French climbdown?
Even before today's summit begins the Commission are claiming victory over the French president and what has been seen as his determination to put French industry before that of other European countries.
The Commission says that the French have promised "the French authorities have undertaken not to implement aid measures to the automotive sector that would contravene the principles of the internal market. In particular, the loan agreements with manufacturers would not contain any condition regarding either the location of their activities or a preference for France-based suppliers".
The statement adds a comment from the competition commissioner Neelie Kroes that it is important to "remove all ambiguity in this case, as Europe must avoid a return to protectionism and its negative consequences for employment in Europe. I am particularly vigilant in this respect."
This may be a question of interpretation. When I was in Paris on Friday French TV was debating on and off all day the suggestion that their president talks too much. It may well be that in this case the rhetoric that angered so many ran ahead of actual measures in the plan. The French Industry Minister, Luc Chatel, who gave the Commission the reassurances it required yesterday, explicitly denied in a BBC interview (on Thursday morning) that the plan was protectionist:
"Once again, there is nothing protectionist about this plan. It is aimed at companies which make cars on French territory, whatever their nationality. It comes with conditions which have always existed at the heart of the European Union. I was elected mayor: when I asked for economic help from the EU, it always came with obligations. The EU would say 'What investments will you match it with? How many jobs will be created?' and we'd have to accept certain obligations. Our plan for the car industry is directly inspired by this mechanism."
How this will all play out when the prime ministers and presidents are all in the same room we will see in a few hours.
I’m Mark Mardell, the BBC's North America editor. These are my reflections on American politics, some thoughts on being a Brit living in the USA, and who knows what else? My 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~41~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Like all career politicians in this era of public service denial Sarkozy makes sound nice noises in all directions. The Commision of course makes sound nice noises to their camp.
The French public has much more say at this meeting than the reporter suggests. Unlike the British the French have not had their teeth pulled out.
Wake up England your CCTV protection culture stops you from protesting.
Complain about this comment
The French Industry Minister, Luc Chatel, is being disingenuous.
The Czechs are quite right to be concerned at the French plans as the Peugeot Plant on Czech soil (and elsewhere in Europe other than France) will be deprived of French/Peugeot funding during the this global financial calamity in order that jobs within the Peugeot factories in France are supported/maintained during these difficult times through tax funding.
The French are basically looking after their own jobs at the risk of Czech Peugeot workers losing theirs.
Chatel and his French clique can dress it up any way they like but it is (a) protectionist and (b) nothing short of a spit in the face of the Czechs who took jobs with Peugeot as cheaper labour than their French counterparts.
At a national level the French are doing nothing wrong but it is within the framework of the EU and the purpose of "ever closer union" and the creation of a United States of Europe viz-a-viz, the EU, that this attitude becomes patently absurd as the French are supposedly the grand architects of the EU project.
So much for EU cohesion - when the chips are down you look after Number 1 as far as the French are concerned and, if I were a Czech Peugeot worker, I would want to find Luc Chatel and let him have a few home truths about the value of the EU to the Czechs when the French say "Stuff you!" to everyone else.
Complain about this comment
How can we fairly say that the EU is anti-protectionist? Surely it was created in order to protect european industry from foreign threats?
Is not the whole aim of the EU borders and import tariff system simply to segregate european industry from the world market, and thereby protect it?
The EU has no core philosophy of a free market, despite the claim that it will increase the wealth of the european people by reducing barriers to trade between member states. That is a myth.
What the EU wants is POWER. It wants the power to pick and choose who shall be the winners and losers in the European market. It wants the power to create vast trading houses that can force smaller foreign states to accept injurious trading terms.
The free market, as a philosophy, is a threat to the EU, because it suggests the EU commission may not protect european industries and the corporations which own them. Just so, local governments, and any other tendency towards direct democracy, are a huge threat to the EU, because these methods take power away from the EU commission to pick and choose who shall be dominant in the glorious european super state.
This matter is very easy to understand, and to predict the outcome. The EU is incredibly predictable, like a big fat man who always eats the same hamburger. The EU wants more power for the institutions set up by the christian democrats in germany and France.
Sarkozy wants protection and favours for his sponsors in france. The outcome is obvious.
Sarkozy and the EU will do a deal whereby the EU favours Sarkozy's sponsors in the short term, and Sarkozy favours EU encroachment on French sovereignty in the long term.
Both parties will conduct these deals behind closed doors, and when they appear for the cameras, everything will be wonderful and glorious in the brilliant EU.
Complain about this comment
#1 - Doctuer_Eiffel
"Unlike the British the French have not had their teeth pulled out. Wake up England your CCTV protection culture stops you from protesting".
It is a completely different issue but I could not agree more.
Complain about this comment
Why is the unelected unaccountable Politburo (Commission) allowed to overrule the democratic governments? Which traitors to democracy allowed this system to come into existance?
We don't need the EU, all we need is economic cooperation. The EU only benefits the politicians anyway.
Complain about this comment
The inherent problem is that national leaders are held accountable by their constituencies. The EU leadership isn't. Thus it only makes sense to appeal to your own constituency by bashing others that will never vote for you. Once the democratic deficit of the EU has been overcome, it will be different.
Complain about this comment
The French minister effectively confirmed the intent with his statement "Once again, there is nothing protectionist about this plan. It is aimed at companies which make cars on French territory, whatever their nationality. It comes with conditions which have always existed at the heart of the European Union."
The key words being 'French Territory', thereby meaning any facilities outside France are to be excluded from this help, so Menedemus is almost certainly right when he says that the Czech plant is likely to be starved of funds. No doubt in true French back stabbing fashion the conditions for the aid will be partially written and partially unwritten and no attempt will be made to police the arrangements. I also suspect that in the next year the non-French plants will be scaled down and maybe even closed, and the EU commission will huff and puff and nothing will happen, whilst at the same time numerous French and EU politicians will still be claiming that it is the UK that is not part of the EU, cant hypocrisy at its EU worst.
Complain about this comment
#3,
How anybody can suggest the EU has not been anti-protectionist, particularly in recent years, is well beyond me!
It is politicians such as Sarkozy who prior to the financial crisis wanted to turn the EU into an organisation that put barriers up and protected intra-EU companies (of course most people correctly read Sarkozy's "European champions" call as really meaning "national, French champions"). The Commission and most member states have long opposed this, and indeed the Commission has been attacked by France and its allies in recent years for adopting an "overly aggressive" competition policy.
