EU Politics: I miss Renaults(don't make fun of me)

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > EU Politics: I miss Renaults(don't make fun of me)

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

And in yet more totally unforeseeable news, the Greek economy keeps on cratering and who knows what the end will be!

quote:

[Grexit back on the agenda again as Greek economy unravels

After three emergency bailouts and the biggest debt restructuring in history, talk has again turned to the country dropping out of the currency union

European finance ministers will once again deliberate over how to treat Greece�s ongoing debt crisis this week despite the country desperately grappling with refugees pouring across its borders.

A meeting on Monday of finance ministers from the eurozone will determine whether creditors are to be given the green light to complete a long-delayed review of Greek economic recovery plans.

The review has been held up by disagreement among lenders over how much more Athens needs to cut from public spending. It is seen as key to reviving Greece�s banking sector and restoring business and consumer confidence.

�I think the situation right now is more dangerous than it was last summer,� the former finance minister Gikas Hardouvelis told the Guardian.

�Then it was a question of the political will of a few people,� he said, referring to the tumultuous negotiations that paved the way to Athens receiving a third bailout in August. �Now it�s a question of implementing reforms and working hard and if a government doesn�t believe in them and implements them begrudgingly, progress becomes very difficult.�

Monday�s meeting comes at an especially sensitive time. Greek unemployment remains the highest in Europe at almost 25% � and just under 50% among the young. Many companies are relocating to Bulgaria, Albania, Romania and Cyprus as a result of over-taxation.

Meanwhile, the once booming tourism trade has taken a hit as bookings to Aegean isles have collapsed because of refugee arrivals. Last week, it was announced by Greece�s official statistics agency, Elstat, that the debt-stricken nation had dipped back into recession.

After three emergency bailouts and the biggest debt restructuring in history, talk once again has turned to the country dropping out of the single currency.

Businessmen and bankers in private concede that as the economy disintegrates the possibility of a parallel currency is now openly being discussed. �The probability of Grexit is still there,� added Hardouvelis. �It has not gone away. Just look at the yield investors are required to pay on Greek bonds.�

Everyone agrees that time is of the essence. Further delays make potentially explosive reforms � starting with the overhaul of the pension system � harder to sell for a leftist-led government that in recent months has faced protest on the streets.

�We have no time,� finance minister Euclid Tsakalotos told the European parliament�s economics committee last week. �We hope the IMF will become more reasonable.�

The Oxford�educated economics professor has repeatedly said that postponement makes any plan �to escape the vicious circle of measures-recession-new measures� almost impossible.

But the IMF, under pressure from its own member states, insists that Greece will have to implement additional measures worth �9bn (�6.96bn), or 4.5% of GDP, if it is to meet an agreed budget surplus of 3.5% in the years ahead.

Without debt relief or deeper cuts to the pension system, the Washington-based body does not expect Greece to be able to meet that target.

While Europe wants the IMF to remain involved in the bailout programme, debt relief � even in the form of extending maturities on bonds � remains politically an anathema to eurozone lenders. Meanwhile, cuts to pensions, which have been slashed numerous times since the onset of the crisis in late 2009, are unthinkable for the government.

With disbursement of aid also held up, debt due for repayment this summer has hastened the need for a solution. �As far as Greece�s bailout is concerned, the bigger problem remains the ongoing disagreement between the Europeans and the IMF over the size of the fiscal adjustment necessary,� said Mujtaba Rahman, head of European analysis at the London-based Eurasia risk consultancy.

Any hopes that Greece�s frontline role in the refugee crisis could see creditors soften their stance were quashed ahead of the meeting on Sunday when Germany ruled out giving Athens more time to achieve budget goals. �[b]The refugee issue and the aid program for Greece should not be mixed,� a spokesman for Berlin�s hardline finance minister Wolfgang Sch�uble told Reuters, setting the scene for the standoff to intensify in Brussels.[/b]

A cratering economy with bad advice and a flood refugees that are being barred inside the country; what could possibly go wrong?

# ¿ Mar 7, 2016 13:53

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 22:02

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

LMAO Verhofstadt is currently holding a press conf saying that the answer to this is increased confederation of Europe.

# ¿ Jun 24, 2016 09:22

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

ChainsawCharlie posted:

Remember the old days when all we had to worry about was nuclear destruction?

There are increasingly more and more days where I pray for this still.

# ¿ Dec 14, 2016 17:49

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Terror operations underway in Schaerbeek, Brussels - apparently they're after ISIS recruiters. Eight arrests made. Good times in Europe.

https://twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/status/810912565589114880

Junior G-man fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Dec 19, 2016

# ¿ Dec 19, 2016 22:26

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Mikl posted:

In all this kerfuffle the following has probably been overlooked, but let's look at the Five-Star Movement for a while.

