Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Uncategorized

May: UK to seek further Brexit delay, try to break logjam

Published

7 minute read

LONDON — With Britain racing toward a chaotic exit from the European Union within days, Prime Minister Theresa May veered away from the cliff-edge Tuesday, saying Britain would seek a further delay to Brexit as its politicians sought a compromise solution to the crisis.

May made the announcement after the EU’s chief negotiator warned that a disruptive and costly Brexit was likely unless Britain broke the impasse that has paralyzed the government and Parliament.

After almost three years of refusal to bend in her insistence that Britain embrace her vision of Brexit, May said the country needed “national unity to deliver the national interest.”

Following the defeat of the government’s plan and a range of lawmaker-written alternatives, May said Britain would need a further delay to its EU departure, currently scheduled for April 12. And she offered to hold talks with opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn in an attempt to find a compromise solution.

“This debate, this division, cannot drag on much longer,” May said in a televised statement from 10 Downing St. that acknowledged her attempts to win backing for the government’s version of Brexit had failed.

European Council President Donald Tusk gave a cautious welcome to May’s change of course.

“Even if, after today, we don’t know what the end result will be, let us be patient,” he tweeted — a suggestion the EU would wait for Britain to present a clear plan.

Earlier, EU negotiator Michel Barnier offered a downbeat assessment of the situation.

“As things stand now, the no-deal option looks likely. I have to tell you the truth,” Barnier said in Brussels.

Barnier said “we can still hope to avoid it” if the intensive work in London produces a breakthrough before an April 10 EU summit.

The leaders of the EU’s 27 remaining countries have given the U.K. until April 12 to leave the bloc or to come up with a new plan, after lawmakers thrice rejected an agreement struck between the bloc and May late last year.

The House of Commons has also failed to find a majority for any alternative plan in two days of voting on multiple options.

May’s statement came after a seven-hour meeting of her Cabinet, which is split between supporters of a “soft Brexit” that keeps close economic ties with the EU, and Brexiteers who believe a no-deal exit is better than compromising.

Her words seemed to indicate that she was veering away from the possibility of a no-deal Brexit — but also that she has not given up on her own withdrawal agreement, which has been rejected by Parliament three times.

Her plan is to seek approval for the legally binding agreement — which sets out the terms of Britain’s departure and triggers a long transition period for the two sides to work out future relations — after securing cross-party political support for a vision of those future ties between the U.K. and the EU.

If she and Corbyn fail to reach agreement, May said Parliament would get to vote on a range of options — and the government would be bound by the result. It is the first time she has committed to following the instruction of lawmakers.

May said she hoped Britain could pass the agreement by May 22, in time to avoid participating in elections for the European Parliament.

A no-deal Brexit would jeopardize trade and travel, with new checks on borders and new regulations on dealings between the EU and Britain.

Barnier said the EU was prepared, but “being prepared for no deal does not mean that there will be no disruption.”

Businesses have warned that the economic impact in Britain could be devastating.

Ford of Europe Chairman Steven Armstrong said “a no-deal Brexit would be a disaster for the automotive industry in the U.K.”

Armstrong that if the U.K. can’t work out a deal on leaving the EU that guarantees “frictionless trade,” the vehicle maker “will have to consider seriously the long-term future of our investments in the country.”

Edwin Morgan, interim director general of business group the Institute of Directors, said May’s statement was “a welcome step towards compromise,” though their remained obstacles ahead.

“We urge the leader of the opposition to work with the prime minister to find a solution,” he said. “Both sides must play ball.”

Britain’s political paralysis — and May’s failure to get Parliament’s approval for the withdrawal agreement she negotiated — have exasperated EU leaders.

French President Emmanuel Macron said that if Britain’s politicians could not agree on a way forward, “they will de facto have chosen for themselves to leave without a deal.”

“We cannot avoid failure for them,” Macron said before a meeting in Paris with Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar.

But Varadkar stressed “there’s still time” for May to come to the April 10 summit with “credible” proposals.

British lawmakers intent on avoiding a no-deal Brexit have drawn up plans to prevent Britain crashing out of the bloc, by accident or design.

“We are now in a really dangerous situation with a serious and growing risk of no deal,” Labour Party legislator Yvette Cooper said.

