Andrew Bailey has accused the European Union of holding the UK to standards it would “not agree to be held to itself” and said the UK would not be a post-Brexit “rule-taker”.
The EU has yet to grant “equivalence” status to the UK, instead demanding UK banks continue to comply with standards set in Brussels. The bloc has said it wanted to wait and see how far the UK’s new rules diverged from its own before agreeing to recognise them.
But the Bank of England governor noted in his Mansion House speech on Wednesday (10 February) that this was in contrast to all other countries the bloc has agreed trade deals with.
“The EU has argued it must better understand how the UK intends to amend or alter the rules going forwards,” Bailey said. “This is a standard that the EU holds no other country to and would, I suspect, not agree to be held to itself.”
The governor said there were two ways of interpreting the EU’s stance, “neither of which stands up to scrutiny”. The first was that the EU believes rules should never change, which he described as “unrealistic, dangerous and inconsistent”.
The second was that the EU would only grant equivalence if the UK agreed to change its rules whenever the EU did. This, Bailey countered, was “rule-taking, pure and simple”.
“It is not acceptable when UK rules govern a system ten times the size of the UK GDP and is not the test up to now to assess equivalence.”
The governor suggested that a common framework of global standards ought to be enough for both sides, noting that “less than this was enough when Canada, the US, Australia, Hong Kong and Brazil were all deemed equivalent”.
Bailey warned the UK, though, that the City must relinquish some control over its standards and rules, should the financial services industry want to agree a deal with its continental counterparts.
“The alternative of narrow domestic control is illusory – it would jeopardise achieving the very things we want, safe open markets, and likewise open economies. Above all, these bodies enable us to build the trust that enables our financial systems to stay open,” he said.
“But, we do not for a moment believe that we can maintain the arrangements we have without change. As the world around us changes, so too do we have to adapt how we achieve these public goods.
“Also, we do not participate in these global institutions with the intention to water them down, misguidedly because we think this would preserve some notion of our competitiveness as a nation. The UK could not be a global financial centre for long if we did.”
FILE PHOTO: U.S. and European Union flags are pictured during the visit of Vice President Mike Pence to the European Commission headquarters in Brussels, Belgium February 20, 2017. REUTERS/Francois Lenoir
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The European Union on Thursday acknowledged a move by the new U.S. government to refrain from imposing additional tariffs on EU goods in a long-running dispute over aircraft tariffs, and said it was ready to work to resolve trade disputes.
The U.S. Trade Representative’s office on Thursday said it had agreed with U.S. industry that it was unnecessary to revise existing tariffs on European goods at this time, refraining from changes that would have been possible during a periodic review.
The move came a day after USTR said it looked forward to working with European allies to resolve a 16-year-long battle over subsidies provided to Europe’s Airbus and its U.S. rival Boeing Co.
Asked about Thursday’s decision, an EU spokesman said, “The EU is ready to engage with the new U.S. administration on the basis of the EU-US agenda for global change we adopted on December 2. Our aim is to find solutions to our ongoing trade disputes, including on Airbus/Boeing.”
The American Italian Food Coalition, which represents more than 450 Italian companies, manufacturers and trade groups, said the move would give both sides time to work out a solution.
“The Biden Administration appropriately hit the pause button on another carousel round of tariffs,” it said.
Officials from the EU and Britain are keen to work out a deal with the administration of President Joe Biden, but talks are on ice until Biden’s pick as top trade negotiator, Katherine Tai, is confirmed in her job by the U.S. Senate. That could take several more weeks, with a confirmation hearing not yet scheduled.
Envoys from Britain and the European Union on Monday stressed their willingness to resolve the aircraft subsidies dispute.
EU Ambassador Stavros Lambrinidis said Brussels had proposed a six-month suspension of tariffs on both sides to allow for negotiations. Britain, which is no longer part of the EU but is part of the Airbus consortium, has said it is also willing to lift tariffs, possibly unilaterally, as a goodwill gesture.
Reporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by Leslie Adler
Another day, another important Netflix deal to report (often, more than one, and the day is still young…) The streaming giant has just inked a rights deal with Penguin Random House Children’s UK to develop a feature film and series based on Brian Jacques’ “Redwall” book series. Jacques’ tales chronicling the adventures of the heroic animals that inhabit the forest haven of Redwall Abbey have sold in excess of 30 million copies and been translated into more than 20 languages. The deal marks the first time that the film rights to the entire book series have been held by the same company, and the first time a feature film of any of Jacques’ works will be made.