The argument put forward by countries such as France has been that EU law has been too strict on European companies who suffer compared to their American/Global counterparts who are not "constrained" in their view by anti-protectionist measures.
So no, the EU has long had an anti-protectionist aim, and we can't allow this to change. Protectionism will only make this financial crisis worse. We have to support the free market, tweak it yes, but certainly not allow Sarkozy and his equally flawed "Sarko-economics" to destroy one of the few decent things about the EU. I personally hope he gets completely put in his place at this summit. This is the EU of 27, not France and Germany's little playground anymore.
Complain about this comment
@democracythreat (3)
you are right. For the EU, protectionism is the norm. Protectionism against the 'big bad baddies' that live, work and operate outside the EU that is.
Take the Common Agricultural and Fisheries Policies. They were designed to protect European farmers from competition from others (mainly Africans). This has had the effect of destroying the livelyhood of tens of thousands of African farmers and fishermen who cannot hope to compete with EU surpluses dumped there at bargain/subsidized prices.
How any EU-phile can justify supporting this obviously racist policy is beyond me.
The most important thing to remember is that the EU is not a free trade zone, but a customs union.
And as much as I despise Sarkozy, if his dumbness of pro-French protectionism helps undermine the EU, I cannot do anything but snigger. Go Sarko! Tell those unelected Brussels gravytrainriders to get stuffed!
Complain about this comment
I have a question Mark,
I am not sure whether you had the possibility to be close to the EU leaders but I've been wondering in what languages they converse. I see them on the news and there is Merkel, Brown and Sarkozy making small talk. However, Sarko doesn't speak English. Also, I saw Berlusconi, Juncker and Sarkozy together and they were happily conversing. I'm sure the northerners all use english..but I'm still curious about Berlusconi and especially, Gordon Brown, when he is confronted with non-English speakers. Can you tell us a bit more about this trivial but interesting detail?
Complain about this comment
#8 SCLSCL,
As always within the EU it is actions that count rather than words, and whilst the EU continually utters anti-protectionist words, there is little effort made to actually implement and police those policies and directives. Examine the directives on social mobility as their sporadic implementation shows how protectionist the labour market is for people living/working in multiple countries. Harmonisation of qualifications is pretty much a pipe dream, making it very easy for protectionist policies by stating a foreign qualification is not recognised. There are many other such protectionist tricks that are used by countries to hinder social mobility, e.g. language barriers, taxation regulations, residency restrictions.
As I've said many times now, the more you delve into the depths of the EU the more you see how the words, policies and directives are only ever paid lip service too or in other words they are just sound bites.
Complain about this comment
"How anybody can suggest the EU has not been anti-protectionist, particularly in recent years, is well beyond me!"
The secret, as pointed out by Buzet23, is to look at what the EU does, and not simply listen to what it says.
There is no doubt that the EU has reduced trade some trade barriers within Europe, but it has also created huge trade barriers.
Consider the import tariff system. Independent states cannot lower tariffs in order to allow their industries to compete. That is a barrier to competition with non EU states.
And yes, it is also a way to "harmonize" the european market, and make competition "fair" between European states.
And within the EU market, free competition is also proscribe in order to satisfy EU regulations requiring "fairness". Local states are prohibited from encouraging industry by lowering corporate taxes, or by providing any other lower cost incentive to trade. This is described as "subsidising" industry. Switzerland is accused of breaking its bilateral treaty by offering low tax laws.
And now the EU wants broader powers to regulate financial trading, ostensibly to protect the middle class investor. This will result in the taxpayer funding massive private banks and manufacturing companies to an ever greater degree, which can be reasonably described as limiting the ability of the common people to compete with large business.
If the philosophy of the EU was truly about liberty and free trade, it would sanctify the right of the individual to vote and to trade on terms defined by the community closest to that individual. Beware a massive centralized committee that claims to desire freedom in trade or any other aspect of human life.
The USSR was always the champion of freedom and democracy, if you listened to what they said and did not look at what they did.
Complain about this comment
President Obama made a similar statement and retraction about American jobs and products during a speech about the stimulus package. The problem of course is to not talk about it but to just do it. By the time the WTO or EU gets around to doing anything about violations, it could be years since the legal process takes forever. The thing to do is to watch their actions, not just listen to their words.
I don't think the world is in this together at all although many nations are in similar predicaments. They will not come out of it together or to the same degree. American "free traders" who tried to circumvent gains by labor unions blamed the Smoot-Hawley act for the depression in the 1930s but that is baloney. The depression occurred because vast amounts of easy credit were advanced to speculators who couldn't pay it back just as now. IMO, this would be an excellent time for the US to pull out of the WTO and put its own house in order by using bi-lateral trade agreements to advance its own economic and political interests. Is that a to hell with everyone else position? Yes, without a doubt. Why shouldn't it?
Complain about this comment
11. Buzet23 wrote:
Examine the directives on social mobility as their sporadic implementation shows how protectionist the labour market is for people living/working in multiple countries.
Actually it's not the EU that implement the law (they can't) but they rely on the "good will" of the state to do it for them.
Naturally, this doesn't happen.
Likewise the rest of your post (and you're right) again do you blame the EU or the states for not following the directive?
Complain about this comment
#14 Ticape,
I think that like most people I blame the EU's unelected politicians (commissioners, council of ministers) and the elected MEP's that do not police their own directives in their own countries. It is very true that it is the member states responsibility to enact such directives with the only remedy being the ECJ, but quite clearly 'good will' does not exist as an effective deterrent against covert protectionism.
My dislike is that all these directives are automatically rubber stamped by all member states even though they have no intention of implementing them, therefore since the EU is run by representatives of the member states the fault lies squarely with the member states and the EU is an expensive illusion for empire builders.
Complain about this comment
Most of you really don't get it do you. It really isn't about what is officially declared and spoken it is just a show for the rest of the world. There has never been a free market ever. Look good, sound good, crash last.
Wonder what the new 20 Pound coin will look like?
Complain about this comment
4. At 12:22pm on 01 Mar 2009, threnodio wrote:
#1 - Doctuer_Eiffel
"Unlike the British the French have not had their teeth pulled out. Wake up England your CCTV protection culture stops you from protesting".
