Pubblicato in: Banche Centrali, Regno Unito

UK. Previsioni. Pil Q1 -7.8%, pil anno su anno -4.7%.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-03-26.

westminster-palace-01

«Accountancy giant PWC has warned the coronavirus could lead to a 7.8% decline in UK GDP this quarter»

«What’s striking about this is the quarterly impact because this crisis is going to be so sharp in the current quarter»

«In the financial crisis things stayed open, it was just the demand was quite low.»

«GDP will fall by 4.7% for 2020»

«business investment has already fallen 30%»

«key manufacturing and logistics businesses must stay in operation as large swathes of the economy, including retail, entertainment, leisure and travel sectors, will go into lockdown»

* * * * * * *

Queste previsioni si fondano sul presupposto che la crisi attuale si attenui nel secondo semestre.

Tuttavia, al momento attuale, questa potrebbe sembrare essere una ipotesi ottimistica.

*


PWC warns GDP fall this quarter could be worse than the financial crisis in 2008.

Accountancy giant PWC has warned the coronavirus could lead to a 7.8% decline in UK GDP this quarter, making the fallout much sharper and faster than during the financial crisis in 2008.

Nick Forrest, head of PwC’s economics and policy arm, said recent GDP projections were the worst he had seen in his 22-year career. 

“What’s striking about this is the quarterly impact because this crisis is going to be so sharp in the current quarter. I’ve seen plenty of commentators even talking about double-digit falls. The biggest drop quarter on quarter in the financial crisis was 2.1%, so this is a far sharper drop than we’ve experienced before.

“In the financial crisis things stayed open, it was just the demand was quite low. This is going to feel very very sharp.” Forrest has estimated that GDP will fall by 4.7% for 2020.

He added there is evidence business investment has already fallen 30%, which is again worse than the credit crunch when in the UK it dropped 15%.

Forrest believes key manufacturing and logistics businesses must stay in operation as large swathes of the economy, including retail, entertainment, leisure and travel sectors, will go into lockdown.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Regno Unito, Unione Europea

UK lascerà l’Easa a fine anno.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-03-16.

Johnson Boris - Improta 001

«The UK’s Transport Secretary Grant Shapps confirmed that the UK will leave the European aviation safety regulator (EASA) after the Brexit transition period that ends on December 31»

«As you would expect from an independent nation, we can’t be subjected to a set of rules and laws made by somebody else…we can’t accept rules from the EU Commission and we cannot accept rulings in terms of court cases from the European Court of Justice or anybody else, any more than the US would, …. A lot of that EU expertise was, in fact, British. In fact, a lot of the leading lights (at EASA) were from the UK»

«the senior figures at EASA who are British would return to the UK by the end of the year, as regulatory powers will revert to the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority»

«The UK’s new safety authority could take up to 10 years to create, according to some estimates, and will cost up to £40 million annually to implement, far for that the £1 million to £4 million that Britain contributes to EASA each year»

* * * * * * *

«we can’t be subjected to a set of rules and laws made by somebody else»

«we can’t accept rules from the EU Commission and we cannot accept rulings in terms of court cases from the European Court of Justice or anybody else»

Il Regno Unito sta proseguendo la sua strada di nazione sovrana che si riappropria delle proprie prerogative e competenze.

*


UK will leave EU’s aviation safety regulator by the end of 2020

The UK’s Transport Secretary Grant Shapps confirmed that the UK will leave the European aviation safety regulator (EASA) after the Brexit transition period that ends on December 31.

“As you would expect from an independent nation, we can’t be subjected to a set of rules and laws made by somebody else…we can’t accept rules from the EU Commission and we cannot accept rulings in terms of court cases from the European Court of Justice or anybody else, any more than the US would,” said Shapps. “A lot of that EU expertise was, in fact, British. In fact, a lot of the leading lights (at EASA) were from the UK”.

Shapps said the senior figures at EASA who are British would return to the UK by the end of the year, as regulatory powers will revert to the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority. The United Kingdom will then seek to be “particularly forward-leaning” when it comes to technology and the automation sectors

The UK’s new safety authority could take up to 10 years to create, according to some estimates, and will cost up to £40 million annually to implement, far for that the £1 million to £4 million that Britain contributes to EASA each year.

The London-based International Airlines Group also expressed disappointment with the decision and added that the Civil Aviation Authority “does not have the expertise required to operate as a world-class safety and technical regulator”.

“Being a member of the European Aviation Safety Agency is not compatible with the UK having genuine economic and political independence,” said the department for transport. “We will maintain world-leading safety standards for the industry…and will continue to work with colleagues in the EU to establish a new regulatory relationship.”

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Problemia Energetici, Regno Unito

UK. ‘Clima’. La data del 2050 non è realistica. Meglio le centrali atomiche.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-03-14.

Johnson Boris - Improta 001

«UK ‘can’t go climate neutral before 2050’»

«The claim comes from the government-funded research group Energy Systems Catapult, whose computer models are used by the Committee on Climate Change, which advises government»

«The report …. believes the UK target of climate neutrality by 2050 will result in harm to the climate»

«Achieving net zero significantly earlier than 2050 in our modelling exceeds even our most speculative measures, with rates of change for power, heat and road transport that push against the bounds of plausibility»

«The UK cannot go climate neutral much before 2050 unless people stop flying and eating red meat almost completely, a report says»

«it calls for small, modular nuclear reactors to support three-quarters of heating in cities through district heating systems.»

«Modular reactors are much smaller than conventional reactors, and brought to a site in a kit of parts to be assembled»

«It warns that livestock production for dairy and meat may need to be cut by 50% rather than the 20% currently envisaged by the Committee on Climate Change. And people will need to eat less meat and dairy by the same amount»

«However, the report warns that the public do not appear ready for substantial lifestyle changes»

«approaching the subject of dietary change or aviation often elicits a more resistant and emotional respons»

* * * * * * *

Gli obiettivi dell’European Green Deal sono irrealistici e, soprattutto, molto costosi.

Coronavirus, crisi petrolifera e crollo delle borse, unitamente alla stagnazione economica, sono urgenze ben più gravi e reali.

Significativo è il suggerimento di installare piccoli reattori nucleari, specie per il riscaldamento delle abitazioni.

È un altro tabù che si sta dileguando. È un’altra divergenza con l’Unione Europea.

*


Climate change: UK ‘can’t go climate neutral before 2050’.

The UK cannot go climate neutral much before 2050 unless people stop flying and eating red meat almost completely, a report says.

But it warns that the British public do not look ready to take such steps and substantially change their lifestyle.

