Brussels [Belgium], November 13 (ANI): Terming Turkey and Pakistan as countries of concern amid rising terrorists attack in Europe, French Member of European Parliament (MEP) Nicolas Bay has asked European Union (EU) to stop “showering” Ankara and Islamabad with subsidies and customs facilities, rather put sanctions against them.
“During the European Parliamentary plenary of November, 11 French MEP Nicolas Bay from the Identity and Democracy Group had strong words against European aid to Pakistan and Turkey in light of threats coming from both countries. MEP Bay’s comments were made in the context of a debate on the ‘fight against terrorism, freedom of expression and education’,” a press statement read.
Speaking to the European Commissioner Ylva Johansson responsible for Home Affairs, Nicolas Bay was critical of the support being given by the European Commission to the countries of concern. “You are showering countries like Pakistan and Turkey with subsidies and customs facilities. We want to sanction them!”Linking terrorism threats to migration, MEP Bay gave the stark warning that the latest terrorist attacks in Paris had all been committed by migrants arriving in Europe.
Highlighting that over the last year’s terrorist attacks had taken place across Europe in Vienna Madrid, London, Paris, Nice, Milan, Berlin, Amsterdam, Toulouse, Stockholm and St Petersburg, the parliamentarian recognised that “No victim should be forgotten!””The last three attacks in France were perpetrated by people of immigrant backgrounds: It was a Pakistani who attacked journalists in Paris; it was a Chechen who slit the throat of a teacher in Conflans-Sainte-Honorine; it was a Tunisian, freshly arrived via Lampedusa, who murdered three people in a church in Nice.”Bay pointed out that since the Madrid attacks in 2004, 450 people had been killed by Islamist terrorists in Europe and that Europe was losing its identity.
“They attack us for who we are, not what we do. We cannot fight this battle if we refuse to name the enemy,” he said.
Bay singled out both Turkey and Pakistan as countries of concern during his intervention: “Erdogan is also moving forward because the European Union does not dare to act, he is waging war on Armenia, and in Libya by deploying jihadists from the ranks of Da’esh, he is threatening our continent with migratory subversion, he is converting the Basilica of Saint Sophie into a mosque.”Bay further critiqued the Commission for its financing of Islamist organisations stating that EUR5.6 million had been given towards Muslim Brotherhood networks. “In total, over the last 5 years, the European Union has paid 36.5 million euros directly to Islamist organisations or projects in which they were involved.”The debate comes in the aftermath of the recent terrorist attacks that took place in France and Austria. President of the European Parliament, David Sassoli, prior to the debate had opened the European Parliament stating that it was “a shared responsibility to fight all types of extremism”. (ANI)
The European Union (EU) has announced that it will be moving forward with increased tariffs on U.S. goods. Tariffs will be imposed on nearly $4 billion worth of American imports. The tariffs will be implemented on a variety of agricultural and industrial goods. A decision issued by the World Trade Organization back in October allows the EU to move forward with retaliatory tariffs. The underlying issue originated from an EU grievance with U.S. subsidies for aircraft production.
“We have made clear all along that we want to settle this long-running issue. Regrettably, due to lack of progress with the U.S., we had no other choice but to impose these countermeasures,” Executive Vice President for the European Commission and Commissioner for Trade Valdis Dombrovskis said in a news release. “The EU is consequently exercising its legal rights under the WTO’s recent decision.”
The increased tariffs will affect a number of different agricultural products. A list of American goods that will be impacted includes a tier system for the tariffs. The 15 percent tier affects some civilian aircraft. A 25 percent tariff tier will apply to a multitude of food and agriculture products. In a press release, National Milk Producers Federation President and CEO Jim Mulhern expressed frustration with how the EU is handling the trade dispute.
“Europe has long wielded restrictive and unjustified trade tactics to limit fair competition from U.S. agriculture, including dairy exports,” Mulhern noted. “The EU’s restrictive trade policies that have resulted in a one-way flow of agriculture trade, and in particular dairy trade, to Europe is something that both the current and future Administrations need to keep in mind. In fact, the trade deficit between the EU and U.S. continues to widen as the EU uses unjustified trade tactics to erode U.S. market access and limit fair competition.”
Anybody following the recent US presidential campaign will know that religious views played a significant role, with lots of attention focused on the white evangelical Christians who supported the non-church going Donald Trump and rejected the devout Joe Biden, who made clear what his faith meant to him.
The evangelicals were not alone in their support for Trump. In a Rite & Reason column in this newspaper (October 27th), Fr Patrick Hannon, emeritus professor of moral theology in Maynooth, wrote about the challenges facing a Catholic politician like Biden in America, trying to balance competing views of church and civil society on moral issues. He noted that in the recent election campaign, Cardinal Dolan of New York had signalled his support for Donald Trump because of his pro-life agenda.
It is clear that Trump’s support among the religious extends beyond evangelical fundamentalists. Indeed, after the 2016 election, the National Catholic Reporter, an American journal, reported that the 81 per cent of white, “born again” evangelical Christians who voted for Trump were joined by 58 per cent of mainline Protestants and 52 per cent of Roman Catholics. They backed Trump because he was willing to meet their demands on moral issues.
That religious/political alliance brought to mind the writings of the Rev Reinhold Niebuhr (1892 -1971), considered in his time to be one of America’s leading intellectuals. The historian Arthur Schlesinger jnr described him as “the most influential American theologian of the 20th century”.
The son of a clergyman, Niebuhr was a pastor in the American branch of the German Evangelical Church, now known as the United Church of Christ, as well as being a leading academic.
He took particular interest in the relationship between religion and politics, believing that religion could be a source of error as well as truth and therefore its role should be to cultivate a sense of humility rather than a sense of infallibility. He said that “religion is so frequently a source of confusion in political life, and so frequently dangerous to democracy, precisely because it introduces absolutes into the realm of relative values”.
In his book The Irony of American History, Niebuhr wrote: “We . . . as all ‘God-fearing’ men of all ages, are never safe against the temptation of claiming God too simply as the sanctifier of whatever we most fervently desire. Even the most ‘Christian’ civilisation and even the most pious church must be reminded that the true God can be known only where there is some awareness of a contradiction between divine and human purposes, even on the highest level of human aspirations.”
That temptation to see “God . . . as the sanctifier of whatever we most fervently desire” may be attractive to those who long for certainty and seek to dominate others but it is not consistent with the teaching of Jesus who stood up to the absolutists of his day (The Pharisees) and told his followers to prepare for change: “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all truth.”
The Christian life requires change, as new truths consistent with the mind of Christ are revealed.
Reinhold Niebuhr may not be widely remembered but his words are, for he is the author of the Serenity Prayer which first appeared in a sermon of his which was included in A Book of Prayers and Services for the US armed forces during the second World War. It speaks well to our fears in these troubling and challenging times.
“God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference. Living one day at a time; enjoying one moment at a time; accepting hardships as the pathway to peace; taking, as He (Jesus) did, this sinful world as it is, not as I would have it; trusting that He will make all things right if I surrender to His Will; that I may be reasonably happy in this life and supremely happy with Him forever in the next.”
Elisabeth Sifton, who edited three of my books and died a year ago, used to put a big X in the margin whenever I mentioned a book that a writer had published. “Writers don’t publish books!” she’d say. “Publishers publish books.” I would dutifully change the wording, but I have to confess that I didn’t understand exactly what she meant—as, indeed, most authors don’t understand what publishers do, other than give them material to complain about.
Well, now I know. Five years ago, with a small group of colleagues, I started a publishing enterprise called Columbia Global Reports. We bring out novella-length works of serious nonfiction—26 thus far—on a wide variety of topics. We began with a charge, and financial support, from Columbia University’s president, Lee Bollinger, who was concerned about the severe contraction of the American press at a time when the immediacy of large international challenges was increasing. Our books are paperbacks, attractively designed and produced in a uniform format, usually based on original on-site reporting that we pay for rather than asking our authors to cover expenses out of their advances.