It is a completely different issue but I could not agree more.
-----------------------------------------------
Oh no it isn't. The French don't lie belly up in the middle of the road and let their government run over them. The British do.
It means the French people have far more control over their government. THAT is far more democracy than the British can handle or are brave enough to handle.
30 years of asset stripping by British politicians and the British are reduced to stiff upper lipped sheep.
Maybe the grass IS greener inside Europe.
Complain about this comment
Gheryando @10.
The language common to all EU politicians is Parseltongue.
Complain about this comment
#16, Doctuer_Eiffel,
One things for sure it would not be made of any valuable metal such as gold as they've flogged their reserves off, and since the family silver was sold off years ago that leaves that out. Probably it will be made from recycled ecological tin as that would reflect its intrinsic value, i.e. not a lot.
As for "Look good, sound good, crash last", they can't even get that right as its been obvious for some years that a crash was coming.
Complain about this comment
Docteur_Eiffel (16)
I would be very surprised if the new 20 GBP coin did not look uncannily similar to the new 20 Euro coin. They will certainly have the same value!
The way that HMG is dismantling British freedoms and way of life for the indigenous British population, I would not be surprised if the coin did not have the Queen's Head removed entirely and it looked exactly like a 20 Euro coin!
If we are really lucky the coin will have that well-known phrase embedded on the obverse "Do as I say and not do as I do!"
rotfl
Complain about this comment
I understand some of the points made in response to my earlier comment about the EU being truly anti-protectionist, but I still say your bread and butter protectionism, ie. the bailing out of national companies, has been attacked aggressively by the Commission with its competition policy.
Of course there is rhetoric elsewhere which is not being fulfilled, just as it is with any government of any sort, but prior to the financial crisis the state aid rules were applied very strictly by the Commission to the frustration of Member States such as France, Italy and Greece who all like a good bail out every now and then.
Ironically the Northern Rock bail-out was probably the first big protectionist move by a Member State for a good while!
I am not saying by any stretch of the imagination that the EU is perfect, far from it, I have grown into a bit of a sceptic in years - however I maintain that the last thing you can claim the EU is, is protectionist towards European market interests. There are those who wish to use the EU as a protectionist weapon, *cough* Sarkozy *cough*, and we have to take a strong stance against it.
But I think to say that currently the EU is a big protectionist tank is misguided. The majority of the barriers mentioned by other readers are at the end of the day there because certain member states are unwilling to truly commit to the free market. That is why the EU will sadly probably never work, because there is such a significant divergence in views between member states as to the correct economic model that Europe should follow.
If you want to correct your statement to "France is a protectionist country that is trying to use the EU as a protectionist shield" then I would be completely ready to agree with you.
Complain about this comment
The French President will say whatever the EU want to hear.
Then he will go back to France and do what needs to be done, he will protect the French workers, the French will not allow anything else.
Their is no willingness among the people to all go down together.
The British need to be rid of the millstone around their neck, the EU and Labour.
Complain about this comment
4. At 09:26am on 01 Mar 2009, gilbertam wrote:
"I've just stumbled upon your blog. It is interesting, I must confess. This post is particularly well articulated, well reasoned, and though-provoking. Keep it up!"
Welcome home!
Complain about this comment
15. At 3:34pm on 01 Mar 2009, Buzet23 wrote:
#14 Ticape,
"I think that like most people I blame the EU's unelected politicians (commissioners, council of ministers) and the elected MEP's that do not police their own directives in their own countries. It is very true that it is the member states responsibility to enact such directives with the only remedy being the ECJ, but quite clearly 'good will' does not exist as an effective deterrent against covert protectionism.
My dislike is that all these directives are automatically rubber stamped by all member states even though they have no intention of implementing them, therefore since the EU is run by representatives of the member states the fault lies squarely with the member states and the EU is an expensive illusion for empire builders".
Buzet/Ticape
Unfortunately here in the UK the directives are not only rubberstamped they are 'gold-plated' and rigidly enforced by our own bureacracy (something that I believe Jean Monnet predicted).
This is having a devastating impact on the UK who has suffered more than any others from EU legislation. It also puts us at a major disadvantage compared to other EU countries who behave more sensibly.
We have been continually betrayed by politicians who sought their own advancement rather than that of the country they supposedly represent. A recent example is a British vehicle manufacturer on the brink of closure because Blair chose to support EU doctrine over and above UK interests.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/4886166/How-UK-defence-firms-suffer-for-MoD-Euro-mania.html
Complain about this comment
MaxSceptic (18)
The worrying thing is that Wizards are born with the inate ability to speak Parseltongue.
The crowd in charge of Europe are in no way clever enough to be Wizards but their tongues are split like Snakes who do speak Parseltongue. Snakes or Wizards . . . its a tough choice for closest resemblance!
In 30 years time, when the current Administration's secrets will be out in the open, we will be able to find out that Wee George is actually a BA (Masters) in Parseltongue. Unfortunately, due to HMG's desire for secrecy other than for its citizens, we will all have to wait the full 30 years to find this fact unearthed!
rotfl
Complain about this comment
I find it highly amusing if not irritating that the "ranting and raving anti EU" group including bloggers herein go on about the "grossly undemocratic EU Commission" and the democratic deficit. Evidently they are unaware that the entire Commission is directly appointed by the Council of Ministers above them, which Council is elected by the member States' electorates in country General Elections. The members of the Council of Ministers are the Prime Ministers and Ministers of their respective countries! Thus the Commission are no more and no less Senior Civil Servants serving their Masters, the elected ruling politicians of their respective countries.
Additionally, the Commissioners have to receive EU Parliamentary approval, similar to Obama's appointments by the US Congress, which is far more democratic than what happens in the UK where Civil Servants are NOT subject to Parliament's approval on appointment, let alone the general electorate.
So if there is a democratic deficit it is within the UK, in particular England which does not even have its own Parliament, unlike Scotland , Wales and Northern Ireland. And Who controls the Civil Service there??
Complain about this comment
#21 - SCLSCL
Support for Northern Rock was not a direct threat to workers in other EU countries. The collective leadership has accepted the need for interventionist policies for rescue ailing sectors. What it does not accept is aggressive protectionism which breaks competition rules.