The report challenges the views of campaign group Extinction Rebellion.

It believes the UK target of climate neutrality by 2050 will result in harm to the climate.

The claim comes from the government-funded research group Energy Systems Catapult, whose computer models are used by the Committee on Climate Change, which advises government.

Its report says: “A number of groups have called for net zero to be accelerated to 2025, 2030 or 2040.

“Achieving net zero significantly earlier than 2050 in our modelling exceeds even our most speculative measures, with rates of change for power, heat and road transport that push against the bounds of plausibility.” Glimmer of good news

But the authors offer some optimism too. They calculate that the UK can cut emissions fast enough to be climate neutral by 2050 – but only if ministers act much more quickly.

They say the government urgently needs to invest in three key technologies: carbon capture and storage with bioenergy crops; hydrogen for a wide variety of uses; and advanced nuclear power.

The report modelled options for society to 2050. It concluded that if decisions are made early, the cost of climate neutrality can be held down to 1-2% of national wealth – GDP.

Scenarios rely on some technologies still in their infancy, which will be controversial. For instance, it draws heavily on burning energy crops, capturing the carbon emissions and burying them underground.

It says hydrogen use will need to grow to supply industry, heat and heavy transport.

Electricity generation will need to double with heavy reliance on solar power and offshore wind.

Controversially, it calls for small, modular nuclear reactors to support three-quarters of heating in cities through district heating systems. Modular reactors are much smaller than conventional reactors, and brought to a site in a kit of parts to be assembled.

It warns that livestock production for dairy and meat may need to be cut by 50% rather than the 20% currently envisaged by the Committee on Climate Change. And people will need to eat less meat and dairy by the same amount.

The report’s author, Scott Milne, said: “Whichever pathway the UK takes, innovation, investment and inducements across low-carbon technology, land use and lifestyle are essential to achieve net zero.

“And there are massive economic opportunities for the UK to lead the world in these areas.”

However, the report warns that the public do not appear ready for substantial lifestyle changes. It warns, for instance, that if people’s homes are better insulated, they may choose to spend the same amount on heating to deliver a warmer home.

It says: “Early evidence suggests a general willingness to adopt new technologies (such as new heating or mobility) as long as these can deliver the same experiences as before.

“Conversely, approaching the subject of dietary change or aviation often elicits a more resistant and emotional response.”

Some experts will be critical of the report’s expectation that new technologies such as carbon capture and storage will be rapidly adopted.

A recent report said it was unrealistic to expect that carbon capture and hydrogen will develop fast enough to achieve the net zero target.

A spokesperson for Extinction Rebellion told BBC News: “The global response to coronavirus shows we can radically address crises if we put our minds to it. Meanwhile, the net zero date has not been put to the people of the UK.

“The science tells us that net zero by 2050 means a hell of a lot worse than giving up flying and red meat – people are dying now around the world as you read this due to governmental inaction.”

The report was not welcomed by the National Beef Association.

Its spokesman Neil Shand told BBC News that scientific studies typically underestimate the role of livestock in capturing carbon in the soil.

He said: “It does seem rather unfortunate that the report links beef production and aviation in this way.

“The timing is more than a little ironic; the shops are full of people panic-buying and it seems clear that the nation’s food sector relies very heavily on imports, and the associated transport that brings them into the UK.

“Food produced on their own doorstep, using a system where animal and non-animal foods are symbiotic requires very little air travel, and makes excellent use of the resources our beautiful country provides. Foreign travel does not have the same necessity.”

In addition, a report from a group of environmentally-minded business leaders has called on the government to show increased ambition and delivery of carbon-cutting policies to get the UK on track to meet climate goals.

It said there was an urgent need especially for policies to bring low-carbon heating to people’s homes.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Regno Unito, Unione Europea

Brexit. Primi colloqui inconcludenti. Muro contro muro.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-03-06.

Johnson Boris - Improta 001

«”There are many divergences, very serious divergences” among the UK and the EU after the first round of talks on the future relationship, EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier warned Thursday (5 March)»

«Barnier said the key hurdles are the framework of the agreement, fair competition, the role for the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and fisheries»

«After the first week of talks, Barnier said the EU and UK agreed to maintain high standards on rules and standards – but London does not to formally commit to those standards or agree to a mechanism to uphold them»

«As part of a trade deal, the EU wants to prevent the UK from undercutting and dumping EU businesses, and wants London to maintain environmental, labour, and state aid rules»

«”Why not stick to them [EU standards and rules], it is a question of trust,” Barnier said»

«Another key issue is that UK does not want to commit to applying the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and rules out a role for the European Court of Justice in interpreting EU law, Barnier noted»

«The set-up of the agreement is also uncertain as the UK wants sectorial agreements on different issues, while the EU wants to have an overall agreement covering all areas»

«Negotiators are also at loggerheads over an agreement on access to British fishing waters and EU markets. Barnier said the UK is asking to negotiate separate reciprocal access on an annual basis like Norway»

«”The UK team made clear that, on 1 January 2021, we would regain our legal and economic independence – and that the future relationship must reflect that fact,”»

«Barnier warned not to underestimate the consequences of a no-deal by next January when EU rules and obligations will no longer apply to the UK»

* * * * * * *

La Commissione Europea ha pubblicato un lungo report sulle tematiche degli incontri. Si noti come sia stata usata la lingua francese ….

Negotiations with the UK: Michel Barnier, the European Commission’s Chief Negotiator, sets out points of convergence and divergence following the first round of negotiations.

* * *

Brexit. Iniziano le trattative. Punto della situazione.

Brexit. Amélie de Montchalin, Segretaria di Stato francese per l’Europa.

Johnson. O accordo solo economico, o a giugno rottura.

Brexit. L’Unione inizia a calare i toni.

Brexit. David Frost, negoziatore di Johnson, ribadisce il no alle corti europee.

* * *

Se l’Unione Europea non desistesse dal voler imporre che il Regno Unito continui a seguire la European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), accettando le decisioni delle corti di giustizia dell’Unione e rinunciando alla esclusiva di pesca della Zona Economicamente di sua sovranità, sembrerebbe invitabile che alla fine si vada ad un no-deal.

Ma Mr Barnier ha ammesso uno dei nodi principali “it is a question of trust“: il Regno Unito non si fida dell’Unione Europea.

*


Barnier: ‘serious divergences’ after first Brexit talks.

“There are many divergences, very serious divergences” among the UK and the EU after the first round of talks on the future relationship, EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier warned Thursday (5 March).

