So last night was the Politics Department Christmas meal. Suffice to say that I’m the only one in so far, possibly because I had my first Article 50-themed dream – Lord Pannick was doing donuts a la Boris, while David Davis was giving evidence to a Parliamentary Committee – and felt that sleep was no longer a good idea.
And yes, drinking was involved. And karaoke.
Anyhoo, I tell you this not simply to stress what a good bunch of colleagues I have but because my dream reminded me of a thought I’d had yesterday while watching the actual David Davis give actual evidence.
As various people have noted, there is a shift going on in government of late; namely that the campaigning mode of bright aspiration is now being tempered by some sense of what is actually possible/likely to happen. In Jolyon Maugham’s lovely phrase ”the bare swinging lightbulb of reality” has cast its unrelenting beam on Brexit, with all the uncomfortable consequences that I currently have no trouble imagining.
As I argued recently, this might be partly a matter of positioning, of politicians softening the effect of Brexit by progressive reshaping of debate and attitudes.
However, to read reports of Cabinet discussions, it’s also evident that there’s also a big pile of self-delusion and ignorance still going on and that any modification of rhetoric or objective is due to Maugham’s lightbulb.
Seen in this light, Davis’ comments that the UK’s plan won’t be ready until February must be read as that time being needed for everyone to come to a more informed understanding about such basics as access to the internal market, free movement, transition deals and budgetary contributions.
Part of this is also a growing understanding of the complexities of the EU27 side of the negotiation. At the event I co-organised on Monday with the CER, we had a great debate (that you can listen to here) about the view from Berlin, Paris, the Visegrad Four and beyond on Article 50.
Importantly, all the speakers stressed that while everyone is committed to maintaining the EU, all are also deeply interested in their domestic agendas and in making the most of the UK’s situation for their own benefit. That translates in some diverse priorities, be that keeping links with the UK (for Germany), preserving security cooperation (for France and the CEECs), defending market liberalisation (for the Dutch) or changing the EU’s future path (for everyone). Today’s European Council might resolve procedure on Article 50, but it’s unlikely to reach full agreement on what it contains.
In short, what we’re seeing here is the start of the more serious end of the shift from referendum to negotiation. To put it differently, there is more of a sense that this is not a movie so much as a big lever-arch file of detailed notes: there will not be Lord Pannick doing stunts, but rather long, complex and hard-to-resolve negotiations on many fine points of law and technicality.
This is the phase in which scrutiny will matter all the more, whatever one’s interest or view of Brexit. Where the government has been pretty consistent is in wanting to negotiate away from the prying eyes of Parliament and the media and as public interest drifts away the pressure to be open will likely drop off too. From a democratic perspective, and for anyone who’s worried about backsliding, this isn’t a good situation, but also suggests that the window of opportunity to open things up is closing down.
Christmas might traditionally be a time of rest, but this year it’s going to be very busy, as everyone tries to get their houses in order for the coming of Article 50 notification. As has been the case since 24 June, the sooner you get out there, the sooner you can set the agenda.
And now for a cup of something soothing.
The post Article 50: The Motion Picture appeared first on Ideas on Europe.
Trips and meetings of Federica Mogherini, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.
EU Heads of State or Government meet on 15 December 2016 in Brussels to discuss migration and security issues. Leaders are also discussing economy and youth, as well as the issue of the ratification of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement in the Netherlands.
Donald Trump’s surprise victory in the United States presidential election has put global climate negotiators on the back foot.
The President-elect’s promise to pull the United States out of last year’s Paris Agreement and his unabashed enthusiasm for coal slowed the momentum that negotiators had hoped to sustain at this year’s climate change talks in Marrakech, Morocco. Trump’s shocking win also provoked threats of tariffs – decision-makers in Canada, Mexico and Europe mooting the possibility of carbon duties on American products.
But there’s a better approach: challenge the incoming president to an innovation race.
That would do a lot more than a carbon tariff to fix the climate over the long term.
The carbon tariff proposal contravenes the fundamental premise of the Paris Agreement. Each nation offered its own commitments at Paris, with the negotiators then constructing a plausible path forward by putting them all together.
A key aspect of this process is periodic renegotiation to bring the sum of national commitments closer to the global goal of limiting the rise in average global temperature to two degrees Celsius or less. But the International Energy Agency says that even if they are fulfilled, the Paris commitments would lead the world to overshoot the target by 35%.
“Challenging the US to a low-carbon innovation race would tap into emotions of pride and superiority, but channel them in constructive directions”
We need another approach to a carbon tariff, which would take us back to the bad old days of top-down climate negotiations.
While setting a global cap, divvying it up among nations, and punishing countries that exceed their quota might seem logical, this approach failed miserably in the 1990s and 2000s. It left the world playing catch-up in the fight against climate change. Wielding the stick causes a backlash. It threatens national identity and self-worth, even when succumbing to pressure may appear to be the economically rational response.
The United States under President Trump would undoubtedly react badly to the carbon tariff. As Harvard economist Robert N. Stavins put it: “Is he the sort of person who would back down or would he retaliate? He seems like the kind of person who would retaliate. And then you’d have a trade war.”
If the stick of tariff threats is a bad approach, will the carrot of competition work?