On January 8th, Grillo launched a surprise online vote on European policy. "Should we split up with UKIP and join the LibDems?" The people's answer was an overwhelming yes.

So the 5SM split up with UKIP and petitioned ALDE (Alliance of Liberal Democrats in Europe) to join their europarliament group.

ALDE said no

That whole thing was so hilarious I couldn't stop laughing.

A fortunate by-product is that a lot of people are now finally and belatedly becoming aware of what an absolute powerhungry scumbag Verhofstadt is. I'll leave you with the Euractiv op-ed on this one:

quote:

Never, ever trust Guy Verhofstadt

By James Crisp

Today we learnt an important lesson; never, ever trust Guy Verhofstadt.

There was a time when, even if you disagreed with him, you could believe the Hof stood for what he believed in. Not anymore.

Earlier today, Beppe Grillo�s Five Star Movement voted to join Verhofstadt�s ALDE group in the European Parliament.

On Friday, Verhofstadt said that he would fight populism if elected European Parliament President on 17 January.

Verhofstadt is meeting Grillo, a populist who wants Italy to quit the euro, this afternoon. They have already drawn up the terms of their marriage of convenience.

There were reports about 30 minutes ago that the deal was dead. But by even considering getting into bed with Beppe Grillo�s Five Star Movement, Verhofstadt has shown his true face.

Framed by that unmistakable middle parting, it is the shifty, snide face of a career politician, a venal opportunist willing to trade any conviction or belief for political gain.

In many ways, it�s an uglier mug than the likes of Nigel Farage. You know where you stand with Nigel, who stands to lose millions in EU funds if his EFDD group collapses as a result of M5S� defection. Don't be surpised if it drives UKIP into the arms of Marine Le Pen.

The Hof could have been the poster child candidate to end the snivelling, infantile Grand Coalition between the European People�s Party and the Socialists & Democrats.

Now he stands for precisely the dishonest backroom deals he claimed to despise. ALDE and 5 Star should be adversaries, not political prostitutes shacked up together for cash and influence.

Is Verhofstadt so obsessed with ALDE regaining its �kingmaker� status as the third largest group in the Parliament?

Perhaps there is more going on here than meets the eye. Maybe the Hof has wrought some Damascene conversion on Grillo, who is now a committed Euro-federalist. It�s hard to tell because no ALDE spokespeople returned our calls or emails.

No matter the result of tonight�s talks, Verhofstadt has lost all credibility and strangled his Parliament candidacy at birth.

ALDE, whose members can be forgiven for feeling mutinous, should jettison this liability as soon as possible.

Or at least hand him the metaphorical revolver and bottle of whisky by rejecting M5S in their vote on its membership.

It is impossible for any responsible, pro-European group to take the M5S on board.

Not my words, but Verhofstadt�s back in 2014.

Mind you, this was even before the ALDE members rightly blew it up.

# ¿ Jan 16, 2017 13:08

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Valiantman posted:

So, it's unconstitutional for Britain to leave the EU without parliamentary approval. The supreme court told the government that they simply don't not have the legal power to execute the Brexit by themselves.

Yeah but Labour can't vote against without losing like half their Northern powerbase.

Hope is a lie.

# ¿ Jan 24, 2017 12:03

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

RE: Austeritytalk

quote:

Austerity was a bigger disaster than we thought

We now take a break from your regularly scheduled scandals to bring you some not-so-breaking news: austerity was as big a disaster as its biggest critics said it was.

That, at least, is what economists Christopher House and Linda Tesar of the University of Michigan and Christ�an Proebsting of the �cole Polytechnique F�d�rale de Lausanne found when they looked at Europe's budget-cutting experience the last eight years. It turns out that cutting spending right after the worst crisis in 80 years only led to a lower gross domestic product and, in the most extreme cases, higher debt-to-GDP ratios. That's right: trying to reduce debt levels sometimes increased debt burdens.

Other than that, how was the policy, Mrs. Lincoln?

But let's back up a minute. This isn't something that's always true. In fact, it almost never used to be. Cutting spending, you see, shouldn't be a problem as long as you can cut interest rates too. That's because lower borrowing costs can stimulate the economy just as much as lower government spending slows it down. What happens, though, if interest rates are already zero, or, even worse, you're part of a currency union that means you can't devalue your way out of trouble?

Well, nothing good. House, Tesar and Proebsting calculated how much each European economy grew � or, more to the point, shrank � between the time they started cutting their budgets in 2010 and the end of 2014, and then compared it with what actually realistic models say would have happened if they hadn't done austerity or adopted the euro. According to this, the hardest-hit countries of Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain would have contracted by only 1 percent instead of the 18 percent they did if they hadn't slashed spending; by only 7 percent if they'd kept their drachmas, pounds, liras, escudos, pesetas and the ability to devalue that went along with them if they hadn't become a part of the common currency and outsourced those decisions to Frankfurt; and only would have seen their debt-to-GDP ratios rise by eight percentage points instead of the 16 they did if they hadn't tried to get their budgets closer to being balanced. In short, austerity hurt what it was supposed to help, and helped hurt the economy even more than a once-in-three-generations crisis already had.

That brings us to two final points. The first is that the euro really has been a doomsday device for turning recessions into depressions. It's not just that it caused the crisis by keeping money too loose for Greece and the rest of them during the boom and too tight for them during the bust. It's also that it forced a lot of this austerity on them.

Think about it like this. Countries that can print their own money never have to default on their debts � they can always inflate them away instead � but ones that can't, because, say, they share a common currency, might have to. Just the possibility of that, though, can be enough to make it a reality. If markets are worried that you might not be able to pay back your debts, they'll make you pay a higher interest rate on them � which might make it so that you really can't.

In other words, the euro can cause a self-fulfilling prophecy where countries can't afford to spend any more even though spending any less will only make everything worse. That's actually a pretty good description of what happened until the European Central Bank belatedly announced that it would do �whatever it takes� to put an end to this in 2012. Which was enough to get investors to stop pushing austerity, but, alas, not politicians.

It's a good reminder that you should never doubt that a small group of committed ideologues can destroy the economy. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.

That's true whether you're talking about the European politicians who pushed for the creation of the euro itself � they ignored the economists who warned them that it might turn out just as badly as it has � or the ones who pushed for austerity a few decades later. After all, it shouldn't have been a surprise that trying to balance your budget when interest rates were zero would end badly.

Economists have known that since the 1930s. Politicians, though, still wanted to do it, either because they thought deficits were morally, politically, or economically bad, and there was no shortage of supposed experts who were willing to tell them that they were right.

These right-wing economists produced study after study showing that countries had been able to successfully cut spending when central banks could offset that by cutting interest rates, and said that this proved that the same was true when interest rates were zero like they were at the time.

You didn't need an economics PhD to know this didn't make sense, just a basic knowledge of economic history.

But no matter. Economists who had never bothered to learn this, or who had forgotten it, or who especially saw this as a good excuse to cut government spending they'd always wanted to kept saying it would work even as it kept failing.

That should be as big a scandal as anything else.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/02/15/austerity-was-a-bigger-disaster-than-we-thought/?utm_term=.c6f23f88460e

Or, you know, just watch Mark Blyth again.

But I'm sure GC will come by at any moment now and complain about lazy Greeks and Spaniards while the busy German worker bee stored for the winter, or some such morality fable.

# ¿ Feb 21, 2017 12:29

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

JMolen posted:

I particularly enjoy seeing a spokesperson of the PvdA throwing out the usual litanies of "We can't actually tax corporations, imagine all the jobs we'd lose! Think about the effects it'll have on THE ECONOMY!"
Meanwhile the VVD eagerly continues to slash into our healthcare and job security chanting "participatiemaatschappij".

It always depresses me when I have to explain to friends and family that I'm an Socialist Party member "but they're so left" and you have to point out again that Labour is an empty husk of neoliberalist thinking with some veneer of social liberalism.

# ¿ Feb 23, 2017 16:30

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

9-Volt Assault posted:

Yes, that's the point.

Don't I know it. I was merely trying to point out how tiresome it is to have to repeat oneself over and over again.

# ¿ Feb 23, 2017 17:01

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Politico's got hold of Juncker's white paper on the future for Europe - there's 5 scenarios for you to mull over.

http://g8fip1kplyr33r3krz5b97d1.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/WhitePaper_POLITICO.pdf

# ¿ Mar 1, 2017 13:49

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

It's a pre-release, leaked version; I thought that was obvious. There's words in there, just less pretty pictures.

# ¿ Mar 1, 2017 14:04

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Kassad posted:

https://twitter.com/ReutersWorld/status/837252813910593536

Rant against the EU in 5... 4... 3... 2... 1...

Between this and the OLAF anti-corruption people smashing into FN offices, it's a good time.

# ¿ Mar 2, 2017 12:07

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Hambilderberglar posted:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janusz_Korwin-Mikke
I think it's this luminary.

Even the Polish usually think Korwin Mikkel is too loving crazy. I think he's also in favour of returning to an absolutist monarchy.

# ¿ Mar 2, 2017 15:42

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Kurtofan posted:

When I think Fn Supporter I think "respect the existence of other political parties"

I think "responsible public servants in the European Parliament" whose wages they richly deserve for their hard toil.