Barnier said the key hurdles are the framework of the agreement, fair competition, the role for the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and fisheries.

After the first week of talks, Barnier said the EU and UK agreed to maintain high standards on rules and standards – but London does not to formally commit to those standards or agree to a mechanism to uphold them.

As part of a trade deal, the EU wants to prevent the UK from undercutting and dumping EU businesses, and wants London to maintain environmental, labour, and state aid rules.

“Why not stick to them [EU standards and rules], it is a question of trust,” Barnier said.

Another key issue is that UK does not want to commit to applying the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and rules out a role for the European Court of Justice in interpreting EU law, Barnier noted.

The French politician argued that justice and criminal cooperation would include the exchange of sensitive personal data, and in order to protect EU citizens’s rights, EU law needs to be interpreted by the ECJ.

He said if there is no agreement on this, the level of cooperation between the UK and EU on criminal and justice would be much lower, based on international rules.

The set-up of the agreement is also uncertain as the UK wants sectorial agreements on different issues, while the EU wants to have an overall agreement covering all areas.

“We do not understand why would we go to a series specific agreement[s], why not put it all in a global framework, […] it is a practical question, to be efficient, to avoid needles parallel structures with separate ratification procedures,” Barnier said.

Fishy matters

Negotiators are also at loggerheads over an agreement on access to British fishing waters and EU markets.

Barnier said the UK is asking to negotiate separate reciprocal access on an annual basis like Norway, but that is not possible because of the large number of species that would come under such a deal.

Barnier said he will seek a “balanced” compromise on fisheries by July, but if the EU and UK cannot agree, he will try to get it in the overall agreement.

In the first week of negotiations talks have not taken place on foreign affairs and defence, Barnier said, because the UK has ruled out an specific agreement on those for now.

“These are going to be tough negotiations – this is just the first round. In some areas there seems to be a degree of common understanding of how to take the talks forward,” a UK government spokesperson said, adding that in areas such as fishing, governance, criminal justice and the level playing field there are “significant differences”.

“The UK team made clear that, on 1 January 2021, we would regain our legal and economic independence – and that the future relationship must reflect that fact,” the spokesperson added.

“An agreement is possible, even if difficult,” Barnier said, adding that mutual trust and not walking back on previous agreements are key to success.

The two sides have until the end of the year to negotiate a deal on the future relationship, if the UK does not ask for an extension to the transition period by July, which Boris Johnson, the UK prime minister, has pre-emptively ruled out.

Barnier warned not to underestimate the consequences of a no-deal by next January when EU rules and obligations will no longer apply to the UK.

“Next January will not be like January this year. It will be very, very different,” he said.

Barnier also said that his British counterpart, David Frost, had assured him that Britain will stick to the measures to prevent a hard border on the island of Ireland, agreed in the EU-UK divorce deal.

EU officials have been worried that by UK government statements hinting at not implementing border checks.

The EU-UK joint committee overseeing the withdrawal agreement will have its first meeting on 30 March.

Talks on the future relationship will continue on London later in March.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Diplomazia, Regno Unito, Unione Europea

Brexit. Iniziano le trattative. Punto della situazione.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-03-04.

Johnson Boris - Improta 001

Della Brexit ci si è a lungo concentrati, riportando via via le continue novità.

Non è un contenzioso solo anglo-europeo: riguarda ed anche molto da vicino l’Italia.

Con marzo inizieranno le trattative tra Regno Unito ed Unione Europea. Da quanto potrebbe sembrare, potrebbero essere molto lunga ed aspra.

Johnson. O accordo solo economico, o a giugno rottura.

Brexit. L’Unione inizia a calare i toni.

Brexit. David Frost, negoziatore di Johnson, ribadisce il no alle corti europee.

Brexit. E moh come fa l’EU a compensare almeno 200 mld al giorno?

Brexit. La fermezza di Johnson lascia nel panico l’Unione Europea.

Johnson, identitario sovranista, non invita la ‘stampa’ dei liberals.

Johnson, identitario sovranista, attacca la Bbc liberal socialista.

*

Riportiamo un lungo articolo della Cnn, che cerca di sintetizzare il punto della situazione, tenendo sempre conto che tale testata è un pilastro dei liberal americani.

«No-deal Brexit is back — and it looks more likely than ever»

«On Monday, the two sides will finally sit down to negotiate what that future relationship looks like. And if the published priorities from London and Brussels are anything to go by, it’s going to be a bloodbath»

«The clock is ticking faster, the political landscape has changed, and no one knows how much good will there is»

«What does the UK want? …. It wants a free trade agreement with the EU similar to the one that Canada enjoys. The EU’s deal with Canada is substantial. It removes the need for most (but not all) tariffs on goods traded between the two. However, it does very little on financial services, the most important sector in the British economy»

«It’s worth remembering that the UK and EU currently trade with zero tariffs and close to zero tariff barriers»

«Because more than trade, what Prime Minister Boris Johnson really wants is to guarantee the UK’s independence from Brussels»

«Where the two sides really disagree is on the pre-conditions for any deal»

«And it’s more of a political row than anything else.»

«Which sounds awfully chummy, until you realize that those areas of sovereignty somewhat cut across the EU’s priorities»

«”The EU’s Common Fisheries Policy has wrecked our fishing industry.”»

«The same could be said in French fishing communities if the EU fails to reach an agreement on how much access French fishermen have to British waters. …. It matters very much to French fishermen because fish have an annoying habit of not respecting borders»

«The second big sticking point is the so-called Level Playing Field»

«If it is to allow UK goods to continue to enter its market free of tariffs, the EU doesn’t want Britain’s departure from the Union to create a competitor on its doorstep that can deviate from EU standards on things like workers’ rights, environmental protections and taxation in ways that make British firms more competitive»

«Which, given the EU’s obsession with rules, is freaking people out in Brussels»

«The UK rejects that any formal oversight is needed»

«the EU is suddenly trying to squeeze you on a trade deal and force the UK to hand over some of its independence»

«The fact that Johnson has a parliamentary majority of more than 80, whatever he decides means that Brussels is negotiating with a man who will follow through on his words»

«As things stand, neither side’s position is acceptable to the other»

* * * * * * *

In effetti, il problema della Brexit è politico, non economico.

Il Regno Unito non intende cedere sulla propria sovranità, mentre l’Unione Europea pone questo come prerequisito ad ogni trattativa.

*


No-deal Brexit is back — and it looks more likely than ever.

The United Kingdom left the European Union on January 31. The world has since been mercifully quiet on the matter, and you’d be forgiven for assuming Brexit was over.

Wishful thinking. The UK is not yet a month into its “transition period” with the EU, during which the country continues to play by EU rules while a future relationship is negotiated. That period ends on December 31.

On Monday, the two sides will finally sit down to negotiate what that future relationship looks like. And if the published priorities from London and Brussels are anything to go by, it’s going to be a bloodbath.

While both want a free trade agreement and close alignment, they also believe that the other is trying to suddenly change the rules of engagement.

Ruptures between the EU and UK are nothing new in Brexit, but this time it’s a little different. The clock is ticking faster, the political landscape has changed, and no one knows how much good will there is. Unless a major breakthrough or concession happens in the coming weeks, it’s hard to see how this concludes any way other than the UK’s transition period ending with no formal deal.

What does the UK want?

On paper, the UK’s goals are straightforward. It wants a free trade agreement with the EU similar to the one that Canada enjoys. The EU’s deal with Canada is substantial. It removes the need for most (but not all) tariffs on goods traded between the two. However, it does very little on financial services, the most important sector in the British economy.

It’s worth remembering that the UK and EU currently trade with zero tariffs and close to zero tariff barriers, so whatever trade deal is reached is still ultimately a question of how much friction will exist, which is a highly unorthodox starting point in trade talks.

This, however, is what the UK wants. Why? Because more than trade, what Prime Minister Boris Johnson really wants is to guarantee the UK’s independence from Brussels.

Sticking points

This is where things could get nasty. The EU also wants a trade deal with the UK and is entirely happy with it being a Canada-style deal. Where the two sides really disagree is on the pre-conditions for any deal. And it’s more of a political row than anything else.

“While there are clearly disagreements when it comes to the EU’s preconditions for negotiating a trade deal — particularly over fish, the role of the European Court of Justice, and the exact nature of the level playing field requirements — when it comes to what the future economic partnership actually looks like, the EU and UK really aren’t that far apart,” says the Centre for European Reform’s Samuel Lowe.

The 541-page Withdrawal Agreement signed off last autumn was accompanied by a 31-page document known as the Political Declaration. In it, the two sides talk of their mutual desire for a comprehensive trade deal, close cooperation on standards ranging from environmental to workers’ rights, and an acknowledgment that geography and history make the relationship unique. Both sides agreed this must be done in a way that respects the EU’s internal priorities, while also respecting the UK’s sovereignty.

Which sounds awfully chummy, until you realize that those areas of sovereignty somewhat cut across the EU’s priorities. And this means that before talks have even started, the familiar blame game between Brussels and London is in full force.

“Now we have both sides’ formal starting positions in this next round of talks, we can see that there are a substantial number of basic incompatibilities,” says Simon Usherwood, Professor in Politics at the University of Surrey.

Fish bones of contention

Let’s start with fish. Despite its relatively small economic importance in the grand scheme of things, there is a romantic idea of fishing communities that resonates with some European voters.

In the UK, the argument goes something like, “The EU’s Common Fisheries Policy has wrecked our fishing industry.” The same could be said in French fishing communities if the EU fails to reach an agreement on how much access French fishermen have to British waters. It matters very much to French fishermen because fish have an annoying habit of not respecting borders. And in elections, romantic arguments can become very powerful.

“Fisheries is a big problem, as the EU want to keep much of the effect of the Common Fisheries Policy, if not the policy itself, while the UK want a much looser arrangement,” says Usherwood. “Given how much both sides have laid weight on what is actually an economically very small sector, this will make it all the more difficult to resolve.”

The second big sticking point is the so-called Level Playing Field. If it is to allow UK goods to continue to enter its market free of tariffs, the EU doesn’t want Britain’s departure from the Union to create a competitor on its doorstep that can deviate from EU standards on things like workers’ rights, environmental protections and taxation in ways that make British firms more competitive.

The UK agrees, as per the Withdrawal Agreement, that this is the best outcome. However, it seems to think that the agreement to do so should be more of a gentlemen’s agreement than something formally locked in place. Which, given the EU’s obsession with rules, is freaking people out in Brussels.

The UK rejects that any formal oversight is needed. The EU believes that this can only be achieved with “sufficient guarantees for a level playing field so as to uphold corresponding high levels of protection over time” in areas ranging from state aid to competition law.

If you’re sitting in Brussels, the UK is breaking away from what it knew was going to have to be a formal agreement. If you’re in Downing Street, the EU is suddenly trying to squeeze you on a trade deal and force the UK to hand over some of its independence. As things stand, neither side’s position is acceptable to the other.

There are numerous other areas of disagreement, from the role that EU courts will play in the UK’s legal system (the UK says none, the EU says some) and cooperation on Europe’s security policy.

A delicate power balance

As difficult as this all seems, there are two ways of looking at it. On the one hand, these red lines can’t be moved and we will never get trade talks. On the other, it shows where both sides have room to negotiate. And looking at it from London, Johnson’s domestic position is arguably securer than his political counterparts in France, Germany, Italy and Dublin. Which gives him political capital at home.

And political stability matters when it comes to talking to Europe. The fact that Johnson has a parliamentary majority of more than 80, whatever he decides means that Brussels is negotiating with a man who will follow through on his words.

This could mean that he powers ahead with a hard Brexit, sure. But there is also a world in which Johnson moves closer to Brussels and uses his personal charm to sell a deal to Brexiteers. After all, he managed to shove what was in large part Theresa May’s Brexit deal down their throats last year, lubricated with sufficient champagne that they couldn’t help but swallow.

While EU officials accept that Johnson’s strength at home also gives him power at the negotiating table, they remain confident that the power of 27 versus one and the potential for no deal doing untold havoc to the British economy means Johnson will use his domestic power to take the less risky option and move closer to Europe.

But that assumes Johnson actually wants to move this time around. Last autumn, Johnson was working to alter a deal agreed by his predecessor that in some respects bought him time to negotiate a harder Brexit, if that’s what he wanted. The trouble is, no one really knows what he wants. Is this all a strategy of brinksmanship in the hopes Brussels will blink? Or does Johnson really value sovereignty over potential economic turmoil?

“As so often, this looks like an exercise in making it up as you go along, without a clear strategic objective in mind, let alone a cunning plan,” says Usherwood.

Which all makes for an exciting political story. It’s just a shame that one man’s gamble speaks for a nation of more than 66 million people.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Regno Unito, Unione Europea

Macron, Regno Unito, Unione Europea ed il problema della pesca.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela

2020-03-01.

Acque Territoriali 493px-Zonmar-it.svg

Premettiamo subito una precisazione terminologica. Il diritto internazionale stabilisce che gli stati esercitino la propria sovranità nazionale sulle acque marine che li bagnano, con le seguenti regole: le acque territoriali si profondano per 12 miglia nautiche dalla costa, la zona contigua per altre 12 miglia marine, e la zona economicamente esclusiva per duecento miglia nautiche. Ricordiamo come un miglio nautico ammonti a 1,852 metri (esattamente 1,851.85 metri).

*

Le acque della zona economicamente esclusiva del Regno Unito sono particolarmente pescose: esse erano aperte a tutti i pescherecci dell’Unione Europea quando il Regno Unito vi afferiva, ma con la Brexit sono ritornate sotto il controllo inglese. Il Regno Unito non ha la minima intenzione di ammettere pescherecci stranieri nelle acque ove esercita la propria sovranità, mentre la Unione Europea vorrebbe continuare come se la Brexit non fosse avvenuta.

Questo è uno dei tanti contenziosi che si sono aperti con la fuga del Regno Unito dall’Unione: quel pescato costituisce infatti una buona quota del pesce consumato nel continente.

2020-02-25__UK Pesca

*

«French President Emmanuel Macron has said he is “not sure” a UK-EU trade deal will be struck by 31 December, the end of the Brexit transition period»

«Mr Macron said negotiations starting in March will be “tense”, with fishing rights a key point of contention»

«It comes as the UK government signalled it would publish its mandate for the trade deal later this week. …. In the document, ministers are expected to reiterate their desire for a Canada-style deal with few tariffs on goods»

«”Anyway, it is going to become more tense because [the British] are very hard.”»

«Mr Macron also said fishing rights could be a sticking point in negotiations»

«The UK has said it will consider a deal on fisheries but it must be based on the notion that “British fishing grounds are first and foremost for British boats”»

«But EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier has said such a deal cannot happen»

«The EU has repeatedly warned that the UK cannot expect to enjoy continued “high-quality” market access if it insists on diverging from EU social and environmental standards»

* * * * * * *

Al pari del Canada, del Giappone o della South Korea, il Regno Unito è uno stato indipendente e sovrano, che vuole trattare ed essere trattato come tale.

La Unione Europea ha ripetutamente dichiarato che nessun accordo sia possibile con il Regno Unito, senza che questo riconosca il rule of law europeo e si sottometta ai giudizi delle corti di giustizia europee.

La chiave di volta della posizione inglese invece sembrerebbe essere questa frase:

«”How would you feel if the UK demanded that, to protect ourselves, the EU dynamically harmonise with our national laws set in Westminster and the decisions of our own regulators and courts?»

È un muro contro muro, ma Mr Johnson governa uno stato sovrano, e non sembrerebbe essere il tipo da farsi intimorire.

Timmermns. Lettere aperta al popolo inglese sulla Brexit.

Brexit. David Frost, negoziatore di Johnson, ribadisce il no alle corti europee.

Brexit. La fermezza di Johnson lascia nel panico l’Unione Europea.

Brexit. Il Regno Unito manda al diavolo le ‘regole’ dell’Unione Europea.

«The PM is expected to tell the EU in the speech that he will accept no alignment, no jurisdiction of the European courts, and no concessions to any Brussels’ demands when talks start in March»

«The government also wants to make progress in striking free trade agreements with countries such as the United States, Japan, Australia and New Zealand»

«One option the PM could support would be a Canada-style free-trade deal which allows tariff-free trade for the majority of goods, but not include the UK’s dominant service industry.»

«We won’t take your rules, PM to tell Brussels»

*


Brexit: Emmanuel Macron ‘not sure’ of UK-EU trade deal by end of year.

French President Emmanuel Macron has said he is “not sure” a UK-EU trade deal will be struck by 31 December, the end of the Brexit transition period.

Mr Macron said negotiations starting in March will be “tense”, with fishing rights a key point of contention.

It comes as the UK government signalled it would publish its mandate for the trade deal later this week.

In the document, ministers are expected to reiterate their desire for a Canada-style deal with few tariffs on goods.

While a trade deal is hammered out with the EU, the UK is following the majority of the bloc’s rules.

The UK is in this transition period until 31 December following its departure from the EU on 31 January.

“I am not sure that an agreement will be reached between now and the end of the year,” Mr Macron said at a meeting with fishermen in Paris on Saturday.

“Anyway, it is going to become more tense because [the British] are very hard.”

Mr Macron also said fishing rights could be a sticking point in negotiations.

The UK has said it will consider a deal on fisheries but it must be based on the notion that “British fishing grounds are first and foremost for British boats”.

Mr Macron’s comments come as the UK government signalled it would publish detailed demands for a trade deal.

The mandate is due to be signed off on Tuesday and will be published online and in Parliament on Thursday, the BBC’s Jonathan Blake said.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s chief Brexit negotiator, David Frost, called for a “Canada-Free Trade Agreement-type relationship” with the EU in a speech in Brussels earlier this month – and the mandate will repeat these demands.

But EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier has said such a deal cannot happen.

Mr Barnier said the EU was ready to offer an “ambitious partnership” with the UK post-Brexit, but its “particular proximity” meant it would be different.

Under Canada’s agreement with the EU, which took seven years to negotiate, import tariffs on most goods have been eliminated between the two countries, though there are still customs and VAT checks.

The EU has repeatedly warned that the UK cannot expect to enjoy continued “high-quality” market access if it insists on diverging from EU social and environmental standards.

UK-EU trade negotiations, led by Mr Barnier and Mr Frost, are due to begin in Brussels on 2 March.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Regno Unito, Unione Europea

Johnson. O accordo solo economico, o a giugno rottura.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-02-29.

Johnson Boris - Improta 001

«The UK has warned the EU it will walk away from trade talks in June unless there is a “broad outline” of a deal»

*


Il 25 febbraio la Segreteria Generale del Consiglio Europeo aveva inviato alle Delegazioni un ponderoso documento, ST 5721/20 ADD 1; ST 5870/20 ADD1 REV2:

Annex to Council Decision authorising the opening of negotiations with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for a new partnership agreement.

Ne estraiamo alcuni passaggi, ricordando come siano stati scritti in un linguaggio ‘politicamente corretto’.

«The envisaged partnership between the Union and the United Kingdom, should be based on and refer, inter alia, to the following underlying principles and key objectives:

– recognise that prosperity and security are enhanced by the rules-based international order, defending individual rights and the rule of law, high standards of protection of workers’ and consumers’ rights and of the environment, the fight against climate change, and free and fair trade; ….