A feature film based on the first book in the series, Redwall, is currently in development with writer Patrick McHale (Over the Garden Wall, Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio), as well as an event series based on the character of Martin the Warrior.
“We couldn’t be more delighted to announce this deal,” says Ben Horslen, Fiction Publisher, Penguin Random House Children’s. “These perennially popular stories have been etched onto the hearts of millions of readers, and we are thrilled to partner with Netflix to bring those beloved characters on screen for families worldwide to enjoy.”
Alan Ingram, representative of The Redwall Abbey Company (owner of Jacques’ intellectual property), added, “Brian often travelled the globe to tell his Redwall stories to young audiences, more often than not at their schools. Brian would have been very happy to see that Netflix shares his joy and desire to bring his stories to life as a new universe of films, series and potentially much more for audiences of all ages to enjoy. We are very excited to embark on this new endeavour with Netflix and Penguin Random House UK.”
Netflix has also just acquired worldwide rights, outside of China, for The Mitchells vs. The Machines, a new animated comedy from Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, producers of the Oscar-winning animated feature, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. The film, which up until recently had been renamed Connected, was originally slated for an October 23, 2020 release, which was then unset; with the new deal, reportedly worth more than $100 million, the feature will premiere later in 2021.
Dan Sarto is Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of Animation World Network.
A BIC statement to the 59th session of the UN Commission for Social Development was at the heart of discussions Wednesday on AI.
BIC NEW YORK — A new statement by the Bahá’í International Community (BIC) on the role of digital technologies in the advancement of civilization has been presented to the 59th session of the UN Commission for Social Development, which concludes 17 February.
“Humanity is in a period of unprecedented transition,” reads the BIC statement, titled Reflections of Our Values: Digital Technologies and a Just Transition. “Possibilities are opening for marked social change to redefine collective values and underlying assumptions. This is especially evident in the realm of digital technologies.”
Slideshow 6 imagesReflections of Our Values: Digital Technologies and a Just Transition highlights that “Possibilities are opening for marked social change to redefine collective values and underlying assumptions. This is especially evident in the realm of digital technologies.”
The statement highlights the growing consensus that digital technologies are not implicitly neutral, as has become clearer in recent years. “Technological innovation,” it reads, “much like the prevalent development paradigm, is deeply influenced by materialistic underpinnings.”
The statement was at the heart of discussions on Wednesday at an online side event during the Commission, co-hosted by the BIC together with the government of the United Arab Emirates and the NGO Committee for Social Development.
Titled “Artificial Intelligence: Ethical Dimensions of the Virtual World,” the event drew more than 100 diplomats, policy makers and civil society actors who explored a range of ethical questions such as how artificial intelligence (AI) can address the needs of diverse local communities, and how innovation and regulation can work hand in hand to advance the common good.
Slideshow 6 images
Soraya Bagheri, BIC representative and moderator of the event, said, “Emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence hold great potential to channel the human spirit to address humanity’s most pressing challenges.”
Speaking of the moral implications of technology, Ms. Bagheri continued, “One challenge we are facing today is that the speed of technological progress has outpaced the ability to reflect.” She highlighted further the need for greater participation of the human family in critical questions concerning humanity’s future, such as how AI and other digital technologies are developed.
Slideshow 6 imagesThe statement was at the heart of discussions on Wednesday at an online side event during the Commission, co-hosted by the BIC together with the government of the United Arab Emirates and the NGO Committee for Social Development, titled “Artificial Intelligence: Ethical Dimensions of the Virtual World.”
Another panelist, Hamad Khatir, Director of International Partnership with the United Arab Emirates Ministry of the Interior, echoed this sentiment, saying, “Inclusivity is a must in designing any software. … The risk of AI being designed only to serve a certain part of the world or part of society is a real possibility… that needs to be clearly assessed against criteria that place human progress at the center of all our goals.”
Slideshow 6 imagesPhotograph taken before the current health crisis. The BIC has contributed to the Commission for Social Development for years through statements and participation in the annual sessions.
Eline Chivot, Senior Adviser on Digital Policy for the European People’s Party, commented on the need for common principles in this area, stating: “[principles] give flexibility to apply a code that we can all agree on and we collectively adhere to. A sort of moral compass.”