Complain about this comment
The common unofficial working language of the EU is English, all the more so since the Scandinavian countries, ex-communist eastern Europe and 2 ex-British colonies joined (guess which ones!). Even Sarko in private speaks excellent English, its just that in making official statements he talks in French to "maintain the language". Some major French companies eg Alcatel even use English as their internal language of international comunication. Quel horreur!
Complain about this comment
I just heard Peter Orszag of OMB say on C-SPAN that one way the US government will increase revenues is by closing tax loopholes on corporations for overseas transactions. This will bring in more tax revenues to the US government and make American overseas business activities less profitable. This is long long overdue. Call it protectionism or whatever else you like, it will tilt the business strategy of large American corporations towards US domestic investments.
Complain about this comment
24.Unfortunately here in the UK the directives are not only rubberstamped they are 'gold-plated' and rigidly enforced by our own bureacracy
Not really, the EU has recently released a report regarding how fast the EU member states (along with the EFTA countries) are with implementing internal directives, following them correctly and infringing them. As far as can I tell, UK tends to score below average in most cases not the worst though but definitely nowhere near the high spot.
Complain about this comment
26. At 4:55pm on 01 Mar 2009, mikewarsaw
Mike
I think most of us are fully aware of the structure set up to represent the facade of sham democracy the EU represents.
If you knew more about the UK you'd also realise that the Prime Minister is not directly elected by the electorate but is simply the leader of the party with the largest majority in the House of Commons.
And as to your comment -
"Thus the Commission are no more and no less Senior Civil Servants serving their Masters, the elected ruling politicians of their respective countries"
Very revealing - surely in a true democracy it should be the people who are the 'Masters' of the politicians.
And this is exactly what those opposed to the EU are against - a political elite ruling with scant regard for the people they supposedly represent.
Until the EU holds a referendum where every citizen in the EU is allowed to vote directly on whether they want to be part of what the EU has become then it lacks a popular mandate and cannot claim to be democratic.
Complain about this comment
Protectionism is one of those interesting words. In its verb form it is one of the classic irregular verbs - I act appropriately, you are protectionist, he is anti-competitive etc.
There always has been protectionism and this current crisis will confirm that it is alive and well within the EU. The French are the masters at saying one thing and doing another but I suspect that all countries will learn fast.
Would it not be wonderful if the EU actually meant what it says about being anti-protectionist and took away lots of import duties imposed on non-EU suppliers. Pipe-dreams.....
Complain about this comment
Under “By jingo what a crisis” the great Mark wrote: “Is a Suffolk boy really happy to see jobs go to, say, Stirling or Southampton rather than his home city?”
I presume this means me. I cannot reply for other Suffolk Boys or Girls, just for myself.:
I am concerned about jobs, but my main concern is to prevent the creation of a Greater European Reich which might not allow us to leave, which would allow fascist continental police into the UK, which might start wars of aggression e.g. against the USA which it hates, which would not represent us in future as it does not represent us now, and which would employ fascist methods inside the “EU” to hang on to power. It has already gone too far in that direction. We need to leave.
Back to jobs:
When we have left the “EU”, I want us to have fairly free trade with other countries, probably within the framework of the WTO. There are a number of reasons which speak in favour of freeish trade.
Such freeish trade inevitably leads to an international division of labour. I have worked for British, German and American organisations. Many British organisations do not deserve to survive. I would much rather buy a German car which worked than a British car which did not, which is the mistake I have made in the past. Such things inevitably mean a loss of jobs in the UK.
There are things which speak against free trade:
1) The massive amount of goods being transported around Europe and the world is ruining the environment.
2)Defence. We need to be able top defend ourselves. When we have left the “EU” we will probably be in a similar situation to Taiwan. We will have an enormous, arrogant, dictatorial, megalomaniac neighbour. We need to be able to plausibly put up a show of being able to defend ourselves against aggression. To do that we need engineering. I have been told that the Crane’s factory in Ipswich is closing and that the stuff will be made in Poland. I am very concerned about that and in general about the decline in engineering in the UK. If those jobs were moved to Stirling or Southampton I would be less concerned. I would still be concerned about them being moved to Sterling because of the threat of Scottish independence. Southampton!
Something similar applies to Austria. I believe that I read that an Austrian tank factory is to close and production is to be moved to Switzerland. Assuming that my memory has not deceived me: The Tyroleans are victims of the “EU”. A horrendous number of lorries crosses Austria using the Brenner motorway. Austrians hate the “EU” just as much as the Brits. If the Austrians leave the “EU” they will need to be able to defend themselves against the megalomaniac, arrogant “EU” which might well want to stop Tyrolean measures to reduce the number of lorries on that motorway. The Austrians need to be able to defend themselves. They need their own weapons factories.
Poles and Czechs: Maybe I think like this because I am part Czech, maybe not.: The Czechs and the Poles have had a very raw deal from the world including the UK. We should have done more to prevent occupations by Hitler and the USSR. We owe them, big -time! We should favour the Czechs and the Poles. I would be happier if it was a toy factory moving to Poland rather than an engineering factory.
NATO: It is sometimes said that trade strengthens trading partners. In that case we should try to improve trade in NATO. I am happy to trade fairly freely with Turkey but do not want to be in a political union with Turkey and do not want millions of Turks coming to the UK. Turkish membership of the ”EU” on its own would be sufficient reason to want to leave the “EU”.
In order to preserve jobs in the UK, I believe we need a thorough reform of our tax system. The reforms I have in mind might well be against “EU” – “law.” Yet another reason to leave the “EU”.
I believe we need something like the following:
1) Reduction or abolition of taxes which discourage/punish honest work and honest employers.
1.1) Reduction or abolition of National Insurance payments.
1.2) Raising of the threshold limit at which people start to pay income tax.
And where do we get the money from? Well from here:
2.1) Road pricing especially for lorries.
2.2) Property taxes. The person with a small property to get an allowance so that most people do not pay more.
2.3) Reduction of the school-leaving age.
2.4) LOW import duties
2.5) Taxes on the internet and on mobile phone usage.
Mark wrote: “Is a Suffolk boy really happy to see jobs go to, say, Stirling or Southampton rather than his home city?”
There is substantial erosion up and down the East Coast. One who might know what he is talking about, told me that some of it was due to dredging to allow enormous container ships into Felixstowe. I suspect that such dredging should not be taking place and that those ships should be docking at Southampton. There would be an inevitable transfer of jobs there if we prevented such large ships from docking at Felixstowe. I would accept that, if we had measures to support anybody who lost their job because of it.