Cooper introduced legislation, which Parliament is set to consider, this week, that would compel May to seek to extend the Brexit process beyond April 12 in order to prevent a no-deal departure.

___

Casert reported from Brussels. Mike Corder in Halfweg, Netherlands, contributed to this story.

___

Follow AP’s full coverage of Brexit at: https://www.apnews.com/Brexit

Jill Lawless, Raf Casert And Danica Kirka, The Associated Press













Storytelling is in our DNA. We provide credible, compelling multimedia storytelling and services in English and French to help captivate your digital, broadcast and print audiences. As Canada’s national news agency for 100 years, we give Canadians an unbiased news source, driven by truth, accuracy and timeliness.

Follow Author

Uncategorized

What is ‘productivity’ and how can we improve it

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Jock Finlayson

Earlier this year, a senior Bank of Canada official caused a stir by describing Canada’s pattern of declining productivity as an “emergency,” confirming that the issue of productivity is now in the spotlight. That’s encouraging. Boosting productivity is the only way to improve living standards, particularly in the long term. Today, Canada ranks 18th globally on the most common measure of productivity, with our position dropping steadily over the last several years.

Productivity is the amount of gross domestic product (GDP) or “output” the economy produces using a given quantity and mix of “inputs.” Labour is a key input in the production process, and most discussions of productivity focus on labour productivity. Productivity can be estimated for the entire economy or for individual industries.

In 2023, labour productivity in Canada was $63.60 per hour (in 2017 dollars). Industries with above average productivity include mining, oil and gas, pipelines, utilities, most parts of manufacturing, and telecommunications. Those with comparatively low productivity levels include accommodation and food services, construction, retail trade, personal and household services, and much of the government sector. Due to the lack of market-determined prices, it’s difficult to gauge productivity in the government and non-profit sectors. Instead, analysts often estimate productivity in these parts of the economy by valuing the inputs they use, of which labour is the most important one.

Within the private sector, there’s a positive linkage between productivity and employee wages and benefits. The most productive industries (on average) pay their workers more. As noted in a February 2024 RBC Economics report, productivity growth is “essentially the only way that business profits and worker wages can sustainably rise at the same time.”

Since the early 2000s, Canada has been losing ground vis-à-vis the United States and other advanced economies on productivity. By 2022, our labour productivity stood at just 70 per cent of the U.S. benchmark. What does this mean for Canadians?

Chronically lagging productivity acts as a drag on the growth of inflation-adjusted wages and incomes. According to a recent study, after adjusting for differences in the purchasing power of a dollar of income in the two countries, GDP per person (an indicator of incomes and living standards) in Canada was only 72 per cent of the U.S. level in 2022, down from 80 per cent a decade earlier. Our performance has continued to deteriorate since 2022. Mainly because of the widening cross-border productivity gap, GDP per person in the U.S. is now $22,000 higher than in Canada.

Addressing Canada’s “productivity crisis” should be a top priority for policymakers and business leaders. While there’s no short-term fix, the following steps can help to put the country on a better productivity growth path.

  • Increase business investment in productive assets and activities. Canada scores poorly compared to peer economies in investment in machinery, equipment, advanced technology products and intellectual property. We also must invest more in trade-enabling infrastructure such as ports, highways and other transportation assets that link Canada with global markets and facilitate the movement of goods and services within the country.
  • Overhaul federal and provincial tax policies to strengthen incentives for capital formation, innovation, entrepreneurship and business growth.
  • Streamline and reduce the cost and complexity of government regulation affecting all sectors of the economy.
  • Foster greater competition in local markets and scale back government monopolies and government-sanctioned oligopolies.
  • Eliminate interprovincial barriers to trade, investment and labour mobility to bolster Canada’s common market.
Continue Reading

Uncategorized

COP29 was a waste of time

Published on

From Canadians For Affordable Energy

Dan McTeague

Written By Dan McTeague

The twenty-ninth edition of the U.N. Climate Change Committee’s annual “Conference of the Parties,” also known as COP29, wrapped up recently, and I must say, it seemed a much gloomier affair than the previous twenty-eight. It’s hard to imagine a more downcast gathering of elitists and activists. You almost felt sorry for them.

Oh, there was all the usual nutty Net-Zero-by-2050 proposals, which would make life harder and more expensive in developed countries, and be absolutely disastrous for developing countries, if they were even partially implemented. But a lot of the roughly 65,000 attendees seemed to realize they were just spewing hot air.