Drawing on the concepts from the BIC statement, Douglas Allen, a professor at the University of Denver and member of the Bahá’í community, spoke about how a just digital future would allow the benefits of productivity and technology to be widely shared, greatly contributing to eliminating extremes of poverty and wealth and “the perception of a zero-sum world.”
WHO/Europe is helping Member States to be more successful at securing support from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria by staging mock reviews of their funding applications. The process has led to 9 countries and territories obtaining approval in principle for just under US$ 3 million of funding to prevent and treat these diseases.
The 9 countries and territories are Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, the Republic of Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. With the exception of Kosovo, all are on the list of 18 high-priority countries for TB control in the WHO European Region, which together bear 85% of the TB burden and 99% of the multi-drug resistant TB burden.
The Global Fund is a driving force behind major grants to fight TB, HIV/AIDS and malaria, and to strengthen health systems. It raises and invests more than US$ 4 billion per year.
In the mock review process, countries present their proposals to a panel of experts and WHO technical staff. The development of the applications is led by a country coordination mechanism with key national stakeholders and development partners.
Like other country partners, Dr Yana Terleeva, Head of the TB Diagnosis and Treatment Coordination Department of the Public Health Centre of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine, found the process extremely helpful. The stakes are high, with the Global Fund investing substantial sums to accelerate Ukraine’s efforts to implement an integrated, patient-centred model of TB and HIV care.
“The mock technical peer review provided us with an opportunity to work closely with technical experts to make the funding proposal technically sound and evidence-based,” she explains. “It also helped us refine the proposal to be sure it meets donor expectations, taking into consideration country needs and contexts. Another added benefit of the exercise is that it also contributes to national capacity-building and development.”
The technical peer review (TPR) sets high standards for countries, and Dr Terleeva acknowledges its influence on TB strategy. “The TPR has high expectations from countries in terms of prioritization of cost-effective and efficient interventions in funding proposals, provision of rationale for selected areas, and expected outcomes,” she continues.
“The TPR also strongly encourages countries to implement effective, innovative approaches in line with the latest WHO recommendations adapted to the country’s epidemiological context. Thus, the mock review assists countries to meet those expectations and to focus on the right strategic direction for their next steps in the TB response.”
According to the Global Fund’s Ms Sandra Irbe, Senior Fund Portfolio Manager for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, the mock review process has improved efficiency and taken some of the stress out of the application process.
“Having WHO experts reviewing before submission is valuable for preventing strategic mishaps,” she explains. “The experts can help guide people towards what they need to do to be successful. If the proposal is not in good shape when it reaches the Global Fund, the technical panel has to send back the application and ask them to review – it makes the process very heavy and stressful. Thanks to the mock review process, by the time the application reaches the Global Fund it is technically sound. This avoids wasting everyone’s time. It’s a critical step, especially since everything runs to tight deadlines.”
*All references to Kosovo in this article should be understood to be in the context of United Nations Security Council resolution 1244 (1999).
Call them “The Horizon Papers”: For the past few weeks, Science|Business has been publishing European Commission documents leaked to us concerning Horizon Europe, the next EU R&D programme. I want to explain why, and why it should matter to anybody who cares about progress in science and technology.
Read The Horizon Papers
Science|Business is publishing here all the draft Horizon Europe work programmes available to us. You can read them here. Or, if you have additional ones, you can send them to [email protected] (anonymously, if you wish.)
First, the short version: For several months, thousands of pages of draft planning documents have been leaking out of the Commission, spelling out how it will spend its research budget over the next seven years. We think the Commission should simply publish them: even though succeeding drafts will change, they can still help researchers plan ahead.
But Commission officials won’t do it. So we are publishing the papers ourselves.
Now, the longer version – and bear with me, please. This isn’t a little fuss over some unreadable legal texts. It’s about the fairness, and efficiency, of the EU’s public research and innovation. In the longer term, it could affect how we get new vaccines, slow climate change or reduce social inequalities in Europe. And in the short term, it certainly affects which universities and companies get the money, and which do not.
The Papers and the Papers
Calling them “The Horizon Papers” is admittedly cheeky of us: Unlike the more famous US Pentagon Papers about the Vietnam War, there’s nothing in these documents that’s secret – or at least, nothing that should be. These are thousands of pages of draft texts, which the Commission intends to finalise and publish in a few months, as it gets ready to start spending the Horizon money.
