Hi from France

better and better: we have Charles and Camilla coming over

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/03/king-charles-to-make-first-state-visits-to-france-and-germany

Quote

“The visit will celebrate the UK’s relationship with France and Germany, marking our shared histories, culture and values,” he said.

 

“It is also a chance to look forwards and show the many ways our countries are working in partnership, whether that be to tackle climate change, respond to the conflict in Ukraine, seize trade and investment opportunities or share the best of our arts and culture.

read : the Uk is on the fast Track to get back into Horizon-Europe

4 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

His job at the time isn't the important issue , the point is that Boris was referring to the people whom he was negotiating with and he wasn't referring to all French people , just the group whom was negotiating with 

.. not to mention he had "no recollection" of having said it.

24 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

To keep it in perspective , Boris wasn't referring to all French people , Boris was frustrated with how the French negotiators were conducting themselves in the Brexit talks and thats who he referred to ,  the French negotiators at the Brexit talks 

I was not referring to Boris Johnson as a prime minister but as a U.K. foreign minister

https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-french-turds-bbc-footage/

but this is just one of many times when UK diplomacy, which used to be very the best of the world, was wrecked when Brexiteers "took control" (and sacked its most talented diplomats).

As soon as Sunak started his Bromance with Macron, some "non-negotiable" issues with Northern Ireland being in the single market suddenly disappeared

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thetimes.co.uk%2Farticle%2Frishi-sunak-macron-cop27-bromance-height-age-prime-minister-xjtrglxtf

3 hours ago, RayC said:

Croatia had little choice but to adopt the Euro and it is far too early to form any opinion about whether its' adoption by them is a success.

I read that practical Euro use in Croatia has been going on for years

3 hours ago, RayC said:

The problem - as I explained in a previous post - occurs at a macro level: It is almost impossible for the ECB to reconcile the - often conflicting - monetary needs of all 20 Eurozone states and that causes problems in the wider economy.

indeed, and the Eurozone cannot really work unless other measures are implemented (tax rates convergence, setting up budgetary transfers from rich to poor regions....). That's why it Brexit is so useful: the UK was the main (though not the only) member blocking these advances.

note the USA has very heterogeneous states in its federation and the dollar works ?

3 hours ago, RayC said:

I'm sure that you will enjoy your holiday in Croatia. A beautiful country. Can I suggest that you visit Plitvice National Park. Simply stunning.

thanks a lot!

Right now we are working on this (your browser will probably translate this page)

.

48 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Sounds terrible...................................can we re-join the E.U ?????

that would be an excellent idea, but neither party wants it at the moment.

• For UK politicians the "B word" is taboo.
• For UE public opinion, the Brexit divorce is now history and we have problems aplenty, so no one really cares: near-zero coverage of the Windsor Framework.

Most experts say no membership candidacy before 10-20 years, I think it's reasonable, but both Britain and the EU will be very different then.

Right now I think the priority is rebuilding the bridges which have been burned down, the good new is the tide seems to turn. No more Boris Johnson (His "The French are little t*rds" did not go down well at all).

besides, Brexit is not as loose-loose as Ray would have it: to a large extend, EU countries want to go on taking or recovering pieces of the UK "economic cake": industrial sites, stock market transactions, euro bonds, foreign students... so, on the EU side there is a lot a wariness about a big quick rapprochement.

.

1 hour ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, but my point is that that isn't  "serious devaluation" and the Pound was over valued before Brexit  and needed to come down a bit and also having a strong currency is a double edged sword .

   

In theory, a weaker currency makes the country poorer but fosters exports and attracts foreign investments.

For 6 years now, the UK has had a weaker currency, weaker exports and less investments. A horrible loose-loose-loose mix.

Year after year after year, Brexit has proved not an outright catastrophy, but a continuous"slow puncture".

And after years running on flat tires, there are considerable consequences.

Brexit might not have been about purchasing power only, but instead about immigration and above all "sovereignty" but a poorer state and population means reduced sovereignty.

And the worst thing now is: no real improvement in sight...

.

23 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

You should provide links, not only screenshots. Unless you are trying to hide the source because it's from some anti British Europhilesrus website like The Guardian.

Automotive News specialized automotive press, europe branch : you can select my quote and left-click google to find the article

now what about this fact itself? Are you conscious how serious the situation is? 

read the BBC news site last months Brexit induced :

1/ a productivity problem

Quote

Brexit has dealt the UK economy a "productivity penalty" of £29bn, or £1,000 per household, a Bank of England policymaker has said.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64623488

2/ an investment problem last time I looked it up and before the pandemics, it was -11% across the whole economy

Quote

 the United Kingdom experienced a drop in private investment of around 11% between 2016 and 2019

..  all this in spite of a serious devaluation of the pound (I guess you experience this in Thailand)

so the current problem with the food bills or the NHS is just the tip of the iceberg : the future IS bleak, we KNOW

While, I quite agree with you that "money is not all that matters" and that Brexit is no Armageddon either, there is a very very serious issue there. 

5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

If you are a French person, I'm not surprised that you are pleased with the Euro.  France gets the benefits and disregards the rules

France routinely has a budget deficit more than the 3% allowed by the EU Euro treaties.

How France gets away with breaking EU rules on its budget deficit every year.

"The European Commission then writes to the French finance minister to express its concern and ask for corrections. The finance minister replies by apologizing profusely, swearing that he or she agrees wholeheartedly with Brussels, but that this year - this year only - France will have to break the rules because of some exceptional circumstances, whatever they are. Then it’s on to the next year, for a routine repeat."

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-france-gets-away-with-breaking-eu-rules-on-its-budget-deficit-every-year-2019-10-25

*Cough*

4 hours ago, placeholder said:

Absolutely. Which is why the Euro was a mistake. I don't understand why the most recent entrants have adopted it Unless the rules were changed and now they have no choice.

... then maybe the Euro was not at all a mistake (unless croats are total idiots of course)

btw I'm extremely happy with the Euro and we're heading for Croatia at Easter with the Euro and the superb scenery, not Portugal/Spain/Italy this year!

1 hour ago, RayC said:

I agree with almost everything in 'The Economist' article. My only quibble would be with the title. I agree that Europe has emerged as the winner in the head-to-head with the UK but - as I have mentioned previously - I am firmly in the Barnier camp here: There are no winners, only losers.

 

Perhaps, a better headline would be something like: "Brexit has caused more pain to the UK than the EU".

economically it's not "more pain", it "much more pain" and to a large extend economy is not just about win-win so we do prefer having japanese automotive plants in the UE rather than the UK

let's have a look

Quote

In 2020 britain devised a new tactic to insult its European neighbours, a long-standing hobby. The diplomat representing the eu in London would henceforth be denied the rank of full ambassador, a courtesy routinely granted to the bloc despite its not being a country. Instead, the Man from Brussels would be granted the lowlier status as an envoy of an international organisation, sending him tumbling down the protocol order. (The plan was later reversed after the eu reciprocated.) Contrast that with this week, when the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, was invited to meet King Charles III at Windsor Castle. Forget the tabloid barbs about unelected Eurocrats; a royal aide dubbed her a “world leader” of the sort worthy of high tea. Whatever the opposite of a diplomatic snub is called, this was it.

that was really insulting and these simple things explain why the situation with Northen Ireland is suddenly solved. No magic, just basic courtesy

and it works well now, maybe too well

Quote

Wonks are currently poring over the “Windsor framework”. It looks like a balanced agreement that allows both sides to save face and move on. Looking at the overall shape of Brexit as it has been haggled over in the past seven years, however, leaves a different impression. Just a glance at the cast present at the final stage of Brexit talks offers a hint of which polity has had a rougher time since talks began. Mr Sunak is Britain’s fifth prime minister since the referendum, and his Conservative Party is headed for a thumping defeat next year, thanks in no small part to endless spats over Brexit. Ms von der Leyen by contrast is just the second person in her job in that time, and will probably get another five-year term next spring. The manner in which Britain left the eu has turned into a national psychodrama; polls indicate most Brits think leaving the club was a mistake. In Brussels dealing with Britain’s latest twist was only an occasional agenda point.

@JonnyF do we agree on that one?

Quote

Vote Leave campaigners had claimed London would “hold all the cards” in talks with the eu. In fact the opposite turned out to be true. Britain imagined it could craft a way to leave the union but retain the stuff it cared about, like some access to the single market. Or did it? In truth nobody ever worked out what Britain really wanted. Setting priorities was terribly square for the likes of Boris Johnson, the dishevelled foreign-turned-prime minister who steered Britain through much of the haggling. Far better to quip about wanting a cake and eating it too. A rotating cast of Brits arrived in Brexit talks with fuzzy notions of being treated like Switzerland or Ukraine. Opposite them were seasoned Eurocrats carrying weighty briefing packs pointing out why that was not to be.

Quote

When it came to the nitty-gritty of coming to an agreement on terms, the triumph of the eu side was to play to its reputation as an inflexible bureaucracy capable only of ticking boxes. Countries looking to join the eu are familiar with this approach—here’s what you have to do, now do it—which was broadly recycled for the only country trying to leave it. Once the 27 remaining countries had decided among themselves what they thought was fair, Britain had little choice but to jump through hoops designed by its negotiating foes. The tone was set early on. Britain had to agree to pony up over £35bn ($42bn) to get to the next stage of talks, for example, to fund its share of future Eurocrat pensions. It tried to quibble but ultimately just had to pay. And so it went.

indeed : I am not paying the pension of Farage !

Quote

One last insult for the road

In an irony that slews of discarded Brexit negotiators in London will not have missed, the Windsor deal shows the inflexible-eu approach had been an act all along. It turns out the commission had lots of scope to accede to British demands, and ask for permission from member states later. It just hadn’t wanted to before. Indeed, Britain has achieved a better deal than anyone expected, though that may not be saying much. In part that is because the eu had long ago achieved its main aim: not even the maddest populist on the continent thinks leaving the club would leave it better off nowadays. The departure of Mr Johnson, once a purveyor of souped-up Brussels-bashing stories for the Daily Telegraph, also helped. 

https://archive.is/Ns7Z1#selection-737.0-753.15

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Quote

we already have a 5-years picture and for the next 5 years investments already tells us the tale: "oven-ready" sunlit uplands? They are not in sight

Ahhh - I see you are able to predict the future. Why didn't you tell us that before? 

I can indeed, anyone can 

for example the future of the British car manufacturing is being set in stone right now,  

Quote

“Ultimately, British car manufacturing will migrate to where the battery factories are, which is going to be in central Europe.”

 

The startup, which struggled to raise funds for a major electric-vehicle battery factory in northern England, failed to get past the stage of developing prototypes for an industry that is vital for the UK’s prospects in the global race to become self-sufficient in EV technology.

 

It has left the UK sorely lacking the battery manufacturing capability that would be absolutely critical to the auto industry’s future. Industry experts estimate Britain needs four to six large battery plants to sustain a healthy car industry. Currently it has one small 1.9 gigawatt-hour Nissan plant in Sunderland, northeast England.

investments today have consequences that extend beyond the present moment. In this regard, we not only have learned a lot since 2016, but we already know what's next in the automotive industry.

Is this news to you? Really?

3 hours ago, RayC said:

Maybe not 40 years but imo the UK's reentry into the EU is not going to happen anytime soon. 2040?

20 or 40 years, this is a distant future, so right now it doesn't matter.

Regardless of the fact British public opinion is now one of the most pro-EU in Europe, the UK is out.

Issues we could discuss :

1.  "what happened to get us there", The Economist  just published a provocative article, that we can read / comment as a starting point (?)
2. "What is going to happen" in the medium term. Long term might be membership in a very federalist Europe or not, but it's too far away to really matter.

1 hour ago, RayC said:

Opinion pieces by the former Presidents of the Union of European Federalists and the Secretary General of the European Federalists (France)  hardly constitute objective sources of information. It's akin to quoting Nigel Farage as evidence in support of a piece entitled 'Why Brexit is a good thing'!

bah

no one is "objective", you just need to recognize their arguments  (which are mostly mine as well and are indeed backed by solid facts over many, many years) : that's what matters.

we think experience has shown again and again the EU is better off without Britain as a member.

This is sad indeed, but having Britain with all the prerogatives and privileges of permanent membership, including the right of veto has been a drag all along.

1 hour ago, RayC said:

???? You win!

 

Thanks for posting the clip. Great TV series.

yay !

now what for the future?

My take is Britain ended up spending forty years inside the UE negotiating opt-outs.. and now we're in for forty years out negotiating opt-ins

3 hours ago, RayC said:

EFTA/ EEA might be used (and useful) as a staging post for full EU membership but I can't see much appeal from a UK perspective of making it a permanent home. The cost of membership would be probably be high with likely limited influence over EU regulation of the Single Market and input in the decision making of the various programmes.

beside denying the UK was at best an annoyance, at worst a free-rider all those years : a summary of the British government’s attitude at the European 2011 summit

Quote

When reality dawned in London, the government had to stand traditional British policy on its head. Gone were the days of divide and rule, of keeping a seat at the negotiating table, of damage limitation, of defensive “red lines”; in came the new British policy of sabotage.

save the Tony Blair years, the UK has always been a drag : it was a pleasant surprise the UK slammed the door on its own initiative (I wish Hungary would do the same, though Orban is not *that* stupid)

2 hours ago, RayC said:

This is becoming very repetitive. 

you are too actually UK constant obstruction is so famous it was featured in Yes Minister ????

10 hours ago, RayC said:

A misplaced, incorrect over-generalisation to ascribe one viewpoint to all Brits.

didn't say "all brits" but what you hold here is the very typical british view of the EU as a big market with no political power.

The remainer argument I read over and over is not about a common European project, but about making more money, fostering economic growth etc... nothing wrong with that but it shows having the UK as a EU member was a mistake all along.

I'm fine with having lots of collaborations with the UK, as long as we are not again taken for a ride. Fine with EFTA, but no full membership, the British influence was detrimental.

Quote

In this regard, Brexit (combined with Covid and the Ukraine crises) has allowed huge political advances that used to be vetoed by the brits when they had power in the EU.

I'm surprised you don't know about NextGenerationEU (EU bond, €800 billion to fund the recovery), REPowerEU, the Stand Up for Ukraine campaign,  joint procurement in defence investments: all of these major advances would have been watered down or vetoed by the brits.

I couldn't care less that the short-term economic effect of Brexit on the EU has been negative.

so

• for the European project, Brexit was great. We have a stronger EU (and many problems indeed, but we can face them in a better way)
• in the longer term, we'll probably have the UK back in the single market, though we need to be very careful = we have to take back control of our €uro forex, bonds, and stock markets
• Brexit has been great for public opinion across Europe

2 hours ago, RayC said:

What it indicates is what Barnier said all along: There are no winners with Brexit.

 

Given that the overwhelming body of data demonstrates that - rather than bring economic benefit - .

You make the usual British mistake : the European project is about much more than economy, it's political, it's about defending our common interests when the West and liberal democraties are in comparative decline to totalitarian (China), or illiberal (Turkey, India, Russia...) countries.

In this regard, Brexit (combined with Covid and the Ukraine crises) has allowed huge political advances that used to be vetoed by the brits when they had power in the EU.

Brexit has proved a timely and very good thing for Europe.

For the UK it doesn't make a lot of sense: idiotic populist  politicians and media have taken control of the country for years, it accelerates issues with the Union and of course there are economic issues with "global britain" for example, a trade deal with New Zealand, Australia or now Mexico makes no sense for UK farmers 

Quote

 

“Environmental impacts are why beef was a sensitive sector, both in New Zealand and in Australia. And now in Mexico. And we want them now to really show that they are keeping their promises of not undermining farmers and trade deals. We don’t want to see further imports of beef.”

 

“I can see no justification for importing any beef into the UK – it certainly won’t help UK farmers or food security if the standards or price of that beef is lower than that which we can produce in the UK.”

 

Dustin Benton, the Green Alliance policy director, added: “Mexican beef is somewhat more carbon-intensive than UK beef. It doesn’t make sense to undermine British producers with higher carbon imports.”

 

Actually, UK farmers have much more stakes in common with European farmers, politics and economy are interwined.

.

about the “Stormont brake”

 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/pres...tsheet.pdf.pdf 

• for the for the brake to apply, power sharing at Stormont would have to be restored. That would require the DUP to allow the assembly to start sitting (by backing the election of a speaker) and to lift its boycott on participating in the power-sharing executive.
• If the DUP were to continue to boycott the executive, the “Stormont brake” would not apply.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...rthern-ireland

unclear to me : in the case EU law is blocked, I'm not sure what the UE will/can do

Uk currency is the result of what the UK economy has turned into : an emerging market. 

Quote

For just a minute, imagine a country that has been buffeted for years by political instability. It has seen four prime ministers in just six years and three general elections over the past seven. This country also held a referendum on its relations with its neighbors, and voted to leave its main trading bloc, leading to a collapse in its trade volumes and stalling growth.

 

While this country calls itself a democracy, its new prime minister was chosen by members of an elite club comprising just 0.2 percent of the actual electorate. And now, this prime minister — who hasn’t even won a popular mandate to rule — has launched a populist pro-growth agenda: Taxes on the top 5 percent are to be cut in hopes of kick-starting growth and creating a trickle-down feel-good factor.

 

Welcome to today’s Britain, a mature G7 country, where it all sounds very emerging market.

https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-emerging-market-crisis-gdp-growth-economic-policy/

Quote

All of the above sounds like a classic emerging market (EM) crisis country. And as an EM economist for 35 years, if you presented me with the above fundamentals, the last thing I would now recommend is a program of unfunded tax cuts.

 

Sri Lanka tried to do just that between 2019 and 2022, and it ended up in currency collapse and default.