Doing this work has given me a view of publishing from the other side—the publishers’ side—even as I have continued to write books of my own for other publishers. What is it that publishers know, and do, that writers don’t fully grasp? I can answer that, at least to some extent.
A quick word, though, from where authors are coming from. Authors are like actors, perpetually aware that many more people want to do what we do than the world has room for. Editors and publishers have jobs. We don’t. We feel our status to be eternally provisional.
Being a publisher has changed my attitude about the writer’s place in the world, and it may be useful and encouraging to know what it is that gives a writer real value to publishers. At Columbia Global Reports, we are looking for writers who can do firsthand reporting in faraway places, make original arguments about major issues, and write prose that is a pleasure to read. That combination of skills is very, very difficult to find; anybody who has all three, or even two out of three, is a rare talent, for whose time and energy we always find ourselves competing against others who also want them.
Journalists who write books—that’s most of our authors at Columbia Global Reports—often complain that book publishers edit and fact-check their work far less than a traditional news organization would. As a publisher, it’s easy for me to see where this evidently odd feature of book publishing comes from. Though book publishing is famously dominated by five big companies, the actual work of getting a book out is strikingly decentralized. Small publishers like us have access to an amazing array of service providers who aren’t publishers themselves—such as, in our case, Publishers Group West, which functions as our sales force, and Strick & Williams, which designs our books. As a nonprofit publisher, we can afford to invest in editing and fact-checking, but the one essential function that can’t be outsourced is establishing the identity of the house and drawing attention to its work. Seeing that firsthand has cleared up the mystery (for an author like me) of why acquiring and marketing are the primary tasks for publishers.
Authors are crucial to that part of publishing. We are all hyperaware of authors, usually of fiction, who are reclusive or mysterious—think of Elena Ferrante or Cormac McCarthy. As an author, it’s appealing to think of oneself as somebody whose writing can command the attention of the world all by itself, to the point that no more is needed than producing the work.
To a publisher, writers who think that way are very frustrating. Are you active on social media? Great. Can you produce an op-ed-length version of the core argument of your book? Even better. Are you adept at being interviewed? Will you turn in a very complete version of your author questionnaire?
It is striking to us how much respect books command. Books have the power to launch sustained conversations in a way that other forms of publications do not. Generating that type of debate only works if the author continues to participate enthusiastically through the entire publication process.
So I would amend Elisabeth Sifton’s maxim. Publishers publish. Writers write. And publishers need writers to be their partners in publishing, too.
Nicholas Lemann is founder and director of Columbia Global Reports. His most recent book is Transaction Man: The Rise of the Deal and the Decline of the American Dream (Picador).
A version of this article appeared in the 11/16/2020 issue of Publishers Weekly under the headline: From Both Sides Now
The leader of the largest party in the European parliament has blamed internal conflict within the British government for stalled Brexit negotiations on Friday, following confirmation that Downing Street advisor Dominic Cummings would be departing his role by Christmas.
On Radio 4’s Today programme, German politician Manfred Weber, who heads the People’s Party and an ally of Chancellor Angela Merkel, cited the “chaotic situation” within the highest echelons of the British government as the cause of the Brexit deadlock.
Weber, who serves as an MEP for the German Christian Social Union, which is linked to Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU), claimed that the infighting is causing the UK’s position to become unclear.
While speaking to the BBC, Weber outlined that Brexit talks have stalled due for two primary reasons: access to UK fishing waters and the “level playing field” rules which prevent state aid favouring British companies.
“There are fair questions we are asking … If you want to change in the future, with your background of sovereignty, your subsidies, regulations, then we must have an option an opportunity to react to stop to limit your access to our market”, he said. “I see what is happening now in Downing Street. We can also see this as a quite chaotic situation where we don’t have an idea what is really the line in Great Britain. So don’t tell us we should be ready for compromise”.
He said the EU requires a “clear idea from Boris Johnson” and urged the Prime Minister to show “leadership”, pointing to “recent developments in America” where “it will be not so easy with Joe Biden [as US president-elect] to achieve an easy trade deal now”.
