economic ship that has free-market anti-regulation at it heart. (Starting form the 1980's and the time of Margaret Thatcher.)
Now, subsequent governments have got themselves elected by declaring that they will stick to the economic polices of their predecessors. That is what the electors voted for Although I do not think that any government needs to be tied to its manifesto, that is what happened.
I recall contacting the Treasury and the Bank of England many times in the last two decades warning of the risk of the problems that we are living through today and having my concerns rejected out of hand, as I am sure many people have had theirs rejected.
So, in so far as, Gordon Brown was the current captain of the Titanic, he is to blame, but the designers also must share considerable culpability.
The British people also voted several times for the agenda that caused the crash so they must also take their share of the responsibility.
Complain about this comment
I think posters need to be very careful about making generalised statements about eastern Europe. Situations vary. Coal may very well be the fuel of choice in countries where it is easily accessible by open cast mining and therefore relatively cheap. In Hungary, the mines at Tatabanya, Miscolc and elsewhere were closed on economic grounds long ago. Today, only 12.8 million tonnes are mined.
39% of Hungary's power is nuclear generated (CIA World Factbook, December 2003) delivering 12.8 terawatt-hours. There is cross border fuel mobility as well and anyone driving from Budapest to Vienna will pass through a huge wind farm on the Austrian side (a long way from the ocean mikewarsaw). It is estimated that there are 50,450,000,000 cubic feet of natural gas reserves, tremendous scope for geothermal generation and hydro-electric generation on the River Tisza. While you are correct that many countries (including Hungary) are not energy rich and are importers, the pattern does not conform with more northern countries where coal is expanding. It is also worth remembering that those countries which are heavily coal dependent have the option of clean coal technology coming on stream in Germany. (Mark wrote about this a couple of weeks back).
The figures are relatively unimportant to this thread but I give them simply to caution against the increasing tendency in western Europe to view the accession countries as a single entity. They are not.
Complain about this comment
I will go with the MAJORITY scientific consensus, and stick with properly PROVEN FACTS, with all those anti global warming arguments properly addressed and rejected... in short HUMAN CAUSED global warming is happening, and is caused by the emission of greenhouse gases (C02 and methane in the majority). This is overwhelming any other warming or cooling natural cycles. Those objecting to these science facts, are ignoring proper science, do not understand how science works and what is proven and how, or to probably the largest extent have some kind of vested personal interest that biases their thinking against rigorously proven truths.
As for Eastern Europe, it's future is nuclear power. The public needs to be educated about the benefits of nuclear power, fuel availability, low costs when done properly, that it can be produced safely and without much waste or that the waste can be stored safely, etc. Just the same as the misinformation denying man caused global warming needs countering, so does the misinoformation against nuclear power... the two very different groups propagating these, have one thing in common, they are both prepared to lie to and misinform the people they are trying to sway for other reasons.
Then, in the spirit of co-operation, if the EU wants to stick to its CO2 targets, it should help those countries reliant on coal to build a nuclear power industry. Perhaps remove some of the farm subsidies from the French, and transfer them into the French companies that build nuclear reactors.
Complain about this comment
That is what the electors voted for Although I do not think that any government needs to be tied to its manifesto.
I agree with all you other points however as we live in a country with no constitution to protect use Government should be ' tied to its manifesto' pledge's otherwise they are completely free to do as they wish.
If they need to break an election pledge for a valid reason then a referedum of the electorite would give them the mandate to do so.
Otherwise we give the government a blank cheque.
The way things are done now ecconomic troubles usually result in extreme's in politics. Without better safeguards whos to say the next P.M could decide to disregard the centre of politics and move to either extremity of the political spectrum. With no recourse from the electorite.
The terror laws have already made this all but a police state. GCB used the terror laws to freeze the assets of Icelandic businesses in the U.K .
We are on the brink of Dictatorship all ready and involved in two wars.
Browns next step could be to declare a state of emergancy and pospone elections till the end of the war. Its been done before.
Whilst its unlikely the powers are there.
We need to face the face that the terrorist have won and we no longer live in a democratic country.
Complain about this comment
"We need to face the face that the terrorist have won and we no longer live in a democratic country".
I completely agree but I cannot go along with you about referenda for changes of government policy. To start with, there simply isn't time when you are faced with an emergency. Secondly, without wishing to be condescending, do you really believe that the majority of electors understand, for example, the complexity of the events that led to the credit crisis still less the fine print of the rescue package? It's a recipe for the blind leading the blind into oblivion.
Complain about this comment
#4
Wow, so Brown caused the world financial melt-down, you should be working for the IMF as even they haven't grasped that morsel. Also, all this talk about the start being due to the USA sub-prime market must be a smoke screen, even more, the USA must be allowing themselves to be the scape-goats for Brown!
Oh, and do you want anymore nutty fruit-cake Sir?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS