Dated 12Th June 2020

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Dated 12Th June 2020 12TH JUNE 2020 THE REALITY BEHIND EUROPE MONTHLY £3.50 A lesson in food security Edward Spalton i n g a p o r e ’s experience of the In the last few days I heard of a success. Land covered by factories COVID-19 crisis shows us phone call from a distressed lady in does not grow crops. One Sexactly why the UK government Singapore, complaining of food commentator remarked as long ago as needs to safeguard our food security as shortages and empty shelves in the 2012 that, in the Sixties, the state had a matter of post-Brexit policy. We supermarkets. I had one of those “I some 20,000 farms occupying 14,000 must not become overly-dependent on told you so” moments. So I thought I hectares of land (more like what we imports for our food supply, or a crisis had better dig a little deeper. would call market gardens than farms), like the current pandemic could leave The interruption in food supplies but most of them had been obliterated us suffering from crippling shortages. was due to the fact that Malaysia had by development. Sometimes it takes a long time to closed its borders to prevent a further The Singapore government is not discern coincidence — and sometimes spread of coronavirus. W h i l s t just responding to the emergency of it bounces back to hit you in the face. I Malaysia and Singapore separated in the moment. It has been facing up to wrote an article on Singapore’s food 1965, they have close economic ties the realities of its situation for many s e c u r i t y, which appeared on the and some 300,000 people a day years, developing its regulatory system Campaign For an Independent Britain normally cross the border between the to maximum advantage. Last year the (CIB) website on the 9th March. two. If Malaysian labour is no longer Ministry of the Environment and It acknowledged the tremendous available, some Singapore businesses Water Resources combined the Agri achievement of the Singapore will have to relocate to Malaysia. Food and Veterinary A u t h o r i t y, the economy, pointing out that it was the The government has assured result of vigorous, active government citizens that it has persuaded firms to National Environment Agency and the leadership and tight regulation — build up stocks of food for the last two Health Sciences Authority into one rather than of Thatcherite laissez faire months and that there are ample new body, the Singapore Food Agency free trade. In particular, I pointed out supplies, provided people do not start — which gives some idea of the that Singapore’s reliance on imports panic buying — although there may be p r i o r i t y. Singapore is a food for 90% of its food supply was not less choice. Sounds a bit familiar, manufacturing and processing something to which any would-be doesn’t it? economy as well as an e n t re p ô t independent state should actively As a densely populated city state, it (transshipment) port. aspire — although an influential is unlikely that Singapore would ever British government adviser appeared have been entirely self-sufficient in Edward Spalton is the chairman of the to think it was highly desirable for the food, but the present huge imbalance is CIB (www.campaignforanindependent UK post-Brexit . l a rgely a result of its industrial britain.org.uk) Loss of freedom of expression hile the UK is looking at China’s country punishable by up to 3 years in theme. Wlegislation attacking freedom jail, classing it as a hate crime. The move followed Social for people in Hong Kong it appears The vote in the Bundestag (German Democrat (SDP) complaints about that similar action, not quite as parliament) on Thursday 14th May protesters burning of the Israeli flag in extreme but still worrying is makes defiling foreign flags to the Berlin in 2017. happening in Germany. crime of defiling the German flag. It should be expected that the EU, Germany has made public burning The same applies for the EU under the German influence will soon of the EU flag or that of any other anthem, Beethoven’s ‘Ode to Joy’ follow. INSIDE: Eurozone crisis p 2 – Book Review “Escape From Brussels” p 3 - UK expats at risk p 3 – The Huawei problem resurfaces p 3 - EU economic bailout under question p 3 – Euro at any price p 3 - Governments draft fisheries negotiating position p 4 – Letters p 6 - Obituary to Tom Hay p 6 VOL 25 NO 10 Eurozone crisis Ben Habib he inherent flaw in the euro, (ECB). There was a total refusal by the problems of the countries in crisis at about which all protagonists in ECB and Germany to countenance the cost of the more fiscally prudent Tthe debate have always been debt forgiveness. Greece’s debts were countries of Northern Europe – for aware, is that a single currency cannot somewhat restructured but Greece was which read Germany and the represent a number of countries if forced to undertake extreme austerity Netherlands. Such a solution is either: from which it has yet to fully recover. abhorrent to both these countries which Those countries’ economies are not Since 2009 the economic situation would, in effect, be bailing out the in similar shape and do not move in of a number of other euro member eurozone. And with perfect timing, lockstep; or there is not political and states has also markedly deteriorated. G e r m a n y ’s Constitutional Court has fiscal union. I t a l y, which has an economy 10 just stepped into the fray. The 19 EU member states that times the size of Greece, had in March It announced the result of a case joined the euro were never in similar of this year a government debt to GDP which has bubbling along since 2015. shape and there is not (at least at the ratio of 135%; Spain had a similar It decided that both the ECB and the moment) political and fiscal union in ratio; and France which is bigger than Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), the zone. both Italy and Spain had a ratio of which had approved ECB actions, had For the French that mattered not 100%. acted ultra vires in the massive extent because they saw the euro as a political To put these into context, the of their QE activities. The timing of the tool to force member states into union. European Stability and Growth Pact ruling is no accident. Germany was For the Germans that mattered not requires that no EU member state compelled to act before its peoples because they knew the euro would should have a ratio exceeding 60%. were forced to bear the full brunt of the inevitably be weaker than the (Even Germany breached this limit in ‘profligacy’ of these other countries. Deutschmark and that would favour its March with a ratio of 63%.) For France, Italy, Spain, Portugal and export dominated economy. Indeed the ECB had undertaken Greece amongst others, the ruling is a The German view was, of course, some €5 trillion of money d i s a s t e r. In short, Germany has absolutely right. Since the creation of printing/bond purchases during the slammed the door on any prospect of a the euro in 1999 it has essentially been course of the credit crunch to try to eurozone bailout. a weak currency much to the benefit of stabilise these economies. T h i s No one could over-estimate the Germany. quantitative easing (QE), as it is importance of this ruling. It means that It is no accident that there is a direct known, is the biggest such programme some of the largest economies in the correlation between the growing trade undertaken by any central bank in the World will be in a funding crisis any surpluses of Germany and the growing World, including the Federal Reserve moment now. When this happens, the trade deficits of the weaker euro of the United States of America. shockwave felt across the Globe will economies, most notably Portugal, In short the eurozone entered the dwarf that caused by Lehman Brothers Spain, Italy and Greece – to name a Covid-19 crisis with many of its going bust. few. member states’ economies already in The ruling will also have major These trade deficits were financed ICU and the ECB’s firepower stretched implications for the EU and, by by growing government debt levels to its limit. The stimulus measures now extension, Brexit. It informs us that which in turn were financed by banks being instituted by these countries to Germany’s court which is, by treaty, in the eurozone, many of which were counteract the effects of lockdown will junior to the CJEU has repudiated the German. In a sense, trade within the increase these debts to unsustainable CJEU’s authority. It is the equivalent of eurozone became one big Ponzi levels. Some of the biggest economies a rebellion by a vassal state in an scheme. And like all Ponzi schemes in the World will be in danger of empire. Other countries in the EU are this worked well while trade flows collapse. The financial fallout would bound to follow Germany’s lead. were growing but the wheels first came be devastating for the World and would Poland and Hungary have for some o ff the wagon in the 2008 credit certainly break the euro.
Recommended publications
  • 17 July 2018 - - Page 1 of 38 - (I) Causing Or Permitting a Derogatory Article to Be Written in Brexit Central; And
    IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL CASE NUMBER: [TBC] B E T W E E N: SHAHMIR SANNI (Claimant) -and- THE TAX PAYERS ALLIANCE LIMITED (Respondent) PARTICULARS OF CLAIM Parties (1) The Claimant was employed by the Respondent from 13 March 2017 to 13 April 2018. He was employed as a Digital Campaign Manager. His responsibilities included running the Respondent’s social media accounts, YouTube channel, and producing website content and video content. (2) The Respondent is a self-declared “grassroots campaigning group dedicated to reforming taxes, cutting spending and protecting taxpayers”. It is a lobbying group pursuing a right-wing political ideology. It operates from 55 Tufton Street, Westminster, an office block where seven other similar right-wing political organisations are based. (3) The Claimant was summarily dismissed by the Respondent on 13 April 2018. Legal Claims (4) The Claimant advances claims of: (a) Automatically Unfair Dismissal by reason of having made a protected disclosure (s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996 (“ERA”)); (b) Directly discriminatory dismissal (s.13 and s.39(2)(c) Equality Act 2010 (“EqA 2010”) because of his belief that protecting the integrity and sanctity of British democracy from taint and corruption was paramount, which is a philosophical belief protected by s.10 EqA 2010 and in accordance with the characteristics set out in Grainger v Nicholson [2010] ICR 360; (c) Protected Disclosure detriment (s.47B ERA), namely:- _________________________ - Particulars of Claim - - 17 July 2018 - - Page 1 of 38 - (i) Causing or permitting a derogatory article to be written in Brexit Central; and (ii) Instructing Wilsons LLP to write the letter wrongly threatening defamation proceedings; and (iii) Permitting or causing the making of derogatory statements in public and the media on 4 July 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Reflections on Brexit and Its Implications for Ireland John Bruton
    No 2017/16, May 2017 Reflections on Brexit and its Implications for Ireland John Bruton Summary This paper presents the testimony delivered by John Bruton, former Prime Minister of Ireland, on 27 April 2017, before the Seanad Special Committee on the Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. The Special Committee was established by the Seanad on February 27th to consider the implications of Brexit for Ireland. Mr Bruton began his testimony by commending the committee for its work and also the government for ensuring, through effective diplomacy, that the particular problems of Ireland have been publicly recognised in the negotiating positions of both the EU 27 and the UK. Contents What is the alternative to a hard Brexit? ............................................................................................................ 1 How will the EU respond to Mrs May’s letter?.................................................................................................... 1 Should the EU offer UK voters another option? .................................................................................................. 2 The EU negotiating position ............................................................................................................................... 4 The state of British knowledge of the EU and its impact on the negotiations ....................................................... 5 Some of the practical problems of Brexit...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • FY19 FOIA Fincen Internal
    DATE REQUEST ID SUMMARY OF REQUEST REQUESTER GoFOIA # RECEIVED Marijuana related Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) The records I am asking you to produce will indicate by Industry Type, Year and Month of filing, States/Territories, and Regulator (all available at https://www fincen gov/reports/sar-stats); and by type of marijuana-related SAR (“Marijuana Limited”, “Marijuana Priority”, and Marijuana Termination”): 19-001-F 10/1/2018 Richards, Jim 2018-10-013 1 the number of financial institutions filing marijuana-related SARs, 2 the number of marijuana-related SARs filed by each financial institution, without naming the institution; 3 the number of suspects listed in each SAR 19-002-F All “Marijuana Limited” SARs filed during Quarter 1 of 2018 10/3/18 Repanich, Tony 2018-08-079 19-003-F FOIA Log for FY18 10/5/18 Kaplan, Thomas 2018-10-044 I am seeking the responsive records for the following FOIA requests to FinCEN (as identified by request number or request ID in your FOIA logs): 19-004-F 10/5/18 Kaplan, Thomas 2018-10-043 2016-01-140, 17-007-F, 17-133-F, 17-172-F, 17-173-F, 17-175-F, 17-245-F, 17-384-F 19-005-F Records pertaining to self 10/9/18 b(6) 2018-10-048 FOIA Log from July 1, 2018 to present, Copy of the Director's daily calendar from July 1, 2018 to present, a copy of all visitor logs from July 1, 2018 to present, and any and all communications, to include but not be limited to official correspondence on congressional letterhead as well as emails sent from the following members of Congress or their staffs, 19-006-F 10/11/2018
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Economy of Brexit and the UK's National Business Model
    SPERI Paper No. 41 The Political Economy of Brexit and the UK’s National Business Model. Edited by Scott Lavery, Lucia Quaglia and Charlie Dannreuther About SPERI The Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute (SPERI) at the University of Sheffield brings together leading international researchers, policy-makers, journalists and opinion formers to develop new ways of thinking about the economic and political challenges by the current combination of financial crisis, shifting economic power and environmental threat. SPERI’s goal is to shape and lead the debate on how to build a sustainable recovery and a sustainable political economy for the long-term. ISSN 2052-000X Published in May 2017 SPERI Paper No. 41 – The Political Economy of Brexit and the UK’s National Business Model 1 Content Author details 2 Introduction 4 Scott Lavery, Lucia Quaglia and Charlie Dannreuther The political economy of finance in the UK and Brexit 6 Scott James and Lucia Quaglia Taking back control? The discursive constraints on post-Brexit 11 trade policy Gabriel Siles-Brügge Paying Our Way in the World? Visible and Invisible Dangers of 17 Brexit Jonathan Perraton Brexit Aesthetic and the politics of infrastructure investment 24 Charlie Dannreuther What’s left for ‘Social Europe’? Regulating transnational la- 33 bour markets in the UK-1 and the EU-27 after Brexit Nicole Lindstrom Will Brexit deepen the UK’s ‘North-South’ divide? 40 Scott Lavery Putting the EU’s crises into perspective 46 Ben Rosamond SPERI Paper No. 41 – The Political Economy of Brexit and the UK’s National Business Model 2 Authors Scott Lavery is a Research Fellow at the Sheffield Political Economy Research In- stitute (SPERI) at the University of Sheffield.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit and the City
    Brexit and the City Saying No to the Princes of Europe: The City of London as a World Financial Centre following Brexit Or Passport to Pimlico: The City of London’s post-Brexit future depending on whether it is located inside or outside Pimlico or even possibly Latvia Professor David Blake* Cass Business School City University of London [email protected] March 2017 [v10] * I am most grateful to Kevin Dowd, Tim Congdon, Daniel Corrigan, Martin Howe QC, Laurence Jones, Edgar Miller and Patrick Minford for invaluable discussions and support during the preparation of this paper. Highlights On 23 June 2016, the British people voted to leave the EU. The prime minister’s Lancaster House speech on 17 January 2017 made it very clear that this meant also leaving the single market, the customs union and the European Economic Area, membership of which means accepting freedom of movement. This has powerful implications for the City: • It is unlikely that business with the EU27 will be conducted via passports in future. • Instead, and depending on the degree of co-operation from the EU27, the City should plan its future operations using either: o a dual regulatory regime, based on a third-party expanded equivalence model with guarantees about how equivalence will be granted and removed, or o the World Financial Centre model where the City ‘goes it alone’. • Transitional arrangements will also depend on the degree of co-operation from the EU27. It is in everybody’s interests that any transitional arrangements are kept as short term as possible, no longer than is needed to bridge the gap between the UK’s exit from the EU and the conclusion of any formal long-term trading agreement with the EU.
    [Show full text]
  • Busting the Brexit Myths the Leave Campaigns Are Already Peddling Their Lies Stirring up Support for a No Deal Brexit
    DORSET FOR EUROPE Busting the Brexit Myths The Leave campaigns are already peddling their lies stirring up support for a no deal Brexit. Remain campaigners need to be able to counter these myths and promote the positives of staying in the EU. One of the saddest aspects of the Leave / remain debate is the lengths to which some Leave campaign- ers will go in pursuit of their goal. For them it’s an existential battle where winning is all important, whatever the costs. The ‘ends justifies the means’ attitude has seen the Leave campaigns fined and -re ferred to the police for breaking electoral law and fined for breaking data protection laws. Many claims made in the 2016 referendum have been thoroughly debunked (Eg. the £350m bus lie, the EU Army lie and the Turkey Accession lie in particular) however many new claims and outright lies are still be per- petrated and we see these daily on our Facebook pages and in conversation with Leavers on our street stalls. This page aims to arm you, our followers and campaigners, with accurate rebuttals. Brexit is the Will of The People Most Leave voters don’t like the idea of a 2nd referendum or “People’s Vote”, they say it’s an affront to democracy to even campaign for one. Every clear thinking person can see the immediate problem with this one. How, surely, can having more democracy be undemocratic? It is the very essence of democracy for the people to be able to campaign and argue for whatever they want. Democracy is a continuous process and doesn’t end with any one vote.
    [Show full text]
  • Resurgent Remain and a Rebooted Revolt on the Right
    Resurgent Remain and a Rebooted Revolt on the Right: Exploring the 2019 European Parliament Elections in the United Kingdom David Cutts University of Birmingham Matthew Goodwin University of Kent (corresponding author) [email protected] Oliver Heath Royal Holloway, University of London Caitlin Milazzo University of Nottingham Abstract The 2019 European Parliament (EP) election took place against the backdrop of the Brexit vote and the failure of parliament to agree on a withdrawal agreement. Nigel Farage’s new Brexit Party topped the poll and the pro-Remain Liberal Democrats, which called for a second referendum on EU membership, returned from electoral obscurity to take second place while other pro-Remain parties similarly performed well. In sharp contrast, the two main parties, Labour and the Conservatives, recorded their lowest combined vote share since they became the main representatives of the two-party system. In this article, we draw on aggregate-level data to explore what happened at the 2019 EP election in Great Britain. Our evidence suggests Labour suffered from a ‘pincer movement’, losing support in its mainly white, working-class ‘left behind’ heartlands but also in younger cosmopolitan areas where Labour had polled strongly at the 2017 general election. Support for the Brexit Party increased more significantly in ‘left behind’ communities, which had given strong support to Leave at the 2016 referendum, suggesting that Nigel Farage and his new party capitalised on Labour’s woes. The Conservatives, meanwhile, haemorrhaged support in affluent, older retirement areas but largely at the expense of the resurgent Liberal Democrats, with the latter surging in Remain areas and places where the Conservatives are traditionally strong, though not in areas with younger electorates where the party made so much ground prior to the 2010-2015 coalition government.
    [Show full text]
  • Learning from History? the 1975 Referendum on Europe Transcript
    Learning from History? The 1975 Referendum on Europe Transcript Date: Monday, 23 May 2016 - 6:00PM Location: Museum of London 23 May 2016 Learning from History? The 1975 Referendum on Europe Professor Vernon Bogdanor Ladies and gentlemen, this is a lecture on the previous referendum that we had on Europe, in 1975, held not by a Conservative Government but by a Labour Government, and I think it does show that Europe has been a very divisive issue for many years – it is not just on the present time. Perhaps the most prescient comment made about Europe was made by Ernest Bevin, the Foreign Secretary in the Labour Government after the War, when Britain was asked to join the European Coal & Steel Community, which was the precursor of the European Union, and Bevin said no. He said, “Once you open that Pandora’s Box, all sorts of Trojan horses will fly out.” We joined the European Community, as a precursor of the European Union, in 1973, after two failed applications, but we wanted, in a way, to be in Europe but not perhaps quite of it. All Prime Ministers I think have tried to straddle the benefits of membership with the Eurosceptic feelings of the British public. The question now of course is whether one can still keep those two horses, to change a metaphor, whether you can still straddle those two horses. But Europe has been the poisoned chalice for so many post-War Prime Ministers: Harold Macmillan, whose Government was ruined by De Gaulle’s first veto; Edward Heath, who lost narrowly in 1974, partly because of the European issue; Margaret Thatcher fell from power because of the European issue; John Major’s Government was ruined by the squabble over Maastricht, another European issue; and Europe of course helped split the Labour Party in the 1980s.
    [Show full text]
  • What Does Leave Look Like V5.Pdf
    2 Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3 No clear or credible plan for an alternative ..................................................................... 5 The Norway model? ........................................................................................................... 7 The Swiss model? .............................................................................................................. 9 Iceland and Liechtenstein? ............................................................................................. 11 Macedonia and Andorra? ................................................................................................ 13 The Isle of Man and the Channel Islands? ..................................................................... 13 Turkey? ............................................................................................................................. 13 Australia? .......................................................................................................................... 14 South Korea? .................................................................................................................... 15 Ukraine, Moldova, or Morocco? ...................................................................................... 15 Vanuatu, Brunei and Nicaragua? .................................................................................... 16 Canada? ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • David Cameron
    1 DAVID CAMERON ANDREW MARR SHOW 21ST FEBRUARY 2016 DAVID CAMERON AM: David Cameron is with me now. Good morning to you. DC: Good morning. AM: Hot foot back from Brussels. You must be knackered. DC: Well, I had a decent night’s sleep last night and, you know, I think it was important work. AM: It was important. I want to go through some of the detail of the important work, but before we do I thought I’d give you the chance – two million people watching, probably Boris Johnson as well, can you tell them why they should be voting to stay in the EU despite all the things they’ve heard against it? DC: Well, I want what’s best for Britain, and I think what’s best for Britain is staying in a reformed European Union, because we’ll be better off safeguarding our position in this massive single free market that we have in Europe. I think we’ll be stronger in the world, being able to get things done, whether that’s making sure our country is safe and our people are safe, and I think we’ll fight terrorism and criminality better. We’ll be safer inside the EU because we’re able to work with our partners, strength in numbers in a dangerous world. That I think is a positive choice for us. I think a leap in the dark with uncertainty already in our world, why take a further risk? You don’t need to. We’ve now got a better deal.
    [Show full text]
  • УДК 811.111'42 Murad Jubaili, National Taras Shevchenko
    УДК 811.111’42 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18524/2414-0627.2019.26.181503 Murad Jubaili, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Department of English philology and cross-cultural communication, postgraduate student ‘US VS THEM’ RHETORIC OF LEAVE NEWSPAPERS IN THE BUILD-UP TO BREXIT REFERENDUM Applying the critical discourse analysis approach, the article analyses the ‘us/good vs them/bad’ pro-Brexit campaign in British newspapers during the three months before the EU membership referendum. Key words: newspaper discourse, critical discourse analysis, Brexit, us vs them rhetoric. In modern political space, mass media has the upper hand in producing representations of reality and this “irresistible power of the mass media” has a ‘mutagenic’ impact on politics [18, p. 248]. The mass media played a key role during the Brexit campaign because it was the site where representatives of the two sides attempted to win the battle for public opinion [4, p. 14]. The referendum on Britain’s membership in the European Union sheds light on how the media, particularly the newspapers, responded proactively with their extensive coverage, editorials and in-depth discussion of various issues related to benefits or disadvantages of Britain’s membership [15], which ultimately led to the decision to end the so-called ‘long and fraud marriage’ taken June 23, 2016 [13]. The British newspapers have long been accused of accumulating the Eurosceptic sentiment in the British public sphere and dividing the political common sense of the Brits till the moment of trigging the referendum that has constituted the most memorable event the recent British history.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit Timeline
    BREXIT TIMELINE BREXIT TIMELINE 1 BREXIT TIMELINE 6 December 2005 David Cameron becomes Conservative leader David Cameron wins the leadership of the Conservative Party. In the campaign, he promises to take the party out of the European People’s Party (EPP) grouping in the European Parliament 1 October 2006 Cameron first conference speech In his first conference speech, David Cameron implores his party to stop ‘banging on about Europe’ 4 June 2009 European Parliament elections The 2009 European Parliament elections see the UK Independence Party (UKIP) finished second in a major election for the first time in its history. 22 June 2009 Conservative Party form new grouping Conservative MEPs form part of a new group in the European Conservatives and Reformists group (ECR), as the party formally leaves the EPP. 20 May 2010 Coalition agrees to status quo on Europe The Coalition Agreement is published, which states that ‘Britain should play a leading role in an enlarged European Union, but that no further powers should be transferred to Brussels without a referendum.’ 5 May 2011 Alternative Vote referendum The UK holds a referendum on electoral reform and a move to the Alternative Vote. The No to AV campaign – led by many figures who would go on to be part of Vote Leave – wins decisively by a margin of 68% to 32%. 9 December 2011 David Cameron vetoes The Prime Minister vetoes treaty change designed to help manage the Eurozone crisis, arguing it is not in the UK’s interest – particularly in restrictions the changes might place on financial services. 23 January 2013 The Bloomberg Speech In a speech at Bloomberg’s offices in central London, David Cameron sets out his views on the future of the EU and the need for reform and a new UK-EU settlement.
    [Show full text]