Complain about this comment
26. At 4:55pm on 01 Mar 2009, mikewarsaw wrote:
'I find it highly amusing if not irritating that the "ranting and raving anti EU" group including bloggers herein go on about the "grossly undemocratic EU Commission" and the democratic deficit.'
The "EU" is undemocratic because it exists. We in the UK have been lied to and betrayed for about forty years.
Complain about this comment
#29 - MarcusAureliusII
As you are entirely entitled to do . .
The issue under discussion is about nations which are committed to not doing so. Rest assured that, if American policy becomes protectionist in a wider sense, you can expect a proportionate response from the EU.
Complain about this comment
Does anybody really imagine the French and German governments will allow foreign companies to prosper at the expence of their own industry ? They may pay lip service to the great plan to save the world, mooted by Gordon Brown, but the reality will be somewhat different. The difference between Britain, and the Franco/German alliance, is that their governments represent the people whereas our government represents a socialist dream of a European super state ruled by a central non national and unelected government, rather than the people of this country
Complain about this comment
Mark Mardell:
Re: FRENCH CLIMBDOWN
I think that France is doing a double step on this issue, and doing climb-down on this issue regarding Protectionism on the current economic downturn....
(**//**)
Re: NICOLAS SARKOZY
I have noticed that as an outsider of French Politics, that he has a tendency to talk way too much; as most politicans do...
~Dennis Junior~
Complain about this comment
#30 - Ticape
The UK government is so busy throwing utterly pointless legislation of their own making at the people, it's a miracle they ever get around to enabling EU stuff.
Complain about this comment
#27,
I'm sure France and co could make the same argument about the companies they wish to bail out.
Not much point in really getting into it again as I'm sure its been discussed to death elsewhere, but I'm just calling a spade a spade when I say that the Northern Rock bailout was indeed, strictly speaking, anti-competitive. You can bet your bottom dollar that in different, more stable financial conditions that the Commission wouldn't have been happy at all about the bail out and had a strong word or 2 for the UK. (obviously since then the Commission has tried to regain the initiative with all the member states bailing out some banks in some form or another with its "well ok, thats allowed, but no more state aid elsewhere please!")
And I'm sure prior to the crisis that foreign banks might not have agreed that the bail out wasnt a "direct threat" to competition elsewhere!
But thats just a sidepoint, I'm not saying the bailout shouldnt have happened. Just that it adds a little bit of irony to the whole protectionism debate.
Complain about this comment
30. At 6:08pm on 01 Mar 2009, Ticape wrote:
"Not really, the EU has recently released a report regarding how fast the EU member states (along with the EFTA countries) are with implementing internal directives, following them correctly and infringing them. As far as can I tell, UK tends to score below average in most cases not the worst though but definitely nowhere near the high spot."
Ticape,
I tend to look at the impact on the UK rather than reports produced by the EU which can be rather misleading.
This is one example of the reality -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/4279444/How-Defra-crushed-British-fishermen.html
There are many many more!!
Complain about this comment
#33 - SuffolkBoy2
" . . . such dredging should not be taking place and that those ships should be docking at Southampton".
You appeared, quite inadvertently, to have answered Mark's question. Having lived in that part of the world for many years, I can assure you that the coastal erosion caused by keeping shipping lanes through the Solent to Portsmouth (Royal Navy) and Southampton (commercial traffic) is devastating. Moreover, if they have their way, an important bird sanctuary in an area of outstanding natural beauty will be lost to a massive new container facility. But that's OK isn't it, because it's not Suffolk.
That smacks of NIMBY and if you think of the EU in the same way as you think of Hampshire and the Isle of Wight - as them, not us - your arguments lose their force.
Complain about this comment
To SuffolkBoy2 (33):
In the end UK out of the EU will be just like the Airstrip One in the book 1984. Sometimes when seeing the British media and politicians it seems to me that the reality, the real word outside the UK, is continuously tried to shut-down. They try to paint the world so that everything is fine and dandy in the UK, that everything is out to get them and that by their special relationship with the US can be saved from all this wickedness of outsiders.
Now what goes to manufacturing and transportation, decentralized industrial production networks are the most efficient, economical and environmental way to manufacture. Transportation costs inside Europe or globally are irrelevant to the benefits of increased competition and pace of change. If you start to but artificial barriers on transportation of goods and services what you end up is decreasing competition and decreasing pace of change and thus technological development. And as you should know technological development is the key to decrease environmental effects of human activity.
I should also add one thing, if the UK that has left the EU doesn't turn up into an Airstrip One, then there is nothing for UK to fear from the continental Europe. Real challenges of Europe are in rebuilding of Eastern Europe, enlargement to rest of the Europe and integration of the Mediterranean area into one common economy. UK really isn't the centre of world nor Europe. Interesting things happen elsewhere.
Complain about this comment
At 13, above, I explained to SCLSCL that the EU justified intervening in the market in the name of "fairness". The EU decides what is "fair" competition, and dictates law accordingly.
I was astounded to read this quote this evening, from the pages of the BBC:
"After chairing the talks on Sunday, Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek said: "We need a Europe without barriers but also a just and fair Europe.""
There you have it. Europe without barriers, but also a "just and fair" Europe.
And who decides what is "fair" in the market?
The commission.
Now, what do they think is fair, just now?
Well, they think it is fair to take taxpayers money, and give it to the western european banks who have gone broke fleecing eastern europeans of money they don't have.
That is what they decided, today. They cannot let the new regulations or bailout money have conditions like "GET OUT OF OUR COUNTRY, PREDATORY WESTERN BANKS!"
No, that would be unfair. So instead, the western banks will be "bailed out", in order that they can continue their business.
In other words, large privately owned banks are being propped up by your childrens' taxes, because that is what is fair.
Because it would be a disaster if the banks failed. An absolute disaster. Do you people know the quality of the people who would be broke if the banks went under?
We are not talking about common low grade people. We are talking about real people, with titles. And shareholdings. People who matter.
People for whom "fair" is a meaningful word, in the EU lexicon.
Complain about this comment
"I find it highly amusing if not irritating that the "ranting and raving anti EU" group including bloggers herein go on about the "grossly undemocratic EU Commission" and the democratic deficit."
