EU EU summit collapses as leaders struggle to fill €75bn Brexit hole - It's between the "Frugals" vs the "Friends of Cohesion"

EU summit collapses as leaders struggle to fill €75bn Brexit hole
States deeply divided over budget as big contributors reject plan for them to pay more
Daniel Boffey in Brussels
Fri 21 Feb 2020 19.31 GMTFirst published on Fri 21 Feb 2020 11.25 GMT

Angela Merkel, Emmanuel Macron and Charles Michel
Angela Merkel, Emmanuel Macron and Charles Michel at the EU summit. Photograph: Yves Herman/AP

A summit of EU leaders seeking to fill a €75bn hole in the bloc’s budget left by Brexit dramatically collapsed after Angela Merkel led major contributors in rejecting a proposal that would have left them paying billions more.
The meeting in Brussels was brought to an abrupt end on Friday evening with the leaders deeply divided, leaving the European council president, Charles Michel, to admit: “We need more time.”
The UK’s departure has left EU states struggling to fund plans over the next seven years to tackle the climate emergency, aid poorer regions and continue to subsidise farmers through the common agricultural policy.
The 27 heads of state and government must agree on a budget for the next seven years, and the European parliament must give its endorsement, before the end of 2020, to avoid the EU’s spending programmes grinding to a halt. “We are super, super late,” admitted one EU official.
Michel, a former prime minister of Belgium, came under fire during the summit, which started on Thursday afternoon, for aiming “far too high” with a proposed budget of 1.074% of the bloc’s gross national income (€1.094tn).
Four member states, known as the “frugals” – the Netherlands, Denmark, Austria and Sweden – have insisted that the EU budget amounts to no more than 1% of the bloc’s gross national income.

They received the support of Merkel, the German chancellor, in opposing proposals that would slash the rebates they receive on their contributions, designed to ensure that the biggest contributors do not overpay.
Play Video
EU leaders express concern over filling €75bn Brexit shortfall – video
One EU diplomat said of Michel: “He wanted enough cash to buy a Range Rover; we only have the money for a Volkswagen – and worst of all he asked Mutti [Merkel] to pay for the Range Rover.”

Responding to claims from reporters that the summit had been a failure, Michel insisted that the issue had to be debated at the “highest political level” and that he now better understood the member states’ positions. “As my grandmother used to say, ‘In order to succeed we have to at least try,’” Michel said.
A late suggestion on Friday tabled by the European commission proposed to reduce the size of the additional burden on the the biggest payers, including Germany, through significant cuts in the EU’s science and research programmes. The compromise proposal would trim €10bn off a budget put forward by Michel.
Under the new plan, the four “frugal” member states and Germany would retain their rebates. France would also see increased cash for its farmers through the common agricultural policy.
The proposal failed to secure the unanimous support of the leaders, however. “That is democracy,” the European commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, said at a press conference at the end of the summit. “It is a good tradition in democracy to debate on the different views, the different emphases … We are not there yet, but we are in a good way.”
Merkel told reporters: “The differences were simply too big.”
Diplomats from the self-styled “friends of cohesion” grouping, consisting of the net recipients of EU cash, put the failure down to a lack of solidarity among the richest member states.
The rightwing nationalist prime minister of Hungary, Viktor Orbán, who has built much of his success on attacking Brussels, told reporters: “Our ambition isn’t only to be very strong friends of the cohesion policy, but to also be very strong friends that work together for a strong EU, and for a strong EU budget for the next period.”
During the last round of budget negotiations, it took the European council two summits to reach an agreement on the EU’s long-term spending, known as the multi-financial framework. A second summit is expected in March.

---

Looks like they have their work cut out for them. Bodes badly for the intimidate future of EU, I think.
 
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

But remember, Brexit will be a disaster for the UK. This is why Brussels is sweating, and the various states (who sell £357bn worth of goods to us every year) are attaching retarded caveats to their demand for a UK trade deal. We're also not allowed to "cherry pick" which would've gone a long way to fixing certain black holes in their budget.

Basically their adherence to THA PROJECT is fucking them over in all sorts of hilarious ways.

Also, fun fact. Whenever a state goes from being a net receiver to a net contributor? They start making more eurosceptic noises of various shades. The Irish began to gripe slowly more and more about the EU quite recently, to the point Sinn Fein is more eurosceptic than it used to be.


At this rate, what're the odds of Brexit creating a domino effect that further weakens the EU?

Hopefully as high as fucking possible because I want to see Guy Verhofstadt out of a job.

It's why the EU won't give us even a half decent deal like a CETA for the UK, despite offering it previously (because they thought we wouldn't go for it) Boris suddenly going "Actually that will do use really nicely thank you." because even a 98% free access to the EU from the UK will cause other states to bolt and demand the same thing. If we sign deals with other third party states who replace EU goods with cheaper global goods, the EU is fucked.

If the UK does make a success of Brexit then the EU is fucked as it proves you don't need it to make a success of your nation.

They're checkmating themselves.
 