It should also provide for automatic suspension if the United Kingdom were to abrogate domestic law giving effect to the ECHR, thus making it impossible for individuals to invoke the rights under the ECHR before the United Kingdom’s courts ….

The envisaged partnership should provide for suspension of the law enforcement and judicial cooperation set out in the security partnership, if the adequacy decision is repealed or suspended by the Commission or declared invalid by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). ….

The respect for and safeguarding of human rights and fundamental freedoms, democratic principles, the rule of law including the United Kingdom’s continued commitment to respect the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and support for non-proliferation should constitute essential elements for the cooperation envisaged in the partnership ….

The fight against climate change, as elaborated in the UNFCCC process and in particular in the Paris Agreement should also constitute an essential element of the envisaged partnership.»

*


Più che un documento, questo è un diktat. La Brexit sarebbe stata inutile.

Mr Johnson ha risposto immediatamente con una nota del suo Governo:

The Future Relationship with the EU. The UK’s Approach to Negotiations.

«It is a vision of a relationship based on friendly cooperation between sovereign equals, with both parties respecting one another’s legal autonomy and right to manage their own resources as they see fit. Whatever happens, the Government will not negotiate any arrangement in which the UK does not have control of its own laws and political life. That means that we will not agree to any obligations for our laws to be aligned with the EU’s, or for the EU’s institutions, including the Court of Justice, to have any jurisdiction in the UK. ….

All these agreements should have their own appropriate and precedented governance arrangements, with no role for the Court of Justice. ….

The arrangements will reflect the regulatory and judicial autonomy of the UK and accordingly there will be no role for the Court of Justice of the European Union in the dispute resolution mechanism»

Il Regno Unito è andato alla Brexit proprio a causa del ‘rule of law’, delle corti di giustizia europee, e dei così detti ‘human right’. Per non parlare poi del ‘clima’.»

Di seguito un sunto succinto dei contenuti:

«The UK document says:

– The UK “will not negotiate any arrangements in which the UK does not have control of its own laws and political life”

– The UK’s aim is for a trading relationship with the EU similar to the ones the 27-nation bloc has with Canada, Japan and South Korea

– There will be no jurisdiction for EU law or the European Court of Justice in the UK

– The UK will rely on World Trade Organization rules under an arrangement with the EU similar to Australia’s if progress on a comprehensive deal cannot be made

– A separate agreement on fisheries is needed, to reflect the fact that “the UK will be an independent coastal state at the end of 2020”

– The government wants to agree a “broad outline” of a deal with the EU “capable of being rapidly finalised by September” in the next four months

– If that does not happen it will decide whether to switch focus to leaving on WTO terms at the end of December»

* * * * * * *

«The UK has warned the EU it will walk away from trade talks

in June unless there is a “broad outline” of a deal»

*


Orbene, i liberal socialisti adesso devono decidersi.

O accettano di rinunciare ad imporre la loro Weltanschauung, oppure le trattative cessano a giugno.

Sarà in ogni caso uno smacco solenne, una sconfitta senza possibilità di appello.

*


Post-Brexit talks: UK prepared to walk away in June if no progress

The UK has warned the EU it will walk away from trade talks in June unless there is a “broad outline” of a deal.

Michael Gove told MPs the UK wanted to strike a “comprehensive free trade agreement” in 10 months.

But the government would not accept any alignment with EU laws as the EU is demanding, with Mr Gove adding: “We will not trade away our sovereignty.”

The EU has already set out its priorities ahead of the formal start of the talks on Monday.

The government has published a 30-page document outlining its priorities for the talks.

The UK document says:

– The UK “will not negotiate any arrangements in which the UK does not have control of its own laws and political life”

– The UK’s aim is for a trading relationship with the EU similar to the ones the 27-nation bloc has with Canada, Japan and South Korea

– There will be no jurisdiction for EU law or the European Court of Justice in the UK

– The UK will rely on World Trade Organization rules under an arrangement with the EU similar to Australia’s if progress on a comprehensive deal cannot be made

– A separate agreement on fisheries is needed, to reflect the fact that “the UK will be an independent coastal state at the end of 2020”

– The government wants to agree a “broad outline” of a deal with the EU “capable of being rapidly finalised by September” in the next four months

– If that does not happen it will decide whether to switch focus to leaving on WTO terms at the end of December

The UK officially left the EU at the end of January, but is continuing to abide by many EU rules while talks on a permanent trading relationship take place.

Mr Johnson has pledged to get a deal with the EU by the end of the so-called transition period – 31 December 2020 – and has said he is not prepared to extend that deadline.

The UK’s negotiating team will be led by Mr Johnson’s Europe adviser David Frost.

———-

Analysis from BBC Political Correspondent Leila Nathoo

Thought Brexit was done?

Sorry to disappoint, but the process of defining Britain’s new relationship with the EU as a non-member state is only just getting going.

We’ll soon be back to the days of crunch talks, the prospect of no deal and the two sides locking horns.

What’s different now though?

Boris Johnson has a huge majority and gone are the days of disunity in the Conservative party that we saw under Theresa May.

So the government is being forthright about what it wants from these negotiations – to pull away from the EU and form a new relationship with the bloc as other non-member states have already done.

We can already see where the flashpoints are likely to be.

But the Conservative manifesto promised a negotiated trade agreement this year – we’ll see in the coming months how likely that’s looking.

———-

How far apart are the two sides?

Both sides agree that the UK will not undercut existing regulations on the environment, workers rights, competition and international tax principles.

But, says BBC Brussels reporter Adam Fleming, there are “some big obvious flashpoints”.

‘Dynamic alignment’: The UK does not want to follow EU legislation as it is updated in the future. The EU is concerned about the UK gaining a competitive advantage.

State aid: The UK wants the freedom to subsidise domestic industries of its choice. Brussels wants state aid restrictions to continue “in perpetuity”.

Governance: The EU wants a “blockbuster” agreement covering everything from fisheries, aviation, energy to immigration. The UK wants different deals in these areas.

Fishing: The UK wants quota deals like the EU has with Iceland or Norway. The EU wants continued access to UK waters.

———-

A Canada-style deal?

The EU’s chief negotiator Michel Barnier has said Brussels is prepared to give the UK “super-preferential access” to the EU market of 450 million people.

But he said the UK has to accept alignment with EU rules as they develop to ensure fair competition with EU states, effectively ruling out a Canada-style deal.

“The UK says that it wants Canada. But the problem with that is that the UK is not Canada,” Mr Barnier told an event at the European Parliament on Wednesday.