# ¿ Mar 2, 2017 16:50

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Rappaport posted:

How is the European Project ever to succeed if we do not compensate the representatives in our shared Parliament adequately? You sound like a fascist, IMO

I am. It is me, the hidden fascist.

# ¿ Mar 2, 2017 17:01

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

His Divine Shadow posted:

Hey Greece just default already, let it happen.

They are literally not allowed to. Welcome to Europe, where the only option is infinite austerity, right until your welfare is back in neolithic periods or you elect the Golden Dawn.

Enjoy your stay.

LemonDrizzle posted:

Syriza to World Bank: "Hello, friends! Can we interest you in a glorious opportunity to stick your dicks in an active blender?"

I giggled quite a bit at this, thank you :cawg:

# ¿ Mar 3, 2017 10:53

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

The only thing you should ever hold referenda on is moral issues; the death penalty, abortion, stuff like that. Because those are real issues that people can grapple with by themselves and come up with and answer they believe in.

Anything purely political, heinously complex (re: Brexit or the Ukraine association treaty) or to do with finances should not ever be put to a referendum.

Edit; LOL this is why I have GC on ignore - how is it possible that one human is that loving dumb and terrible?

Junior G-man fucked around with this message at 11:43 on Mar 9, 2017

# ¿ Mar 9, 2017 11:25

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

I'm waiting for Maltese Caucasian Pol Pot myself.

# ¿ Mar 9, 2017 22:55

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

It'll be boring uber centrism with light notes of neoliberalism in the palate. There's a mild bouquet of racism with overtones of fygm, a classic aroma or 5 party coalitions.

# ¿ Mar 15, 2017 18:09

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

VVD+CDA+D66 gets you to 59, who's the addition? PvdA again? That would be a loving disgrace if they didn't go into opposition now.

# ¿ Mar 15, 2017 21:08

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

E_Motion posted:

VVD/CDA/D66 is 69 (nice), not 59.

VVD+CDA+D66+GL is kind of a weird coalition, but might be the first try. It would be kind of weird to not award the party that quadrupled its seats from 4 to 16. Would be very hard negotiations though between VVD and GL.

Yeah I think it'll be VVD+CDA+D66+GL if they're willing to finally get serious about the environment. Wouldn't be too bad but most milquetoast.

# ¿ Mar 15, 2017 21:18

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

He'll be there as the eternal protest vote for angry white men.

# ¿ Mar 15, 2017 21:23

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Cat Mattress posted:

Good.

If you think that'll make the Eurogroup any better you're sorely mistaken.

Plus I heard some corridor rumbles here in Brussels that they really want to keep him, so expect the living neoliberalist corpse that is Dijsselbloem to pop up at the ECB or in the Commission in a senior position.

# ¿ Mar 15, 2017 21:32

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

I'm still not sure that the PvdA isn't capable of returning to government. I mean, they're perfectly at home an a right wing cabinet.

# ¿ Mar 15, 2017 21:40

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Lord of the Llamas posted:

If I were the EU I wouldn't lift a finger to strike a deal within the 2 years.

They will, there's already a plan to start trade deal negotiations at the same time as exit talks. Like the EU said wouldn't happen.

# ¿ Mar 20, 2017 13:30

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Pluskut Tukker posted:

Really? Source? (not that I don't believe you but it's certainly news to me)

Don't have a link for you, but it's the latest scuttlebutt here inside the bubble. The Irish are pushing it hard - they're terrified of being caught in the middle of the EU and UK as so much of their trade relies on the UK open borders etc.

# ¿ Mar 20, 2017 14:09

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

GaussianCopula is Dijsselbloem's personal account and I claim my 5 pounds.

# ¿ Mar 22, 2017 09:30

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

I'm nearly convinced that GC is Dijsselbloem's personal account.

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 12:09

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Full text on the EU's negotiating principles available here: http://www.politico.eu/wp-content/u...c205e-189779173

Some quick analysis from Politico:

quote:

Council response puts Brexit talks on collision course

Setting Brexit negotiations on an immediate collision course, the European Council said Friday it would insist on resolving the terms of the U.K.�s departure before discussing the country�s future relationship with the EU.

The Council�s position, laid out in draft negotiating guidelines obtained by POLITICO, flatly rebuffs a call by U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May in her official notification letter �to agree the terms of our future partnership alongside those of our withdrawal.�

May repeated that phrase four times in her six-page letter formally triggering Article 50 Wednesday, underscoring the importance that she places on implementing what she called a new �deep and special partnership� before the U.K. breaks free from the bloc.