At this rate, what're the odds of Brexit creating a domino effect that further weakens the EU?
No, more likely this will serve as a beneficial crisis that gives the EU an excuse to raise a direct income tax, or some other tax, and implement a more comprehensive system of monetary fund transfers to complement and stabilise the Euro.
 
These days when Europeans complain about Brexit rather than try to explain how both the UK and EU will be better off in the long run, I just point at them and say in a demonic voice "Your world will BURN!"

Incidentally, does anyone know a good way to make your eyes light up red without relying on post-production video effects?
 
These days when Europeans complain about Brexit rather than try to explain how both the UK and EU will be better off in the long run, I just point at them and say in a demonic voice "Your world will BURN!"

Incidentally, does anyone know a good way to make your eyes light up red without relying on post-production video effects?

UV contact lenses, you can get them in a nice red.

Once you realize that no one who matters listens to the Twitterati, Twitter is actually pretty funny to read.

Twitter is fucking hilarious to read after elections when these dickwads get their shit repeatedly pushed in. It's like watching someone be told Santa isn't real over and over.
 
How in the hell can the Krauts pay more for this? I just don't get who's driving this giant economy. Seems like there are only so many brands on the market and damn near everything is made in china and taiwan. They have a few automarken, high end watches, overpriced rifles, razors? Uh...I'm assuming they farm something in their lush bavarian hills. Where's this euro money coming from? Maybe there are a lot of domestic things I haven't seen, but even when I've travelled abroad it seemed like anything foreign was Asian with at best, a holding company or brand name in bavaria.
 
How in the hell can the Krauts pay more for this? I just don't get who's driving this giant economy. Seems like there are only so many brands on the market and damn near everything is made in china and taiwan. They have a few automarken, high end watches, overpriced rifles, razors? Uh...I'm assuming they farm something in their lush bavarian hills. Where's this euro money coming from? Maybe there are a lot of domestic things I haven't seen, but even when I've travelled abroad it seemed like anything foreign was Asian with at best, a holding company or brand name in bavaria.

They along with French Basically own the most important and prosperous companies in eastern europe along with utilities.
 
What? But the remainers assured me that Britain got way more out of the EU than they paid in! The EU should now have a budget surplus, right? Right?

Yeah, but it was only more value because they figured in how much all the rapes and stabbings would cost if you had to pay private mercenaries instead of immigrants doing it for free.
 
What? But the remainers assured me that Britain got way more out of the EU than they paid in! The EU should now have a budget surplus, right? Right?

Also, I know they're talking a budget of over a trillion dollars, but it still seems amusing to me that they're arguing about %0.074 of a difference.
they have a budget of about 1084 billion from what I can tell, that's not 0.074%, that's more around 7%, which is a pretty massive deal for a government.
 
How in the hell can the Krauts pay more for this? I just don't get who's driving this giant economy. Seems like there are only so many brands on the market and damn near everything is made in china and taiwan. They have a few automarken, high end watches, overpriced rifles, razors? Uh...I'm assuming they farm something in their lush bavarian hills. Where's this euro money coming from? Maybe there are a lot of domestic things I haven't seen, but even when I've travelled abroad it seemed like anything foreign was Asian with at best, a holding company or brand name in bavaria.
Ton of industrial equipment, e.g. Bosch, Siemens.
Chemicals and pharmacuticals, e.g. BASF, Bayer.
Service industry, e.g. T-Mobile, SAP, Aldi, Lidl.
 
How in the hell can the Krauts pay more for this? I just don't get who's driving this giant economy. Seems like there are only so many brands on the market and damn near everything is made in china and taiwan. They have a few automarken, high end watches, overpriced rifles, razors?

If the EU puts tariffs on UK exports and the UK retaliates they're going to sell fewer high-end autos.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...warn-hard-brexit-would-be-fatal-idUSKCN1PA173

In 2016, Britain was the largest single export market for German manufacturers, who sold 800,000 new cars there, or 20 percent of their overall global exports. Fewer cars are exported to China and U.S. because German carmakers have factories there.

https://www.ft.com/content/c06b1762-761d-11e8-b326-75a27d27ea5f

Then there is the category of events that did manage to intrude, but not in an obvious way. An example would be Donald Trump’s threat to impose tariffs on car imports. But what has that got to with Brexit? The anticipation of the US president’s tariffs has the potential to change the way the EU will look at its future trading relationship with the UK.

To understand this, let us imagine that the Brexit talks were to break down. The UK would crash out of the EU in March next year with no transitional deal in place. British goods entering the EU would be subject to EU tariffs, and vice versa. The EU levies a 10 per cent tax on car imports. The UK could levy reciprocal tariffs.

Now consider the position of German carmakers. According to the German association of the automotive industry, the country last year exported 769,000 cars to the UK, its single largest export market. The US came second with 494,000 cars. German carmakers also export 258,000 German-made vehicles to China, plus those produced in US and Chinese factories.