Why were they so down? It couldn’t be that they were feeling guilty about their own hypocrisy, since they had flown in, many aboard private jets, to the Middle Eastern petrostate of Azerbaijan, where fossil fuels count for two-thirds of national GDP and 90% of export revenues, to lecture the world on the evils of flying in planes and prospering from the extraction of oil and natural gas. Afterall, they did the same last year in Dubai and there was no noticeable pang of guilt there.

It’s likely that Donald Trump’s recent reelection had a lot to do with it. Living as they do in a media bubble, our governing class was completely blindsided by the American people’s decision to return their 45th president to the White House. And the fact that he won the popular vote this time made it harder to deny his legitimacy. (Note that they’ve never questioned the legitimacy of Justin Trudeau, even though his party has lost the popular vote in the past two federal elections. What’s the saying about the modern Left? “If they didn’t have double standards, they’d have no standards at all.”)

Come January, Trump is committed to (once again) pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Accords, to rolling back the Biden Administration’s anti-fracking and pro-EV regulations, and to giving oil companies the green light to extract as much “liquid gold” (his phrase) as possible, with an eye towards making energy more affordable for American consumers and businesses alike. The chance that they’ll be able to leech billions in taxpayer dollars from the U.S. Treasury while he’s running the show is basically zero.

But it wasn’t just the return of Trump which has gotten the climate brigade down. After a few years on top, environmentalists have been having one setback after another. Green parties saw a huge drop off in support in the E.U. parliament’s elections this past June, losing one-third of their seats in Brussels.

And wherever they’ve actually been in government, in Germany and Ireland for instance, the Greens have dragged down the popularity of the coalitions they were part of. That’s largely because their policies have been like an arrow to the heart of those nations’ economies – see the former industrial titan Germany, where major companies like Volkswagen, Siemens, and the chemical giant BASF are frantically shifting production to China and the U.S. to escape high energy costs.

But while voters around the world are kicking climate ideologues to the curb, there are still a few places where they’re managing to cling to power for dear life.

Here in Canada, for instance, Justin Trudeau and Steven Guilbeault steadfastly refuse to consider revisiting their ruinous Net Zero policies, from their ever-increasing Carbon Tax, to their huge investments in Electric Vehicles and the mandates which will force all of us to buy pricey, unreliable EVs in just over a decade, and to the emissions caps which seek to strangle the natural resource sector on which our economy depends.

Minister Guilbeault was all-in on COP29, heading the Canadian delegation, which “hosted 65 events showcasing Canada’s leadership on climate action, nature-based solutions, sustainable finance, and Canadian clean technologies—while discussing gender equality, youth perspectives, and the critical role of Indigenous knowledge and climate leadership” and stood up for Canadian values such as “2SLGBTQI+” and “gender inclusivity.” Once again, in Azerbaijan, which has been denounced for its human rights abuses.

And no word yet on the cost of all of this – for last year’s COP28 the government – or should I say the taxpayers – spent $1.4M on travel and accommodations alone for the 633 member delegation. That number, not counting the above mentioned events, are sure to be higher, as Azerbaijan is much less of a travel destination than Dubai, and so has fewer flights in and available hotel rooms.

At the same time all of this was going on, Trudeau was 12,000 kms away in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,  telling an audience that carbon taxation is a “moral obligation” which is more important than the cost of living: “It’s really, really easy when you’re in a short-term survive, [to say] I gotta be able to pay the rent this month, I’ve gotta be able to buy groceries for my kids, to say, OK, let’s put climate change as a slightly lower priority.”

This is madness, and it underscores how tone-deaf the prime minister is, and also why current polling looks so good for the Conservatives that Pierre Poilievre might as well start measuring the drapes at the PMO.

He has the Trudeau Liberals’ obsessive pursuit of Net Zero policies in large part to thank for that.

The world is waking up to the true cost of the Net Zero ideology, and leaving it behind. That doesn’t mean the fight is over – the activists and their allies in government are going to squeeze as many tax dollars out of this as they possibly can. But the writing is on the wall, and their window is rapidly closing.

Dan McTeague is President of Canadians for Affordable Energy.

Continue Reading

Trending

X