The Council document is the EU�s first effort at a formal response to May�s triggering of Article 50, which set in motion the two-year negotiating process. Distributed Friday morning to ambassadors for circulation in their home capitals, it lays out the EU�s broad principles as it enters negotiation with the U.K.

The guidelines are due to be approved by leaders of the remaining 27 EU countries at an extraordinary summit in Brussels on April 29 and will be followed by more detailed written directives for the EU�s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier and his team. At that point, the actual talks will be set to start. Read the full document here.

While the draft guidelines echoed May�s hope for a collegial negotiating process and agreement on an orderly departure, the Council also called for a strictly �phased� approach, in which talks on a future relationship would begin only when �sufficient progress� had been made on the divorce terms, including on such complicated issues as guarantees for citizens, the U.K.�s financial obligations and Ireland�s borders.

�The first phase of negotiations will aim to settle the disentanglement of the United Kingdom from the Union and from all the rights and obligations the United Kingdom derives from commitments undertaken as Member State,� the Council wrote, and �provide as much clarity and legal certainty as possible to citizens, businesses, stakeholders and international partners on the immediate effects of the United Kingdom�s withdrawal from the Union.�

The Council noted that �an overall understanding on the framework for the future relationship could be identified during a second phase of the negotiations under Article 50m� but it also pointedly ruled out concluding any agreement on a future relationship until after the U.K. formally withdraws from the EU.

The guidelines left open the possibility of a transition period that might avoid a rapid and disruptive exit, but did not specifically endorse such a transition, which it said would have to be �clearly defined, limited in time, and subject to effective enforcement mechanisms.�

�We think it is important to insist on a phased approach,� said a senior EU official involved in drafting the guidelines. �We need to be able to establish as far as possible what will be the situation the day after Brexit before we start talking about the medium and long-term future.�

The draft guidelines are the first in a series of formal documents the Council will issue laying out its principles in the Brexit talks and giving specific directives to its negotiating team, and effectively provide the EU�s first formal response to May�s notification letter.

While the guidelines are subject to revision and must be approved by the EU�s 27 leaders at a summit meeting on April 29, officials stressed the draft was the result of nine months of close consultations between the EU institutions and the capitals. As a result, Council officials said, the overarching principles laid out in the draft guidelines are unlikely to change.

The senior EU official said the bloc�s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, would be expected to return to the Council for clearance to move from one phase of negotiations to the next.

�Once sufficient progress in Phase One has been achieved and the European Council comes to this assessment that sufficient progress has been achieved, then we can move on,� the official said. �And that next phase, of course, will be about the future, about the framework for the future relationship, but again, we think we need to deal with first things first.�

But the official warned that legally there would be no way to seal a future agreement with the U.K., in part because any such deal would require the ratification by national parliaments of the 27 EU countries, a process that can take up to two years following the conclusion of an agreement.

�Article 50 is about what it says it is about, it�s about the arrangement for withdrawal, taking account of the framework for the future relationship. That�s what it�s about and that�s what we intend to do,� the official said. �But we cannot smuggle the future relationship as such under Article 50. It is simply legally not possible.�

Core principles

The Council�s guidelines are intended to articulate the core principles of EU leaders as they confront the first-ever departure of a member.

Chief among those principles is a balance of �rights and obligations� � an equation that EU officials said was made substantially simpler by the U.K.�s decision to leave the bloc�s single market and its customs union.

From virtually the moment the result of the U.K. referendum was clear, EU leaders had been resolute that the four freedoms that serve as pillars of the single market were non-negotiable. May�s decision to leave the single market and the customs union avoided a messy fight, particularly over the freedom of movement of citizens, which the U.K. had made clear it would no longer honor as it moves to tighten immigration controls.

The draft guidelines, however, state that if the U.K. wants a transition period that would extend its participation in the single market, the fundamental freedoms must be honored and �existing regulatory, budgetary, supervisory and enforcement instruments and structures� must continue to apply.

After EU leaders approve the guidelines at a special summit in Brussels on April 29, the Council, based on recommendations from the European Commission, will develop far more detailed negotiating directives for Barnier and his team. Those directives are expected to be approved in late May. Once that occurs, the formal talks with the U.K. can begin.

In the draft guidelines, the Council took a broad but straightforward approach on many issues. On the question of how much Brexit will cost the U.K., the Council simply declared it expects Britain to live up to its responsibilities on �liabilities and contingent liabilities� without pegging any specific number.

�A single financial settlement should ensure that the Union and the United Kingdom both respect the obligations undertaken before the date of withdrawal,� the Council wrote in the draft. �The settlement should cover all legal and budgetary commitments as well as liabilities, including contingent liabilities.�

On citizens� rights, the guidelines were slightly more expansive in calling for guaranteed protections for nationals of EU countries living in the U.K. and Britons living in EU countries.