Thank you for sharing your amusement and/or irritation at our collective "ranting and raving". No, no, your comments are not in the least bit insulting. We understand that fine chaps like you simply know what is best, and that you mean no harm when you patronize us so vigorously. We understand that your fine type of human being has long been speaking to us in this way for our own good. We know you are not hopelessly arrogant and fill with a sense of class superiority. We understand you are really such a nice chap, and you simply wish to help the idiot lower classes understand reality. It is really very kind of you to take the time to even talk with common folk. We are most grateful.
Having said all that, it seems your argument is to justify the democratic mandate of the EU by pointing to the UK system of representation.
The UK has a head of state chosen by bloodline, like a racehorse. It has an upper house of hereditary peers. It has a prime minister who was not elected by the people he represents, but rather by his party. It has a "pay to play" system of legal practice and qualification.
It has a two party system, where both parties are funded and therefore influenced overwhelmingly by corporate entities, who pay for both parties political exposure in a private, corporate media.
So if I gather your argument properly, your point is that the EU is democratic because it is more or less as democratic as the two party corporate system of sham democracy in the UK.
Thank you for addressing the matter from such great height, and with such force. Better to waffle and waft than to rant and rave, nuh?
Much more "decent" for a chap. Don't want to say the wrong thing, you know. You don't know who might be listening! Hey, chap?
Complain about this comment
Re:#41
Threnodio, thank you for informing me. I did not realise that Southampton had a problem with erosion. I am not a NIMBY person. I thought that with all those liners going in there for centuries everything was hunky-dory. So I suppose my answer to that would be that maybe we shouldn't allow such large ships to dock in the UK or that they should be made to dock at artificial islands off the coast.
I do not regard the people of Southampton as "them."
Neither do I think of the "EU" as them not us. I hate the "EU". I do not hate the people who live there. I want to be friendly with them and to cooperate with them and to dance with some of them. I find it very disappointing that I keep on having to make this point to various "EU" supporters.
Complain about this comment
42. At 9:14pm on 01 Mar 2009, Jukka_Rohila wrote:
To SuffolkBoy2 (33):
"... Sometimes when seeing the British media and politicians it seems to me that the reality, the real word outside the UK, is continuously tried to shut-down. They try to paint the world so that everything is fine and dandy in the UK, that everything is out to get them and that by their special relationship with the US can be saved from all this wickedness of outsiders...."
Well that is not me. Again, I am disappointed that I have to point this out again.
The relationship with the USA has little to do with the relationship with the "EU".
We need to get out of the "EU" whatever relationship we have with the USA afterwards.
Complain about this comment
threnodious
"if American policy becomes protectionist in a wider sense, you can expect a proportionate response from the EU."
As I have pointed out on other threads, it is the EU whose policy is and has been protectionist for a long time in agriculture and aircraft manufacture for example and it is the US which has not delivered a proportionate response....yet.
IMO, the US should pull out of the WTO, NAFTA and all other global trade arrangements and negotiate bilaterally from strength to its own best advantage. There is no excuse for American taxpayers or workers propping up their counterparts in foreign countries at their own expense anymore. The cold war is over and where the multinational corporations' interests are in conflict with American interests, it is the right and obligation of the American government to bring them to heel.
Complain about this comment
#45 - SuffolkBoy2
I have been reading your posts for a long time and I realise there was no malice intended. It is not difficult sometimes to see why sincerely held views might be misunderstood though.
By the way, the issue in Southampton Water is not so much the dredging as the sheer size of the wash as the approaches are through very narrow channels close to shore. I am afraid your problem is purely geographical. Felixtowe is a hell of a lot closer to Rotterdam than Southampton.
Complain about this comment
#30 Ticape,
You mentioned that "the EU has recently released a report regarding how fast the EU member states (along with the EFTA countries) are with implementing internal directives, following them correctly and infringing them."
I am very interested to have you post the link to this document, when I used the key words that you have used all I got was 'National implementation measures notified to the Commission' under the EU's 'how EU law is applied' and of course the rate for all countries was between 97 and 99 percent, meaning that these statistics are simply a white wash.
To be accurate it is not just being able to judge whether they are on the member state's rules book but whether they are actually enforced, and how effectively the ECJ is on policing infringements. Since the ECJ only accepts cases on certain limited criteria and statistics by country are extremely well hidden it must be almost impossible to dig out the sordid details of national infringement statistics.
Complain about this comment
"EU law has been too strict on European companies who suffer compared to their American/Global counterparts who are not "constrained" in their view by anti-protectionist measures."
Could you be more vague ?!
Complain about this comment
"surely in a true democracy it should be the people who are the 'Masters' of the politicians. "
True, true, but since the UK attacked Iraq against the will of it's people, should we reach the conclusion that the UK is not a democracy ?!
Complain about this comment
It would be interesting to see how far this 'joke' called the European Union withstand the test of time.
If you leave to it the French, the 'Union' only mean what they can exploit out of it. Now that French jobs are at stake, never mind the Czech; Petain-like they would leave the fold once their skins are in danger of being baked.
Why do you think the more cynical Britons remains outside the Euro currency fold; if they cannot trust the Germans, they trust the French much less!
What's more the French would have to pay for their intolerable affront to the Chinese; when the latter starts banning French products let's hope the European unionists come to France's rescue and boycott Chinese trade in tandem.
Complain about this comment
#50,
I don't get your point - I was stating at #8 what Sarkozy and his allies believe - that competition rules should not penalise, but encourage the growth of dominant pan-European companies so that they can compete with their global rivals?
I thought that was straightforward enough for most people to understand. Sarkozy can't make us forget with one little speech that he has a consistent track record of being pro-protectionist.
Complain about this comment
Cracklite wrote:
""surely in a true democracy it should be the people who are the 'Masters' of the politicians. "
True, true, but since the UK attacked Iraq against the will of it's people, should we reach the conclusion that the UK is not a democracy ?!"
Yes. That would be the correct conclusion.
I am intrigued by the exclamation mark at the end of your sentence. It implies that the UK being described as an undemocratic system astounds you.
Why? It is, after all, a monarchy with an upper house of hereditary peers. The people elect neither their head of state nor their prime minister. They have zero right to referendum.
The first day I was ever in London, I happened to see a million people marching against a war. It was absolutely incredible. So was the response from government. Absolutely zero response.
