L’équipe gouvernementale dirigée par Modibo Kéita a été réaménagée pour la 5ème fois le jeudi 7 juillet dernier. Ils sont désormais 34 ministres à y figurer, parmi lesquels 8 femmes contre 6 dans le précédent Gouvernement. 9 nouvelles têtes font leur entrée. Parmi les entrants, on trouve des pro-ATT, des membres des groupes armés, de la CMA et de la Plateforme, et d’autres bords politiques.
En effet, c’est un Gouvernement de large ouverture que dirige désormais le Premier ministre Modibo Kéita. Il rassemble, hormis l’opposition, tous les courants politiques de notre pays. Des partisans de l’ancien Président de la République, ATT, exilé à Dakar, y font leur entrée. Un fervent défenseur d’ATT après le coup d’Etat de 2012 y fait ses premiers pas, dans sa jeune carrière politique, dans une équipe gouvernementale.
Après le coup d’Etat de mars 2012, Amadou Koïta avait croisé le fer au sein du FDR contre la bande à Sanogo, pour défendre la République et le retour à l’ordre constitutionnel. Il a été de tous les combats pour défendre son mentor, ATT, après sa chute. On se rappelle récemment son combat pour son retour dans le cadre du Rassemblement pour la paix au Mali, un mouvement qui regroupe les partisans des différents Présidents successifs au Mali.
Un signal pour la réconciliation nationale? Koita hérite du portefeuille de la Jeunesse et de la Construction Citoyenne. Il va s’atteler à la mobilisation de la jeunesse malienne, avec la redynamisation récente du Service national des jeunes (SNJ). Le ministre Baby voit donc son département scindé en deux au profit de Président du PS Yeelen Kura. Il ne va désormais plus s’occuper que de l’Emploi et de la Formation Professionnelle.
Autre signal fort pour la réconciliation nationale, c’est l’entrée dans le Gouvernement Modibo Kéita 5 de l’ancienne rebelle Nina Walett Intallou, la Présidente des femmes du MNLA. Elle va désarmer pour promouvoir l’Artisanat et le Tourisme maliens, deux secteurs qui souffrent fort de l’impact de la crise. Son entrée au Gouvernement divise également le département de Mme N’Diaye Ramatoulaye Diallo, qui va uniquement s’atteler désormais à la promotion de la Culture malienne, en deux.
L’autre groupe armé, la Plateforme, se voit attribuer un 2ème portefeuille ministériel, avec l’arrivée de Mohamed El Moctar à la tête du ministère de la Réconciliation Nationale en lieu et place de Zahabi Oul Sidi Mohamed. Il en est à sa 2ème expérience gouvernementale après son passage au ministère de la Culture sous le régime ATT.
Dans le Gouvernement réaménagé, deux nouvelles femmes (voir ci-dessous) amènent à 8 le nombre de dames dans l’équipe gouvernementale. Il s’agit de Mme Traoré Seynabou Diop, qui remplace Mamadou Hachim Koumaré au ministère de l’Equipement, des Transports et du Désenclavement, et de Mme Kéita Aïda M’Bo, qui hérite du département de l’Environnement, de l’Assainissement et du Développement Durable en lieu et place d’Ousmane Koné, qui permute au ministère de l’Urbanisme et de l’Habitat. Il y remplacera Dramane Dembélé, chassé du Gouvernement.
Le Président du CNID, Me Mountaga Tall, permute lui aussi au département en charge de la Communication où il remplace Choguel Kokala Maïga, mis à la porte, tout comme Cheickna Seydi Amadi Diawara, débarqué du Gouvernement au profit du Président de l’ADEMA, le Pr Tiémoko Sangaré, désormais locataire du ministère des Mines.
Le département d’Abdel Karim Konaté se déconnecte de l’Industrie au profit du nouvel entrant, Mohamed Ali Ag Ibrahim, qui s’occupera du Développement Industriel de notre pays. L’Enseignement Supérieur retrouve la Recherche Scientifique, avec comme titulaire Mme le Pr Assetou Founè Samaké Migan.
Parmi les nouvelles têtes, on retrouve Malick Alhousseini, Président du COREN. Il remplace Mamadou Frankaly Kéita au ministère de l’Energie et de l’Eau, celui-ci payant cash sa gestion calamiteuse de la pénurie d’eau à Bamako et environs et les coupures intempestives d’électricité.
Autre entrée remarquable, celle du désormais avocat au Barreau de Paris, Me Mamadou Ismaila Konaté, qui remplace Mme Sanogo Aminata Mallé au ministère de la Justice et des Droits de l’Homme, Garde des Sceaux.
Youssouf Diallo
22 septembre
De violents combats, accompagnés de fortes explosions, ont opposé lundi matin dans la capitale sud-soudanaise Juba les forces loyales au président Salva Kiir aux ex-rebelles du vice-président Riek Machar, ont rapporté plusieurs témoins et sources diplomatiques à l’AFP.