If the UK were forced into a cliff-edge Brexit in March, the German car industry would face tariffs in its two largest export markets within a few months of each other. Daimler-Benz issued a profit warning last week, and this only in relationship to the expected rise in Chinese tariffs on Mercedes cars made in the US.

Just imagine what might happen once the US levies tariffs on European cars sometime in 2019, and possibly only a few months after Brexit. If the UK were to join in a tariff war, the industry would suffer the commercial equivalent of a cardiac arrest.

This would come on top of an escalating diesel emission scandal. Mercedes may need to recall 774,000 cars to remove software-cheating devices. Add to this the long-term commercial impact of diesel bans in cities, the surge in sales of electric cars and the complex impact of artificial intelligence, and the outlook for the German industry has worsened dramatically since the Brexit referendum.

If the UK doesn't agree a free trade deal with the EU and trades on WTO terms with 10% tariffs and the US imposes tariffs on German cars, which Trump has threatened to do, it's fair to say those exports of high-end autos are going to get pretty dinged up.

In fact, it would actually make sense in that scenario to move production capacity to the UK and the US. This is good for them, but not so good for people making cars in Germany.

Tariffs are probably a bad thing in the long run, but in the short term, a country might gain from raising them.

Of course from a UK perspective, it could agree tariff free trade with essentially everywhere but the US and it would come out ahead

https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindu...ade/articles/whodoestheuktradewith/2017-02-21

Almost half (48%) of UK goods exports went to the EU in 2016. UK goods exports to the EU were worth £145 billion in 2016, or 7.4% of GDP.

If 48% goes to the EU, 52% goes elsewhere. Inside the EU the non EU stuff will get tariffed. Outside the EU it could all potentially be tariff free. And the UK runs a trade deficit with the EU but has a trade surplus with non EU countries


1582403998625.png

When it comes to Ireland, if I were the UK I'd just refuse to set up customs posts at the border on the ground of national security and let the EU build border posts and/or go to WTO court to try to force the UK to so. There's some evidence that national security is a valid reason to derogate from WTO rules. E.g.

https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/gatt_ai_e/art21_e.pdf

On 7 May 1985 the US notified the contracting parties of an Executive Order prohibiting all imports of goods and services of Nicaraguan origin, all exports from the US of goods to or destined for Nicaragua (except those destined for the organized democratic resistance) and transactions relating thereto.28 In Council discussions of this matter, Nicaragua stated that these measures contravened Articles I, II, V, XI, XIII and Part IV of the GATT, and that “this was not a matter of national security but one of coercion”.29 Nicaragua further stated that Article XXI could not be applied in an arbitrary fashion; there had to be some correspondence between the measures adopted and the situation giving rise to such adoption.30 Nicaragua stated that the text of Article XXI made it clear that the CONTRACTING PARTIES were competent to judge whether a situation of “war or other emergency in international relations” existed and requested that a Panel be set up under Article XXIII:2 to examine the issue.31 The United States stated that its actions had been taken for national security reasons and were covered by Article XXI:(b)(iii) of the GATT; and that this provision left it to each contracting party to judge what action it considered necessary for the protection of its essential security interest.32 The terms of reference of the Panel precluded it from examining or judging the validity of the invocation of Article XXI(b)(iii) by the US. Concerning the Panel decision on this issue, see page 601 and the discussion of Article XXIII below. When the Council discussed the Panel Report, Nicaragua requested that the Council recommend removal of the embargo; authorize special support measures for Nicaragua so that countries wanting to do so could grant trade preferences aimed at re-establishing a balance in Nicaragua’s preembargo global trade relations and at compensating Nicaragua for the damage caused by the embargo; and prepare an interpretative note on Article XXI. Consensus was not reached on any of these alternatives. The Panel Report has not been adopted. At the meeting of the Council on 3 April 1990 Nicaragua announced the lifting of the trade embargo. The representative of the US announced that the conditions which had necessitated action under Article XXI had ceased to exist, his country’s national security emergency with respect to Nicaragua had been terminated, and all economic sanctions, including the trade embargo, had been lifted.33

I.e. the US banned all imports and exports from Nicaragua for national security reasons and got away with it.

The UK could decide not to set up customs posts for fear of restarting The Troubles and instead have electronic declarations and enforcement away from the border. If the EU doesn't like that, it would need to go to the WTO courts.
 
Last edited:
Well, that certainly didn't take long. Boris must be silently laughing his ass off at this. This doesn't bode well for the EU and makes them look terrible internationally. It screams to all the world that brexit fucked the EU

So, who is going to pay for all those migrants now I wonder?
Cause the first round of talks expectedly didn't immediately succeed? Don't be silly.
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: aitchivey
What? But the remainers assured me that Britain got way more out of the EU than they paid in! The EU should now have a budget surplus, right? Right?

Also, I know they're talking a budget of over a trillion dollars, but it still seems amusing to me that they're arguing about %0.074 of a difference.

I was piled-on in various lefty forums in the lead up to the EU referendum just for using the term "net contributor" to describe the UK.
 
Back