So, I do not understand why there is some confusion about whether the westminster system is democratic, and I understand even less the shock and horror at the suggestion. Clearly, the system is not democratic.
I think the key to understanding why the westminster system is now so undemocratic is to understand the evolution of the corporation, the "fictional legal entity". When UK parliamentary democracy started, there were not corporate entities influencing the will of parliament. Leaving aside the upper house, parliament was elected by the will of real people. Sure, these people were the rich, but they were still real people.
In the modern world, corporations have become the only "people" with the funds required to advertise their desired policies via the private, and expensive, media. And so the democracy has become a democracy only in the sense that corporate entities are the demos.
The real biological people have been left behind by a system that has no use for them.
It is political evolution in action.
Perhaps this is why the swiss adopted the referendum as the core item in their democracy. They knew the power of corporations, and they wanted a government of people, not of fictional elites entities calling themselves people.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I think we should think about the causes of the economic crisis. One of them, in my view, is a poorly controlled world economy, where boarders’ tariffs have been greatly reduced or discarded without thinking the process through. (Another is the financial problem.) The problem is even more accute within the EU.
Can anyone seriously contemplate having the French (or the English or the Germans), pay more taxes to help out Estonia or the Czech Republic, while their own unemployment is increasing by leaps and bounds? That would only feed the process which caused the crisis.
What is going to happen is that unemployment will become so bad in the main European countries that the tax base will dry out and the buying power will be reduced to mere subsistence level. Car companies will have no one to sell their cars to, and it will not matter where they build them anymore.
Very wisely, present local governments want to put clauses in their bailout programs which demand that money be spent locally. That is what Obama has done, and Sarkozy after him. All the worshippers of free trade are trying to stop them, and will probably succeed. I am afraid we will have to go through the same disaster Russia went through in the 90’s. Where is our Putin?
Complain about this comment
Surely the language spoken by politicians is 'withforkedtongue'?
North American Indians identified its association with cowboys in the 19th century.
Complain about this comment
Sorry did I say a 20 Pound coin?
I meant a 20 Million Pound coin.
You see for the UK Euro sceptics I have some potentially good news (only short term good news though I am sure)
I don't think Europe wants you to have the Euro seeing how the UK has become such a liability now. In fact all that security at the border may well be to keep Brits out.
So you see the UK putting all its eggs in one basket (albeit the City of London financial market the biggest casino on the planet), which has been dropped by the majority of the worlds population, has made the UK the basket case of Europe.
The truth about France is less credit thrown at people and only 80% mortgages means a nation of savers is already doing better at this stage of the global economic crash.
Well done the French.
As for working less hours the French manage to get high work per man hour ratios consistently and hey they strike for better conditions in life not just a pay packet.
Business lesson number 1 for me, as I was taught on a government scheme for the unemployed, was if the business is failing getting the employees to work harder just drives the business faster into the ground.
Only 1.86 million jobs in manufacturing left in the UK now. Guess which countries are going to recover first.
Don't forget both Labour and Conservatives have administered the export of manufacturing jobs to the far east and both have been responsible for the CCTV madness. Meaningful work replaced by meaningless nonsense just to massage the unemployment figures sponsored by the Conservative and Labour parties.
I doubt a green paper or a white paper could be squeezed between them close as they are to each other.
Meanwhile France is in the year 2009 and Britain remains stuck in 1984.
Complain about this comment
I remember when people laughed at the assertion that Britain was anything like George Orwell's book 1984.
Phoney wars and continual observation don't be silly! arf! arf! ...
Complain about this comment
Monsieur Le Docteur_Eiffel;
"Sorry did I say a 20 Pound coin?
I meant a 20 Million Pound coin."
"don't be silly! arf! arf! ..."
Yes the British pound is in the doghouse....or more precisely the British doghouse is the dog pound....and Gordon Brown is the dog star.
Complain about this comment
"You ain't nothin but a pound dog,
a cryin' all the time.
You ain't nothing but a pound dog
and you ain't no friend of mine."
:-)
Complain about this comment
wow Marcy, looks like you've found a like-minded spirit in Doc Eiffel. When are you going to raise your French supermarket anecdote with him?
Complain about this comment
Mr Mardell, "..This may be a question of interpretation..", may well be your weakest effort yet at clutching the fig-leaf of expediency when attempting to explain France's attitude and actions within the EU when it is French interests that are at stake!
Basically Msr Luc Chatel with typical sang-froid was stating the France strategy from the era of President De Gaulle's CM and its more recent, supposedly omniscient European Union.
According to the EUrotocracy and your Blog, "...French authorities promise... not to contravene principles of the internal market.."
Well, as has been noted regularly about Mesdemoiselles through the epoch of EU development, 'They would say that wouldn't they!?' And 'yes' the leaders of France most certainly do say that and with such aplomb
France will employ the language (".. there is nothing protectionist about this plan.."), the theory ("...comes with conditions that have always existed at the heart of the EU..") and the regulation (".. our plan for the ... is directly inspired by this mechanism..") of the EU to its benefit at any and all times (as any member should; PM Brown please wake up and smell the grenadine!).
When that language, theory and regulation is in the way it will be disposed of by simply reinterpreting it to what France's Government of the day sees as its needs for France to go ahead with its own self-interest of rightfully 'protecting' France (as any member should; PM Brown please wake up and taste the grenadine!).
EU representative Neelie Krooes portentously stated she is going to be "... particularly vigilant.." and we of course all recognise how with that remark the Elysee Palace occupant will have begun quaking in his Jean-Paul Gautier suit! Memo to EUrocrat N.Krooes: There is political reality and there is EU-double-speak. In the former a National Head of State is subject to Citizen automative workers etc. who can vote, demonstrate and unravel any seat of power if sufficiently roused in the right circumstances. In the latter there is just EUrocrat bureaucracy producing bits of paper that cannot vote, cannot demonstrate and most assuredly will not effect the President of France's mandate for power. It is not even a contest.
France will 'protect' its automative industry at any cost to the EU etc. and not blink an eye of concern towards the EU in Brussels.
France will be absolutely correct to do so for that is what the Government's first duty is in every State: Protection of the State. No amount of EU legislation will ever overcome that political reality and responsibility owed by every elected politician to their State's Citizens and to no other person or institution.