“This is because of Britain’s proximity to the EU and the much larger trade volumes it has with the EU than with Canada.”

Michael Gove, the minister in charge of delivering Brexit, hit back in his statement to MPs, saying: “Geography is no reason to undermine democracy.

“We will not be seeking to dynamically align with EU rules on EU terms governed by EU laws and EU institutions.”

What are the opposition parties saying?

Labour’s shadow Exiting the EU minister Paul Blomfield said the government’s negotiating strategy was “frankly underwhelming”.

He told MPs the government had a “cavalier disregard” for the consequences of failing to conclude a deal in the next 10 months and the uncertainty that would mean for business.

The Scottish National Party’s Pete Wishart said: “This is nothing other than a routemap to the cherished no-deal – the real ambition of these Brexit zealots.”

Critics say leaving without an agreement and going to World Trade Organisation rules – the terms countries use to set tariffs (taxes) on goods when they do not have free-trade deals – could damage the economy.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Regno Unito, Unione Europea

Brexit. L’Unione inizia a calare i toni.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-02-29.

Johnson Boris - Improta 001

La posizione di Mr Johnson nelle trattative con l’Unione Europea sono chiarissime:

«The PM … will accept no alignment, no jurisdiction of the European courts, and no concessions to any Brussels’ demands when talks start in March»

«The government also wants to make progress in striking free trade agreements with countries such as the United States, Japan, Australia and New Zealand»

«One option the PM could support would be a Canada-style free-trade deal which allows tariff-free trade for the majority of goods, but not include the UK’s dominant service industry.»

«We won’t take your rules, PM to tell Brussels»

*

«Brexit negotiator says UK must be able to set its own laws»

«The UK “must have the ability to set laws that suit us,” the PM’s chief Brexit negotiator has said in a speech in Brussels»

«David Frost has set out the UK’s stance ahead of post-Brexit trade negotiations, due to start next month. … He dismissed the idea an EU court would have a role in future trade disputes, saying: “We only want what other independent countries have.”»

«It is central to our vision that we must have the ability to set laws that suit us – to claim the right that every other non-EU country in the world has»

«”How would you feel if the UK demanded that, to protect ourselves, the EU dynamically harmonise with our national laws set in Westminster and the decisions of our own regulators and courts?»

*

La posizione dell’Unione Europea è altrettanto chiara.

«The EU wants the UK to sign up to strict rules on fair and open competition – known as level-playing-field guarantees – so if British companies are given tariff-free access to the EU market, they cannot undercut their rivals»

«The EU has repeatedly warned that the UK cannot expect to enjoy continued “high-quality” market access if it insists on diverging from EU social and environmental standards. …. It also wants the European Court of Justice to have a legal role in policing any free trade agreement reached»

* * * * * * *

Queste argomentazioni possono essere approfondite leggendo i seguenti articoli.

Johnson, identitario sovranista, non invita la ‘stampa’ dei liberals.

Johnson, identitario sovranista, attacca la Bbc liberal socialista.

Brexit. La fermezza di Johnson lascia nel panico l’Unione Europea.

Brexit. David Frost, negoziatore di Johnson, ribadisce il no alle corti europee.

Unione Europea. I liberal socialisti tentano il colpo di stato

La rivolta di Germania, Paesi Bassi, Danimarca, Svezia ed Austria

Germania. L’industria si ribella.

Eurostat. Produzione Industriale Tedesca -7.2% anno su anno.

Brexit. E moh come fa l’EU a compensare almeno 200 mld al giorno?

Laura Kövesi. La Nancy Pelosi dell’Unione Europea.

Brexit. Accordo di divorzio esposto per punti.

Brexit. Il Regno Unito manda al diavolo le ‘regole’ dell’Unione Europea.

Brexit. Macron la indica come ‘avvertimento storico’.

Brexit. L’Unione Europea piglierà una severa batosta. Un sacco di miliardi.

* * * * * * *

A marzo dovrebbero iniziare i colloqui tra Regno Unito ed Unione Europea, ed ora quest’ultima inizia ad abbassare i toni dello scontro.

«Siamo pronti a offrire al Regno Unito un accesso super preferenziale ai nostri mercati. Questo con un concorrente leale. È qualcosa che possiamo fare senza garanzie certe che il Regno Unito eviterà ingiusti vantaggi competitivi? La risposta, temo, è semplice: non possiamo»

Una cosa è richiedere clausole che evitino ingiusti vantaggi competitivi, ed una totalmente differente che il Regno Unito debba accettare la giurisdizione delle corti europee.

E questo sembrerebbe esse un grande passo avanti, anche se è una clamorosa sconfitta della sinistra europea.

*


Brexit: Barnier, accesso preferenziale ai mercati Ue solo se Gran Bretagna leale

Accordo? ‘Difficile, poco tempo’.

“Siamo pronti a offrire al Regno Unito un accesso super preferenziale ai nostri mercati. Questo con un concorrente leale. È qualcosa che possiamo fare senza garanzie certe che il Regno Unito eviterà ingiusti vantaggi competitivi? La risposta, temo, è semplice: non possiamo”. Così il capo negoziatore Ue per la Brexit Michel Barnier intervenendo ad un evento al Parlamento Ue. “Il Regno Unito non è il Canada” ha aggiunto ricordando di avere ricevuto un “mandato a condurre nuovi negoziati per arrivare ad un accordo con il regno Unito anche se sarà complicato, difficile ed in un tempo limitato”.

“Non credo che il Regno Unito diventerà una sorta di Singapore sul Tamigi, ma ciò significa che non dovrebbe essere un problema per il Regno Unito concordare una serie di regole di base”, ha aggiunto, Barnier. 

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Regno Unito, Unione Europea

Brexit. David Frost, negoziatore di Johnson, ribadisce il no alle corti europee

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-02-23.

Johnson Boris - Improta 001

«Brexit negotiator says UK must be able to set its own laws»

«The UK “must have the ability to set laws that suit us,” the PM’s chief Brexit negotiator has said in a speech in Brussels»

«David Frost has set out the UK’s stance ahead of post-Brexit trade negotiations, due to start next month. … He dismissed the idea an EU court would have a role in future trade disputes, saying: “We only want what other independent countries have.”»