Une source diplomatique occidentale a confirmé à l’AFP de violents combats dans la matinée vers l’aéroport et le quartier de Tomping, impliquant de l’artillerie lourde. L’ambassade des Etats-Unis à Juba a pour sa part fait état de « combats sérieux entre le gouvernement et les forces d’opposition » à Juba.
The Informal meeting of Environment Ministers takes place on 11 and 12 July 2016 in Bratislava.
As Brexit Britain weighs the option of a free-trade agreement to access to the EU single market, it would do well to consider the sobering example of a similar deal betweenEurope and Canada. It is relatively uncontentious, yet floundering in choppy political waters.
Known as CETA, talks on a deal concluded almost two years ago, and opposition to it has been growing ever since. Intertwined in the public consciousness with a much bigger trade pact that’s in the works with the US, the deal has become a prime target for green groups, trade unions and left wing parties, which see it as a free-market attack on regulation.
Read moreOn 12 July 2016, the Council found that Portugal and Spain had not taken effective action in response to its recommendations on measures to correct their excessive deficits.
It confirmed that they will not have reduced their deficits below 3% of GDP, the EU's reference value for government deficits, by the recommended deadline. And in both cases, it found the fiscal effort to fall significantly short of what was recommended.
The Council's decisions will trigger sanctions under the excessive deficit procedure. They are based on article 126(8) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
The Commission has 20 days to recommend further Council decisions imposing fines. Those fines should amount to 0.2% of GDP, though Portugal and Spain can submit reasoned requests within 10 days for a reduction of the fines. The Council will have 10 days to approve the fines.
"I am sure that we will have a smart, intelligent result at the end”, said Peter Kažimír, minister for finance of Slovakia and president of the Council.
In April 2011 however, after several months of market pressure on its sovereign bonds, Portugal requested assistance from international lenders. It obtained a €78 billion package of loans from the EU, the euro area and the IMF. In October 2012, the Council extended the deadline for correcting Portugal's deficit by one year to 2014, in the light of the recession that the country faced.
Economic prospects deteriorated further, and Portugal's general government deficit reached 6.4% of GDP in 2012. In June 2013, the Council extended the deadline for correcting the deficit by another year, to 2015. It set headline deficit targets of 5.5% of GDP in 2013, 4.0% of GDP in 2014 and 2.5% of GDP in 2015, consistent with 0.6%, 1.4% and 0.5% of GDP improvements in the structural balance respectively.
Portugal exited its economic adjustment programme in June 2014.
However its general government deficit came out at 4.4% of GDP in 2015, and the deadline was missed for correcting the deficit. The overshoot was largely due to a financial sector support measure (resolution of Banif), though the deficit net of one-off measures would in any case have been above 3% of GDP. The cumulative improvement in Portugal's structural balance in the 2013‑15 period is estimated by the Commission at 1.1% of GDP, significantly below the 2.5% recommended by the Council. When adjusted in the light of revised potential output growth and revenue windfalls or shortfalls, it is even slightly negative.
Overall, since June 2014 the improvement in Portugal's headline deficit has been driven by economic recovery and reduced interest expenditure in a low-interest-rate environment. The country's general government gross debt has broadly stabilised. It amounted to 129.2% of GDP at the end of 2013, 130.2% of GDP in 2014 and 129.0% of GDP in 2015, according to the Commission's spring 2016 economic forecast.
The Council concluded that Portugal 's response to its June 2013 recommendation has been insufficient. Portugal didn't correct its deficit by 2015 as required, and its fiscal effort falls significantly short of what was recommended by the Council.
SpainSpain has been subject to an excessive deficit procedure since April 2009, when the Council issued a recommendation calling for its deficit to be corrected by 2012.
In December 2009 however, the Council extended the deadline to 2013. The Commission forecast that Spain's 2009 deficit would reach 11,2 % of GDP, five percentage points more than its previous estimate.
In July 2012, the Council extended the deadline for a further year to 2014 on account of renewed adverse economic circumstances. The Commission projected that Spain's general government deficit would reach 6.3% of GDP in 2012, compared to the 5.3% previously expected.
Also in July 2012, the euro area member states agreed to provide up to €100 billion of loans for the recapitalisation of Spain's financial services industry.
In June 2013, the Council found that Spain fulfilled the conditions for extending the deadline for correcting its deficit by a further two years, setting a new deadline of 2016. It set headline deficit targets of 6.5% of GDP for 2013, 5.8% of GDP for 2014, 4.2% of GDP for 2015 and 2.8% of GDP for 2016, consistent with 1.1%, 0.8%, 0.8% and 1.2% of GDP improvements in the structural balance respectively.
Spain exited the financial assistance programme for the recapitalisation of its financial institutions in January 2014. It had used close to €38.9 billion for bank recapitalisation, plus around €2.5 billion for capitalising the country's asset management company.