Memo to PM Brown: Drink one glass a day of 'grenadine avec le schnapps' until with gallic flair you are emboldened to the point of protecting the Citizens of the UK by a Referendum on EU membership (thus you will be at least the equal of every French President since 1956). Put your fellow countrymen at the centre of your policy-making and not deal with them as though some periphery item on a busy internationalised agenda. You will be amazed at how the electorate will reward you for being as passionate about your Citizens' welfare as the President of France is of his Citizenry; almost certainly it would mean you still being in No.10 when Sarkozy stands for re-election in 6 years time!
Complain about this comment
60. At 00:12am on 03 Mar 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
Monsieur Le Docteur_Eiffel;
"Sorry did I say a 20 Pound coin?
I meant a 20 Million Pound coin."
"don't be silly! arf! arf! ..."
MarcusAureliusII wrote:Yes the British pound is in the doghouse....or more precisely the British doghouse is the dog pound....and Gordon Brown is the dog star."
Thatcher squandered north sea oil and sold off the family silver as did EVERY British primeminister and political party thereon. So while I dont like Brown I am intelligent enough to see he follows the Conservative tradition of asset stripping and selfserviing instead of public service. Europe just might not be as bad a deal as the Europhobes foam on about. We have been completely shafted by ALL our own politicians. NONE of them are worth a light. They have all stomped on the Brits for their own career purposes.
Remember you don't have a right to walk down the street in a group larger than three. I don't hear the Europhobes complaining about that. Of course it would be below them to complain to Europe about that!
Face it the French have got more spunk than the Brits. The moment that little bit of legislation was introduced in France the government would have fallen instantly.
Wake up England.
Complain about this comment
Docus EiffelliusII, you may need to spout off a few more trite anti UKisms if you want a response
Complain about this comment
The French aren't going to climb down, they are going to be knocked off the pedistal they put themselves on. Their quasi socialist welfare state was unsustainable even before this crisis. Now the end will potentially be far more violent than it might have been. Sarkozy admitted France was bankrupt when he was elected long before the full impact of the economic disaster ever hit. The collision between the irresistable social and political pressures in France on one hand and the impenetrable economic realities of France and the wider world now on the other will result in an explosion. I'm glad that from my vantage point not in the front rows, I'll be able to watch it from a hopefully safe distance. France is long overdue for a fall. When it goes, it might just take all of Euroland with it. If there is one thing the UK did right, it was to stay out of the Euro. However bad things get in the UK, they would be worse if it hadn't.
Complain about this comment
The French don't need to climb down from anything because there is nothing to climb down from.
France exports food and still has an industry. Britain has all its broken eggs in one worn out basket.
You are flogging a dead horse. Grab the Euro while you can.
Your pride in your social phobia is alien to the French who enjoy socialising which is a very human thing to do.
Thatcher said "there is no society" well there is in France and it is more fun than being bitter and twisted and isolationist to the point of starving yourself to death.
There is only one pension plan that is crash proof and that one is called everyone looking after everyone here and now.
Complain about this comment
#49. Buzet Here's the link http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/score/index_en.htm
SparkletI tend to look at the impact on the UK rather than reports produced by the EU which can be rather misleading.
And the UK media aren't misleading? Heh! Reminds me of the headlines three weeks ago when most British newspaper said that the "EU" demanded the HMG to give Qatada money. They can't even tell the difference between EU and the European Court of Human Rights.
Until the EU holds a referendum
Why do sceptics always demand the EU to hold a referendum? That's like demanding an electrician to fix your plumbing. Honestly the EU cannot give you a referendum, it has no power nor right to do so. Westminster on the other hand does.
Complain about this comment
Looking at the abominable state unprivileged people are forced to live in UK housing estates, compared to other northern European nations and the total lack of confidence in politicians ever since Thatcher, i fail to see how one can maintain with a straight face that the EU is less democratic than the UK. In France for example, thousands of people protesting is actually considered pressure by politicians. As for the EU politicians, coorect me if i'm wrong, surely they are appointed by elected politicians of the member states. Is that such a horribly undemocratic thing? Over here (Netherlands), both majors and judges are appointed.
Complain about this comment
Docteur_Eiffel
"France exports food and still has an industry. Britain has all its broken eggs in one worn out basket."
They wouldn't if half of Europe wasn't contributing taxes to EU agricultural subsidies to keep French farmers afloat while protectionism keeps low priced imports on the world market out. Even so, they are going broke. When was the last time they drove their farm equipment into town to tie up traffic and demonstrate their anger and frustration? Wasn't it just a couple of month ago? Face reality. By the standards of world agrabusiness, the French small farm is an inefficient anachronism, an antique, a dinosaur that will die. It cannot produce on the scale and at the low cost the major farming nations like the US and Canada can. Its time is running out quickly.
Complain about this comment
Oh please not the old chestnut of the French farmers get subsidy... implying the Brits don't.
They have more farms and farmland that is why they get more. The smaller farmers group up and work efficiently TOGETHER. As for the omnipotence of French farmers it is not as powerful as it once was and is starting (only just starting) to wane. The French are beginning to favour the organic growers. They have taste!
Personally I think ALL farming across Europe should have all subsidy lifted except for organic produce. And farmers (and the managed pension fund owned farms in the UK) should be forced to plant hedges again without recompense from the tax payer. That way Europe slows down global warming and avoids a polluted monoculture prairie. And anyone who talks tripe about hedges taking valuable growing area learn about something called ecology.
As for going broke... ALL nations are going broke. It's a global economic crash.
France has highly skilled artesans, craftsmen/women, much more industry than the UK, and more than enough food. France exports food! Gosh! An alien concept to the UK. Which will die rapidly if the food imports stop due to the pound being worth less than buttons. Which it will be because it is a global economic crash. (There is about a weeks worth of food in the stores)
If the Tories and Labour hadn't been so busy asset stripping our country WE would be in a better position. Instead of having a useless service industry to a bust casino.
The other side of flat broke is a new economy and it wont be the same as the last one. The French position looks good and the UK one does not. Does that hurt your nationalism aspect of the ego? It doesn't mine. Credit where credit is due. Well done the French. It is called "getting it together".
Face the reality of the redundancy of the anti French jingoism. In a tight corner we need all the friends we can get.
I predict the Euro will hit the floor after the pound has gone through it and the dollar is dust.
Might be a good idea for all of us to start learning how to grow our own food.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
View these comments in RSS