«It is central to our vision that we must have the ability to set laws that suit us – to claim the right that every other non-EU country in the world has»

«The UK wants a Canada-type free trade agreement with the EU, Mr Frost said»

«If this cannot be agreed, then Britain will trade on the basic international terms it currently follows with Australia»

«The EU wants the UK to sign up to strict rules on fair and open competition – known as level-playing-field guarantees – so if British companies are given tariff-free access to the EU market, they cannot undercut their rivals»

«The EU has repeatedly warned that the UK cannot expect to enjoy continued “high-quality” market access if it insists on diverging from EU social and environmental standards. …. It also wants the European Court of Justice to have a legal role in policing any free trade agreement reached»

«”How would you feel if the UK demanded that, to protect ourselves, the EU dynamically harmonise with our national laws set in Westminster and the decisions of our own regulators and courts?»

«The question is whether that can be reconciled with the EU’s position that it has to apply more stringent safeguards to its neighbour than it does to Canada, Japan or South Korea»

* * * * * * *

I liberal socialisti dell’Unione Europea si sono cacciati in un vicolo cieco.

Al pari del Canada, del Giappone o della South Korea, il Regno Unito è uno stato indipendente e sovrano, che vuole trattare ed essere trattato come tale. La chiave di volta sembrerebbe essere questa frase:

«”How would you feel if the UK demanded that, to protect ourselves, the EU dynamically harmonise with our national laws set in Westminster and the decisions of our own regulators and courts?»

È del tutto evidente come i liberal socialisti europei siano destinati a perdere la faccia.

Non riusciranno mai ad imporre al Regno Unito proprio quelle corti di giustizia dalle quali è fuggito con la Brexit.

Si facciano pure venire le coliche colecistiche ed anneghino tranquillamente nella bile, furibondi di rabbia impotente: nessuno può accettare condizioni così vistosamente ingiuste. Le corti di giustizia europee sono disgustosamente partigiane ed ideologizzate. Poi, ma chi mai si credono di essere?

*


Brexit negotiator says UK must be able to set its own laws.

The UK “must have the ability to set laws that suit us,” the PM’s chief Brexit negotiator has said in a speech in Brussels.

David Frost has set out the UK’s stance ahead of post-Brexit trade negotiations, due to start next month.

He dismissed the idea an EU court would have a role in future trade disputes, saying: “We only want what other independent countries have.”

It comes as France warns Britain to expect a bruising battle during talks.

Acting Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey said: “Boris Johnson should listen to the views of British businesses who want to maintain the closest possible alignment with the European Union.”

Addressing students and academics at the Université libre de Bruxelles, Mr Frost said: “It is central to our vision that we must have the ability to set laws that suit us – to claim the right that every other non-EU country in the world has.

“So to think that we might accept EU supervision on so-called level playing field issues simply fails to see the point of what we are doing.”

He said this was not a “a simple negotiating position which might move under pressure – it is the point of the whole project”.

The UK wants a Canada-type free trade agreement with the EU, Mr Frost said. If this cannot be agreed, then Britain will trade on the basic international terms it currently follows with Australia.

He said the UK will set out more details of its vision for the future relationship with the EU next week.

Mr Frost also reiterated the government’s insistence that it will not extend the transition period beyond the end of this year.

The transition period runs until 31 December 2020, during which time the UK continues follow EU rules – including freedom of movement.

It is intended to allow time for the UK and the EU to agree a post-Brexit trade agreement.

One of the key sticking points could be the idea of ensuring a level playing field – which was referred to by Mr Frost in his speech.

The EU wants the UK to sign up to strict rules on fair and open competition – known as level-playing-field guarantees – so if British companies are given tariff-free access to the EU market, they cannot undercut their rivals.

The EU has repeatedly warned that the UK cannot expect to enjoy continued “high-quality” market access if it insists on diverging from EU social and environmental standards.

It also wants the European Court of Justice to have a legal role in policing any free trade agreement reached.

But in his speech, Mr Frost asked: “How would you feel if the UK demanded that, to protect ourselves, the EU dynamically harmonise with our national laws set in Westminster and the decisions of our own regulators and courts?

“The more thoughtful would say that such an approach would compromise the EU’s sovereign legal order.”

A rare appearance by the PM’s man in Brussels

This was a rare public appearance by the man who’ll run Boris Johnson’s negotiations with the EU.

David Frost told the audience at a university in Brussels that the whole point of the UK’s departure was so it could set its own laws for its own benefit.

And that’s why Britain couldn’t accept the continued application of European rules or the involvement of Brussels in competition policy as the conditions for an ambitious free trade agreement.

The question is whether that can be reconciled with the EU’s position that it has to apply more stringent safeguards to its neighbour than it does to Canada, Japan or South Korea.

This carefully controlled event in front of some students, a few diplomats and a lot fewer journalists was designed to show the post-Brexit politics of Britain, not to spell out the government’s opening negotiating position in detail.

That’ll come next week, when the EU is expected to do the same.

Speaking on Sunday, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian predicted the two sides would “rip each other apart” as they strove for advantage in the negotiations.

“But that is part of negotiations, everyone will defend their own interests,” he added.

He also said it would be tough for the UK to achieve its aim of agreeing a free trade deal by the end of the year.

Speaking at a security conference in Munich, Mr Le Drian said the two sides were far apart on a range of issues.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Giustizia, Regno Unito, Stati Uniti

Prescrizione. Se si adottasse il metodo sassone si vivrebbe felici.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-02-16.

Lupo__001__

Nel Regno Unito la giustizia si basa sul commonon law. Pur nella sua variegata complessità, il corpo delle sentenze pregresse suggerisce

«limiti temporali riferiti all’estinzione non del reato ma dell’esercizio del potere dello Stato di proporre l’azione in giudizio, allo scopo di garantire l’acquisizione di prove genuine e un giusto processo a una distanza di tempo non eccessiva rispetto ai fatti contestati. …. dove l’azione va avviata entro sei mesi dalla commissione del reato» [Fonte]

* * *

Similmente negli Stati Uniti,

«dove Quinto e Sesto emendamento garantiscono l’imputato dal fatto che il rappresentante dell’accusa danneggi la difesa e guadagni vantaggio processuale dal tardare a chiudere le indagini rispetto a quanto previsto dalle norme sullo “speedy trial” (30 giorni dalla notizia di reato per stilare l’accusa e poi altri 70 giorni per instaurare il giudizio)» [Fonte]

* * * * * * *

Siamo perfettamente consci che questa sintesi di un problema così altamente complesso è brutale e che vi siano molte eccezioni, che però sono e rimangono eccezioni: non sono per nulla la norma.

Nulla vieta che la Magistratura esegua indagini, coperte da segreto istruttorio, ma da quando invia la notifica di reato ha un mese per stilare l’accusa formale e due mesi per portare l’imputato in giudizio.

La differenza con l’attuale situazione italiana dovrebbe essere evidente.