Spain's general government deficit amounted to 5.9% of GDP in 2014 and 5.1% of GDP in 2015. above the intermediate targets set by the Council. A relaxation of fiscal policy in 2015 had a large impact on the fiscal outcome. The cumulative improvement in the structural balance over the 2013‑15 period amounted to 0.6% of GDP, significantly below the 2.7% recommended by the Council. When adjusted in the light of revised potential output growth and revenue windfalls or shortfalls, it is even lower.
Over the 2013‑15 period, low or even negative inflation made achievement of the fiscal targets more difficult, but this was largely offset by higher-than-expected real GDP growth. A low interest rate environment has also helped Spain reduce its deficit. The Commission's 2016 spring economic forecast projects a general government deficit of 3.9% of GDP in 2016 and 3.1% of GDP in 2017. Spain is therefore not set to correct its deficit in 2016 as required. The debt-to-GDP ratio declined from 99.3% in 2014 to 99.2% in 2015, thanks to sales of financial assets. According to the Commission's 2016 spring forecast, the debt ratio is expected to rise to 100.3% in 2016 and decline thereafter.
The Council concluded that Spain 's response to its June 2013 recommendation has been insufficient. Spain didn't reach the intermediate target set for its headline deficit in 2015 and is not forecast to correct its deficit by 2016 as required. Its fiscal effort falls significantly short of what was recommended by the Council, and it even relaxed its fiscal stance in 2015.
On 12 July 2016, the Council issued recommendations on economic, employment and fiscal policies planned by the member states.
The Council thereby concluded the 2016 "European Semester", an annual policy monitoring process. The European Council endorsed the recommendations at its meeting in June.
"We look forward to the effective implementation of these country-specific recommendations in the coming months“, said Peter Kažimír, minister for finance of Slovakia and president of the Council.
In March 2016, the European Council endorsed the following priorities:
The European Semester involves simultaneous monitoring of member states' economic and fiscal policies during a roughly six-month period every year.
In the light of policy guidance given by the European Council annually in March, the member states present each year in April:
The Council then adopts country-specific recommendations (CSRs). It provides explanations in cases where the recommendations do not correspond with those proposed by the Commission.
RecommendationsThe 2016 CSRs are addressed to 27 of the EU's 28 member states. To avoid duplication there is no CSR for Greece, as it is subject to a macroeconomic adjustment programme.
In March 2016, the Council adopted a specific recommendation on the economic policies of the euro area. It did so at an earlier stage than in previous years, to take greater account of eurozone issues when approving the recommendations for the eurozone member states.
The recommendations were adopted at a meeting of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council.
On 12 July 2016, the Council adopted new rules addressing some of the practices most commonly used by large companies to reduce their tax liability.
The directive is part of a January 2016 package of Commission proposals to strengthen rules against corporate tax avoidance. The package builds on 2015 OECD recommendations to address tax base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS), endorsed by G20 leaders in November 2015.
"This new directive aims to protect our domestic corporate tax bases against aggressive tax planning practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market", said Peter Kažimír, minister for finance of Slovakia and president of the Council. "It is therefore an important step, which also demonstrates that we see the fight against such practices not only as our common priority but also our common commitment.“
The directive addresses situations where corporates, mostly multinational groups, take advantage of disparities between national tax systems in order to reduce their tax bills. It responds to the perception of many taxpayers and SMEs that some multinationals do not pay their fair share of tax, thereby distorting tax competition within the EU's single market.
The directive covers all taxpayers that are subject to corporate tax in a member states, including subsidiaries of companies based in third countries. It lays down anti-tax-avoidance rules for situations that may arise in five specific fields:
The directive will ensure that the OECD anti-BEPS measures are implemented in a coordinated manner in the EU, including by 6 member states that are not OECD members.
Three of the five areas covered by the directive implement OECD recommendations, namely the interest limitation rules, the CFC rules and the rules on hybrid mismatches. The two others, i.e. the general anti-abuse rule and the exit taxation rules, deal with anti-tax-avoidance aspects of a 2011 proposal for an EU common consolidated corporate tax base.
ImplementationThe directive was adopted without discussion at a meeting of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council. Political agreement was reached on 17 June 2016, following a silence procedure.
The member states will have until 31 December 2018 to transpose it into their national laws and regulations, except for the exit taxation rules, for which they will have until 31 December 2019. Member states that have targeted rules that are equally effective to the interest limitation rules may apply them until the OECD reaches agreement on a minimum standard, or until 1 January 2024 at the latest.
Other initiativesWork has proceeded meanwhile on the rest of the January 2016 anti-tax-avoidance package. On 25 May, the Council approved:
The anti-tax-avoidance package follows on from a number of EU initiatives in 2015. These include a directive, adopted in December 2015, on cross-border tax rulings.
In December 2014, the European Council cited “an urgent need to advance efforts in the fight against tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning, both at the global and EU levels”.