�The right for every EU citizen, and of his or her family members, to live, to work or to study in any EU Member State is a fundamental aspect of the European Union,� the Council wrote, adding: �Agreeing reciprocal guarantees to settle the status and situations at the date of withdrawal of EU and UK citizens, and their families, affected by the United Kingdom�s withdrawal from the Union will be a matter of priority for the negotiations. Such guarantees must be enforceable and non-discriminatory.�

Officials said the EU would seek new legal mechanisms in the U.K. so citizens can seek redress if they feel mistreated. �On the EU side, we have clear rules for that, we have complaints procedures, we have the Court of Justice,� an official said. �There needs to be also on the U.K. side some sort of practical means of enforcing, in effect exercising your rights.�

In addition, the guidelines urge the protection of the autonomy of EU decision-making, essentially calling for the U.K. to commit to interfacing with Brussels and not trying to circumvent the EU in talks with individual members.

�The Union will act as one,� The council wrote. �It will be constructive throughout and will strive to find an agreement. This is in the best interest of both sides.�

And while the Council said it welcomed the U.K.�s desire for a strong future relationship, it warned that life for the U.K. would not be as good as being a member of the EU. �The European Council welcomes and shares the United Kingdom�s desire to establish a close partnership between the Union and the United Kingdom after its departure,� the Council wrote. �While a relationship between the Union and a non Member State cannot offer the same benefits as Union membership, strong and constructive ties will remain in both sides� interest and should encompass more than just trade.�

Reality sinking in

In discussing the guidelines, EU officials expressed some satisfaction that reality seemed to be taking hold in London.

�There will be a new legal border between the U.K. and the rest of us simply because the legal situation will be different on the two sides of that border,� a senior official said, adding, �That is simply inescapable. It is a mechanical consequence of the decision of the U.K. to leave the single market and the customs union and therefore there will also be a certain level of economic and other types of disruption.�

�We can and should � do what we can to reduce some of those consequences,� the official said. �But we cannot eliminate those consequences. There will be some disruption. And so far in the U.K. debate, it has often looked as if well nothing will change. There, I note, in the Theresa May letter she does start to prepare her home ground for the fact that this will have consequences.�

But as officials in Brussels braced themselves for the tough negotiations ahead, there was also an overall tone of sorrow and regret. �In many ways this is an absurd tragedy,� the senior EU official said, �in which all of us must play our predestined roles.�

# ¿ Mar 31, 2017 10:21

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Collateral Damage posted:

It's definitely in the EU's interest to make the divorce as painful as possible, to set an example for anyone else who might get funny ideas about leaving.

No, it isn't.

The EU, naturally, needs to make sure that the UK does not have the same shape and size of deal as it would when they were members. If they were to achieve that, then the next out the door would (probably) be the Polish and the Hungarians, followed by the Italians depending on the elections.

However, there is no need to antagonise/destroy/do real harm to the future EU-UK relationship - in terms of trade, security and hundreds of years of history, the UK is a vital partner to the EU and will remain so. That is pretty clearly spelled out in the document.

What will end up hurting the UK is that it is simply physically impossible to do a full-scale trade deal + the leaving procedures in the allotted 2 year time scale, of which only 15-18 months are effectively usable due to the length of time it would take for the EU and UK parliaments to go through their voting procedures. Therefore, some sort of transitionary mechanism will need to be installed in early 2019 to avoid the 'cliff edge' situation. All that will happen but the devil is, naturally, in the details. And those details matter an extraordinary amount if you're talking border inspections, sudden tariff impositions and loss of passporting rights for the UK financial sector. Millions of little lines of regulations and contracts will need to be redone and rewritten by thousands of experts, and all the while they're tinkering with the machine, it needs to keep running smoothly.

When that machine stops running smoothly, it will be an ouchie for the EU, but somewhere between a broken leg and cardiac arrest for the UK. It's not a matter of wanting to punish (because that's not on the table), it's that the natural process of Brexit will inevitably lead to mild-to-extreme damage, which will be poorly explained by pundits as 'punishment'.

Pissflaps posted:

Broadly agree with you but the UK can't make trade deals with individual EU member states - membership of the EU forbids it.

Nor can the UK make formal trade deals with 3rd countries. For the whole of the Brexit timetable the UK still formally falls under the agreement that the European Commission is the only and single competent authorities for trade deal for the whole EU28. They have probably already started informal discussions with 3rd countries, but can't formally do anything for the next 2 years without pissing off the EU27 and the EU institutions. Who are, and will be for the foreseeable future, the biggest trading partner of the EU. Therefore the UK can't afford to piss them off at this stage. Also, Liam Fox is intellectually incapable of leading an international trade delegation and understanding the fine point of trade negotiations. Believe me, I've sat next to him at dinner and there's not much going on upstairs there.