For the most part, they are drafts of the so-called work programmes with which the Commission plans and explains how it will spend the money. They fill in the many blanks in the programme’s authorising legislation – the key details a would-be grantee needs to know when planning to seek funding. For instance, the European Innovation Council work programme spells out how it will spend its €1.5 billion budget for 2021 – important for hundreds of small tech companies. The “widening” work programme signals what the Commission will do with €3.3 billion to promote east-west research collaboration. Also leaked is the standard grant contract and application template.
Why does any of this matter? If you’re in a big company or university, with the resources to choose among priorities, these funding roadmaps help you plan ahead: to strengthen a research team in a particular field, or start assembling a new research consortium that will be well-placed to apply for the money. Given that your odds of success at winning a grant were under 12% in the old programme, and could well be lower in the new one, more time to plan can push up your odds. Further, some researchers use the information to lobby for their pet projects to be written into the final plan.
But these documents aren’t yet publicly available. The Commission has not yet published them. Instead, they are circulating privately by email and online post, haphazardly (if you Google, you can find some of these already posted on university or association websites, some open and some closed). That means that those researchers who know the system and have the right contacts can read them now – and indeed, have been doing so all through last year as one draft succeeded another. And – would it surprise you? – those with the best contacts are typically at multinationals or rich northern universities. This is the “oligarchic” research system that was singled out, in a superb European Parliament study in 2018, as one of the reasons why researchers in poorer, remote institutions win so few Horizon grants.
Plug or print
What’s the problem? Why doesn’t the Commission either plug the leaks, or publish the drafts itself?
Plugging is virtually impossible. There are hundreds of officials and experts around the EU who are part of the planning process. Many of the leaks come not from Brussels, but from the member state capitals – where officials recognise the importance of the drafts and sometimes pass them to contacts; the member states have a vested interest in ensuring that their teams win. And anyway, there’s no obvious legal tool with which to stop the leaks. This isn’t classified information, with legal penalties for loose lips.
So why not publish? In part, the Commission is institutionally shy of publishing draft documents, because it knows the member states want to argue about the details privately, cutting deals: I’ll back your agenda if you back mine. Backroom deals don’t happen on a public website. Further, the long wrangling last year over the EU budget means Horizon Europe isn’t yet ready to start (notwithstanding the Commission’s fancy “launch” event on 2 February ). There are a lot of legal steps to be completed, including a final, confirmatory vote in the European Parliament. Until that’s done, the Commission is legally shy of publishing any details.
And so, we at Science|Business decided to do something about it ourselves. Through Mr Google and our own contacts, our core news team – Goda Naujokaitytė, Florin Zubaşcu, Éanna Kelly, Nuala Moran, Maximilien Guelette and myself – have been gathering as many of these draft documents as possible, writing summaries and publishing as soon as possible, no thanks to the Commission. In fact, a Commission spokesman, when asked about these papers, responded: “we don’t comment on leaked documents.” Mille grazie. (In fact, some Commission officials agree with us, and have been referring researchers to our Website to read the documents there. Thank you.)
So what?
But, you may ask, why all this fuss? Why do I care?
As a journalist – first for the Wall Street Journal and now for Science|Business – I have been following EU Framework Programmes since their start in 1984. This leakage is not new: I have seen it repeatedly (and yes, journalists like leaks; but we also like fairness.) In 2013, a similar parade of leaks attended the start of Horizon 2020, and we published some of the work programmes then. But this year, it’s on a bigger scale. It is now systemic. And that’s dangerous. If the impression grows that Horizon Europe is a game rigged for the well-connected, it risks being undermined.
And there is a broader issue here: the future of science. I believe in EU research programmes, and in most public research programmes around the world.
Science is a force for good, and somebody needs to pay for it. With matters of public interest – pandemics, climate change, social inequalities – better the government foot some of the bill and steer research for the public good, rather than leave it solely to private entities and private interests. A timely example: the COVID-19 vaccines we now hail simply would not exist today if the European Commission, the German and Spanish governments (to name two with strong coronavirus labs), the US National Institutes of Health and other public bodies had not paid the lab bills year after year, with no obvious prospect of immediate return.