Challenging the United States to a low-carbon innovation race would tap into similar emotions of pride and superiority, but channel them in constructive directions. If the United States can come up with new and better ways to produce electricity, trap carbon and save energy, Americans would save the world and make a lot of money. If the Mexicans, Canadians, and Europeans do the same… well, at least the world still gets saved.
“The cost the US’s energy innovation commitment is a mere rounding error in the context of tax cuts spending that are set to come”
A global focus on innovation would lead to new options that will make the energy services that everyone needs more affordable and more accessible. Simply making dirty energy more expensive – the carbon tariff approach – will not do that. Europe’s very high tax on gasoline, for instance, has encouraged Europeans to drive smaller cars, but it has not led to the breakthroughs in electric vehicles that the world desperately needs to kick its petroleum habit. The small carbon tariffs being suggested will have small results in the best of circumstances. Yet even relatively small investments in innovation have the potential to be truly transformative.
Mission Innovation, a lesser-known agreement which was also signed last year in Paris, provides the framework for an innovation race. Many of the world’s largest nations, including the United States, pledged to double their investments in low-carbon energy research and development by 2020.
A deep-pocketed group of global entrepreneurs, led by Bill Gates, promised to provide billions of dollars in follow-on investment to reap the fruits of this R&D in the market. They announced a US$1bn initial fund on Monday. The cost of fulfilling the US’s Mission Innovation commitment would be $6.4bn per year when fully ramped-up. That’s a mere rounding error in the context of the giant tax cuts and spending extravaganza that are set to come in the next year.
So a message to the nations of the world as they await Trump: be afraid, even very afraid, but don’t let fear lead to a counterproductive spiral of threats and counter-threats.
Stay on the sunny side, keep doing the right thing, and hope that, as Winston Churchill was famously supposed to have said, “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing… after they have tried everything else.”
IMAGE CREDIT: CC / FLICKR – Gage Skidmore
The post Challenge Trump to an innovation race, and avoid a trade war appeared first on Europe’s World.
Following the referendum in Denmark on 3 December 2015, we agree on the need for operational arrangements, minimising the negative impact of Denmark's departure from Europol on 1 May 2017, for the mutual benefit of Denmark and the rest of the European Union in the combatting of cross-border serious and organised crime and international terrorism. Such arrangements must be Denmark-specific, and not in any way equal full membership of Europol, i.e. provide access to Europol's data repositories, or for full participation in Europol's operational work and database, or give decision-making rights in the governing bodies of Europol. However, it should ensure a sufficient level of operational cooperation including exchange of relevant data, subject to adequate safeguards.
This arrangement would be conditioned on Denmark's continued membership of the European Union and of the Schengen area, on Denmark's obligation to fully implement in Danish law Directive 2016/680/EU on data protection in police matters by 1 May 2017 and on Denmark's agreement to the application of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and the competence of the European Data Protection Supervisor.
The Commission and Denmark will endeavour to initiate the necessary legal procedure as rapidly as possible and take all necessary actions, including contacts with relevant institutional actors, to ensure a swift process with a view to the new arrangements being in place by 1 May 2017 or as rapidly as possible thereafter. This is to limit to the maximum extent possible the gap between 1 May 2017 and the entry into force of the future operational agreement, in order to minimise the negative impact on cooperation and data exchange.
We acknowledge that the only way for Denmark to fully participate in the new Europol Regulation by 1 May 2017 is to make use of the procedure foreseen in Protocol No 22 to the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
To receive the Brussels Briefing in your inbox every morning, register for a free FT account here and then sign up here.
In the central Mediterranean, Europe’s forgotten crisis grinds on: 4,752 are dead or missing, while 175,000 more have risked their lives by getting into unseaworthy vessels. The EU’s leaders will meet in Brussels today, once again, to try to come up with a solution, an explanation or perhaps a scapegoat.
Read moreThe third meeting of the EU−Ukraine Association Council will take place on 19 December 2016 in Brussels.
The meeting will be chaired by High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Federica Mogherini, on behalf of the European Union. Ukraine will be represented by its Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman.
A press conference will take place after the meeting, on Monday 19 December at 11.30 in the Justus Lipsius building (main press room). A specific accreditation is needed to attend the press conference and all media opportunities.
The Association Council will discuss relations between the EU and Ukraine, specifically on:
The EU High Representative and the Prime Minister of Ukraine will also discuss more specifically developments related to Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as the EU global strategy and regional issues.
Programme - including media opportunities and information on media accreditationJournalists holding a 6-month badge (30.06.2016 - 31.12.2016) or a European Council badge (15.12.16) do not need to register. 6-month badges and European Council badges can be collected at the accreditation centre of the LEX building (14/12 from 9.30 to 13.00 and 14.00 to 19.00 - 15/12 from 8.00 to 20.00).
Other journalists must register by e-mail before Friday 16 December 13.00 to : press.centre@consilium.europa.eu, including copy of their ID and valid press card or assignment letter.
In circumstances that are sensitive politically, economically, socially and with regard to safety, relations between the EU and Niger are mainly expressed through development cooperation. Budgetary support is a major link in the cooperation between the EU and Niger. Governed by the European Development Fund, it has supported the macro-economic reform programme implemented by Niger’s government, reforms to the management of public finances and the implementation of the Socio-Economic Development Plan since 2013.
Donald TUSK, President of the European Council, meets EU Leaders.