Finally, you have to remember that because the EC has been the only authority with the legal competence to do trade deals for the last decades, the UK simply does not have the thousands of staff required to embark on ambitious 3rd country trade deals. Any that there were or are have been employed by, or seconded to, the EC for ages now. The May government will need to train hundreds of experts in these things, and that can take up to 15-20 years until you're at the right level (never mind the infighting, backbiting and other insanity now going on inside the UK gov't where many are now perfectly, delusionally, content to fall pack on WTO rules).

Junior G-man fucked around with this message at 11:06 on Mar 31, 2017

# ¿ Mar 31, 2017 10:57

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

e X posted:

They might not want to "punish" the U.K. but this is a historic first and the idea that EU will play anything but hardball here is naiv.

This will set the precedent for all future leavers, if the outcome is anything but a clear loss in privileges and advantages for the U.K. it would be terribly damaging for the future of the EU.

You really have to stop using words like 'punish', 'hardball' etc. You pre-determine outcomes with that, and especially it allows you to create a universe where one side is 'good' or 'bad' or 'winning' or 'losing'. At the end of the day, as the end of the Politico article I posted said, there are no winners here. Everybody is now a hostage of having to play their pre-determined role in the upcoming drama (and/or farce). If you view it like that, then that mindset will help you interpret things in the next two years a lot more clearly rather than if you think in oppositional terms or some kind of mercantilist attitude to trade deals.

As Cerebral Bore said, this isn't about screwing anyone over, it's about the fact that the EU27 are in an infinitely stronger starting position and will remain there unless the UK cleverly manages to fracture the bloc, which I have my doubts they will given that all Boris Johnson can do is insult people, Liam Fox is too dumb and David Davies looks like he's about to die from exhaustion. The EU cannot, will not and should not give the UK everything they ask for but a 'close partnership' arrangement will be found, but the advantages will go to the EU27 and the UK will simply be worse off.

That, therefore, is the almost-predictable outcome of these negotiations, which is why you need to stop using words like 'punishment' etc. - such terminology will create (for yourself and others) an oppositional relationship that does not (yet) exist between the EU and the UK. There are simply facts of life which the UK should stop ignoring, but they cannot do that due to their internal political problems.

Junior G-man fucked around with this message at 11:45 on Mar 31, 2017

# ¿ Mar 31, 2017 11:38

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Honj Steak posted:

Just checking and rewriting the tens of thousands of EU regulations into Britain's own post-EU regulatory system will take many years and will seriously impede government and bureaucracy. Tusk is right in saying that there's no need for punishment, Brexit itself is a punishment without additional political action.

This is a really glorious article about "Brexit by the numbers" - the whole thing is worth reading, but I'll C/P the big numbers here:

quote:

20,833 � EU laws and rules to be scrutinized

12 � Mentions of the UK in the Lisbon Treaty that may have to be removed

5 � Number of years Brussels big brother will be watching

�10 billion � Size of the EU�s big budget conundrum

197,893 � Number of EU citizens who could lose rights

73 � MEPs set for the chopping block

359,953 � Number of financial services �passports� at risk

1 � Big consumer and roaming rights mess

42,000,000 � Health hassles for Britons holidaying on the Continent

2 � Multi-billion-euro nuclear problems caused by Brexit

1 � Irish Peace agreement under the spotlight

3,800 � Brits paid by the EU or receiving EU pensions

0 � UK�s use of the globalization adjustment funds before the Brexit referendum

All of that and more, supposedly to be sorted out in two years.

# ¿ Mar 31, 2017 12:42

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

His Divine Shadow posted:

So yeah then, RIP EU.

Eh, I don't know. The UK leaving with a slightly-worse deal than EU membership is probably one of the things all 27 remaining countries can agree on. Plus, the central leadership (except Verhofstadt :ughh:

) is much, much more competent than the UK side.

# ¿ Mar 31, 2017 13:39

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

orange sky posted:

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't a huge part of the UK's economy dependent on immigrants? I was under the impression that even the big bucks jobs in finance and IT were filled with people that aren't British since there aren't enough people to fill all those gaps.

Yup, farming is incredibly depending on seasonal/harvest labour, and this morning the UK hospitality industry was crying alarm because they say they need about 60.000 EU migrant a year to keep everything going (think waiters, room service, cleaners etc). The NHS itself can't exist without immigrants.

# ¿ Mar 31, 2017 14:27

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

jBrereton posted:

Do you think Barnier cares about a rock the Spanish have failed to seize a bunch of times?