But to sustain such successes, public research programmes need popular support. They can’t appear to be rigged games. And so they must be transparent. Horizon Europe must not only be, but be seen to be, fair and open to the best and brightest. We urge the Commission to fix this systemic, absurd problem before it’s too late.
epa08639756 A handout grab photo made available from a video provided by the NGO 'Sea-Watch 4' shows rescued migrants and heading to Palermo, Italy, 01 September 2020. According to reports, the charity vessel rescued 353 people and will be disembarked in Palermo after a ship quarantine. EPA/Ufficio Stampa Sea Watch HANDOUT HANDOUT EDITORIAL USE ONLY/NO SALES
Goal to relaunch economy for security and slow migration
BRUSSELS – The European Union has proposed a new agenda for the Mediterranean with a seven-billion-euro plan to stimulate the economy of Mediterranean partner countries in recovery from the Covid crisis, as well as face political instability and slow the causes of the push on irregular migration, aiming at a green transition as well as young people and women.
Investments in the 10 countries of the southern partnership (Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Syria and Tunisia) will be financed by the EU’s new Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI), which will allocate up to seven billion euros for the 2021-2027 EU budget period.
The funds could mobilise up to 30 billion euros in private and public investment in the region in the next decade.
“Europe wants to contribute directly to a long-term vision of prosperity and stability of the region, especially in the social and economic recovery from the Covid-19 crisis,” said EU Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Olivér Várhelyi.
He said new investments in the Brussels programme aim to restore security in the area – “the greatest challenge that has arisen since the Arab Spring” – and fight “irregular migration”.
Brexit has been called an “unmitigated disaster” by food industry experts, as they told MPs about the impact of new trade arrangements.
Sector leaders told the International Trade Select Committee the cost of disruption hads already caused some businesses to shut their doors for good.
Ian Wright, chief executive of the Food and Drink Federation (FDF), told MPs on Thursday food exports have been cut by at least half since the start of January despite the deal.
He told the committee: “We agree with other trade groups that food exports to the EU have declined by 50 to 60 per cent in January.
“That may be because companies have stockpiled three or four months of goods on the other side of the Channel and they may bounce back, but that is a big number to recover in the next few months.”
He said he was “particularly concerned” about uncertainty among officials overseeing new trade checks.
Inside Politics newsletter
The latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekday
Inside Politics newsletter
The latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekday
“This is not trivialising it, but in many cases they are making it up as they go along, because they don’t know what would happen with particular certificates,” he said.
Mr Wright also warned that the UK could be “50,000 customs agents” short of what is needed when import regulations are enforced from April.
Marine and fisheries consultant Terri Portmann told MPs that seafood businesses are already shutting amid the impact of Brexit disruption.
UK news in pictures
Show all 52
“It has been an unmitigated disaster,” she said on Thursday.
“We have already seen seafood businesses who heavily relied upon an export market close their doors – companies that have been around for 30 to 40 years.
“And I suspect there are many more that are currently hanging on by their fingernails and going bankrupt slowly, because part of the problem is that with fresh seafood products, you can’t stockpile.”
Briefing UN Member States on Thursday, WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus drew attention to a $27 billion financing gap in the ACT Accelerator, which supports the development and equitable distribution of coronavirus tests, treatments and vaccines globally.
“The longer this gap goes unmet, the harder it becomes to understand why, given this is a tiny fraction of the trillions of dollars that have been mobilized for stimulus packages in G20 countries”, he said.
Secondly, noting some bilateral deals, he called on all States “to respect COVAX contracts and not compete with them”.
And third, Tedros underscored the need for “an urgent scale-up in manufacturing to increase the volume of vaccines” with “innovative partnerships” to include tech transfer, licensing and “other mechanisms to address production bottlenecks”.
Meanwhile, as Africa marks one year since its first COVID-19 case, on 14 February, WHO revealed that last month, the continent had witnessed a 40 per cent surge in COVID fatalities – pushing the death toll there towards 100,000.
“The increasing deaths from COVID-19 we are seeing are tragic, but are also disturbing warning signs that health workers and health systems in Africa are dangerously overstretched”, WHO Regional Director for Africa Matshidiso Moeti said at a virtual press conference.
‘Grim milestone’
At the same time, in the last 28 days, over 22,300 deaths were reported on the continent – a 3.7 per cent fatality rise – compared with nearly 16,000 deaths in the previous 28 days, which reflected a 2.4 per cent increase, according to WHO.