The Spanish care enough to force it into the Council declaration of principles (which is quite a high-level diplomatic deal), therefore Barnier will care at least a bit. Or has been made to.

Nobody expects this whole train to be derailed by a rock with some monkeys on it, but you never know; the EU-US trade deal was (in part) stuck over whether or not the word 'Parmesan' could only apply to cheese from one particular region of Italy, and not to US equivalents. It depends on how much stock both countries choose to put on it, and Gibraltar makes for great media fodder stories.

# ¿ Apr 1, 2017 21:48

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/spain-drops-plan-to-impose-veto-if-scotland-tries-to-join-eu

Hahaha, now Spain is no longer planning to block the Scots from joining the EU if they choose independence.

# ¿ Apr 2, 2017 09:59

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Pissflaps posted:

In this hypothetical scenario which country would be invading where ?

My pennies are on Malta finally taking Gibraltar.

# ¿ Apr 3, 2017 09:41

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

LemonDrizzle posted:

In practical terms, why would Fillon particularly need to save money? He presumably has a pretty generous inflation-indexed pension waiting for him given his years in politics, he's old enough that he could retire and live off that pension any time he wants, and he earns a comfortable salary now.

Upkeep on chateaus is notoriously hideous.

# ¿ Apr 3, 2017 10:00

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Crossposting this from the UKMT :

Some fascinating Brexit negotiation polling

quote:

A Guardian/ICM poll suggests that at least two thirds of voters would oppose the UK paying an �exit bill� to the EU of �10bn or more. Voters would also oppose another compromise Theresa May may have to accept as part of the Brexit deal, giving the European court of justice continuing control over UK law during the transition period. (See 4.16pm.)

Potential �exit payments�

The biggest row will almost be about the UK�s �exit bill�. The EU wants the UK to pay its share of current EU budget liabilities and it has been widely reported that they will set the figure at �60bn (around �50bn). The Financial Times� Alex Barker has written a good Centre for European Reform paper explaining how this sum is calculated. British ministers insist �50bn is just an opening bid, and so instead we asked what people would feel about �exit payments� set at a lower level.

Respondents were asked about �paying an �exit fee� of up to [�3bn/�10bn/�20bn], as a one-off or in instalments, as the UK�s contribution to spending commitments made by the EU when the UK was a member.�

�3bn

Acceptable: 33%

Not acceptable: 46%

Don�t know: 21%

�10bn

Acceptable: 15%

Not acceptable: 64%

Don�t know: 21%

�20bn

Acceptable: 10%

Not acceptable: 70%

Don�t know: 20%

Accepting ECJ rulings

The UK and the EU both accept that there will be a need for a transitional period after Brexit until a new UK-EU trade deal comes into force. But the terms of this transitional deal are likely to be a source of dispute. May says Brexit must restore the supremacy of British law and remove Britain from the clutches of the European court of justice. But the EU may insist on the UK obeying the ECJ during the transitional period.

Respondents were asked about �continuing to obey rulings from the ECJ for a few years after Brexit, as part of a transitional deal that eases the impact of the UK leaving the single market�.

Acceptable: 34%

Not acceptable: 47%

Don�t know: 19%

I'm not sure how well this will end; the EU has been adamant (and will likely remain so) that the UK sticks to all the payments and contracts pledged and signed during the last EU multi-annual financial framework. The talk here in Brussels is that the exit bill will be around 60 billion euro, excluding some longer-term research financing etc. If the UK press goes all mental, and they will, over these sums, then things get very difficult off the bat.

Same with the ECJ; all the agreements/contracts etc that the UK has signed up to previously for the current payment period stipulate that the ECJ is the final arbiter. I'm sure they can work out some kind of solution involving a mixed panel of ECJ and UK judges, but it will still involve drat FORIN JUDGES to some extent.

It's not too unreasonable to suppose that your insane tabloids (along with half the Tory party) will go mental when they hear the numbers and the judges and if they're strong enough, it really will be WTO rules.

However, crystall-ball gazing is quite difficult but this is the kind of stuff that will make the next two years fascinating, yet horrifying.

# ¿ Apr 3, 2017 18:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 22:02

Junior G-man: Sep 15, 2004; Wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

double nine posted:

Hey JuniorGman, since you have an ear to the ground in BXL, what would online publications/blogs have the most influence over there, other than the FT? I'm not asking what you think carries the most accurate analyses, I'm asking which ones are popular amongst the european bureaucracy and the orbiting pressure groups.

In order of popularity (I have some slides on this for some reason):

1. Politico
2. BBC
3. Euractiv
4. Financial Times
5. Economist

# ¿ Apr 4, 2017 09:59

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > EU Politics: I miss Renaults(don't make fun of me)

«‹›12 »