This mortality spike comes as Africa’s second wave which began in October, seems to have peaked on 6 January, having spread significantly faster and proven far more lethal.
WHO maintained that second wave cases surged far beyond the peak experienced in the first wave and health facilities have become overwhelmed.
“This grim milestone must refocus everyone on stamping out the virus”, said Dr. Moeti.
New strain, new challenges
At the same time, new contagious COVID-19 strains are spreading rapidly as Africa gears up for its largest-ever vaccination drive.
The variant known as B1.351, which was first identified in South Africa, has now been detected in eight African States, while the mutation initially identified in the United Kingdom, called B1.1.7, has been found in six countries on the continent.
“This is obviously very disappointing news, but the situation is very dynamic”, said Dr. Moeti. “While a vaccine that protects against all forms of COVID-19 is our biggest hope, preventing severe cases which overwhelm hospitals is crucial”.
This week South Africa said it would pause the roll-out of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine citing a study indicating that it is less effective in battling the country’s dominant B1.351 strain.
Coordinated approach needed
WHO says there is an “urgent need” for a coordinated approach to variant surveillance and more evaluation to help decipher the potential impact they may have on vaccine effectiveness.
“The pandemic is far from over, and vaccines are just one crucial tool in our fight against the virus. We must boost investments and support for our health workers and health systems by sticking to mask wearing, regular hand cleaning and safe social distancing”, said Dr Moeti.
The economic blow dealt by Brexit will be four times greater in the UK than the EU, according to the latest forecasts by Brussels.
A month into the new relationship, the European commission said the UK’s exit on the terms agreed by Boris Johnson’s government would generate a loss in gross domestic product (GDP) by the end of 2022 of about 2.25% in the UK compared with continued membership. In contrast, the hit for the EU is estimated to be about 0.5% over the same period.
Equivalent to lost economic output worth more than £40bn over two years, the commission said that although worse damage had been avoided thanks to the 11th-hour trade deal signed in December, substantial barriers to trade still remained and would come with a heavier cost for Britain.
“While the FTA [free trade agreement] improves the situation as compared to an outcome with no trade agreement between the EU and the UK, it cannot come close to matching the benefits of the trading relations provided by EU membership,” the commission said in its winter economic forecast.
Most mainstream economists have already forecast that Brexit will deliver a bigger hit to the UK economy than to the EU. However, the figures compiled by the commission mark the first official EU estimates made since the deal was agreed.
The forecast comes as the UK government comes under mounting pressure over delays to cross-border trade after a month of the new rules, with business groups warning that further disruption is expected as more new border checks come into force later this spring.
The deal agreed between London and Brussels included maintaining zero-tariffs – taxes on the sale of goods across borders – between the UK and the EU. However, businesses have faced additional costs and delays from new paperwork, customs checks and confusion over the new system.
The commission said the “trade shock” from these so-called non-tariff barriers amounted to the equivalent of a tax on imports worth 10.9% for the EU and 8.5% for the UK. It said there was a bigger impact on growth for countries with a higher share of goods trade with the EU – such as Ireland – and that the lack of a deal on services – which form 80% of the UK economy – would hurt the UK, as well as EU nations where doing service-sector business with Britain was more important.
However, it said the last-minute trade deal helped to reduce the negative effect by about a third for the EU and a quarter for the UK compared with a no-deal scenario and reverting to World Trade Organization terms.
Sign up to the daily Business Today email
The winter 2021 economic forecast projects that the EU economy will grow by 3.7% in 2021 and 3.9% in 2022 as the impact of tougher lockdown measures at the start of 2021 give way to a vaccine-fuelled recovery later in the year. It said the EU economy should return to pre-pandemic levels in 2022, earlier than previously thought, but added that it would take longer for some nations than others.
The economies of Italy and Spain are not expected to return to pre-crisis levels until later than 2022, as countries with a higher dependence on tourism largely in southern Europe suffer from a slower return of international travel.
<
p class=”css-38z03z”>The Bank of England forecasts growth of 5% in the UK in 2021 and 7.25% in 2022, with GDP returning to pre-Covid levels towards the end of the yearThis, it said, would be faster than the EU thanks to better progress in administering the Covid vaccine.