“It’s time to take over responsibility and come to a common understanding. Britain has red lines, we have red lines, let’s now come to a compromise”, he added.
The German lawmaker’s comments were rejected by UK government sources. The unnamed official told The Guardian that Prime Minister Boris Johnson has “been clear that he wants a deal if there is a deal to be done. We’ve been negotiating constructively and with creativity”.
“I guess the reason the EU feel the need to say these sorts of things is that they are starting to realise that we meant it when we said there were fundamental principles from which we couldn’t move. We need to see some realism and creativity from their side if we are to bridge the significant gaps that remain”, he added.
Dominic Cummings, special advisor for Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson, arrives at Downing Street, in London, Britain, November 12, 2020
This follows confirmation that Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s top aide and former director of the Vote Leave campaign that spearheaded the UKs movement to leave the EU in 2016, would leave Downing Street by 25 December 2020.
However, this contradicted a previous comment by Cummings, who told the BBC on Thursday that the “rumours of me threatening to resign are invented”. He later clarified that his position remained unchanged from a blog post in January, where wrote that would make himself “largely redundant” by the end of the year.
An unnamed EU source told the Guardian that Cummings’ had been holding the negotiation process “hostage” and his departure could lead to an easing of resistance to compromise.
“His flawed concept of state aid has held the negotiation hostage,” the diplomat said.
Cummings has long advocated for Brexit as an opportunity for the UK’s to subsidise the tech industry beyond the common competition restrictions of the European Union.
Despite the logjam, a deal must be agreed to this month in order to provide sufficient time for parliamentary ratification. If a compromise is not reached, then the UK will leave the bloc without a deal and trade on World Trade Organisation rules.
The EU’s negotiators, heading by Michel Barnier, have been in London this week for discussion over the future relationship. The team will leave on Friday before meeting with their UK counterparts next Monday in Brussels.
???? After 7 days of intensive negotiations in London, talks continue with @DavidGHFrost and his team in Brussels in full respect of the national health measures #COVID19
Support €1 trillion in investment for climate action and environmental sustainability in the decade to 2030
EIB Group is now aligning all financing activities from end of 2020, with goals of Paris agreement
More than 50% of annual financing dedicated to green investment by 2025
More Green advisory services and financing of innovative low carbon technologies
Support for green capital markets, climate change adaptation, Just Transition projects
On Wednesday, the European Investment Bank (EIB) Board of Directors, composed of representatives from the EU member states, approved the Climate Bank Roadmap (CBR) that sets out in detail how the EIB Group aims to support the objectives of the European Green Deal and sustainable development outside the European Union.
The Climate Bank Roadmap comes at the end of a stakeholder engagement that included two major events in March and June and more than 200 written submissions to the Bank.
The existing EIB Climate Strategy was announced at the Paris Climate Conference in 2015. The EIB Board of Directors approved an update of the strategy, to align it with the 1.5 degree temperature goal. Together with the CBR, this will guide the Bank’s activities in the next 5 years.
“2021-2030 is the critical decade to mobilise the trillions of investment that are required to limit global warming to 1.5 degree, and protect the environment and biodiversity. As requested by the European Council and the EU member states, I am proud to announce that the EIB Group has achieved an important milestone in its transformation to become Europe’s fully fledged climate bank.” said EIB Vice President Ambroise Fayolle responsible for climate action and environment. He added: “The unanimous decision by our shareholders sends an encouraging signal about Europe’s capacity to deliver on climate action and environmental sustainability. The EIB builds upon a very strong track record. It has been Europe’s main instrument in financing climate action for years, and we are on track to deliver on our commitment to invest $100 billion between 2016 and 2020. Now the EIB Group will be the first Multilateral Development Bank to be Paris aligned. The Climate Bank Roadmap ensures that the EIB Group will make a decisive contribution to a green recovery from the COVID-19 crisis, supporting the objectives of the European Green Deal, including a Just Transition for regions that depend on carbon intensive industries, and, globally, by supporting sustainable development activities through all the projects we finance. Cooperation is key and we look forward to working with partners around the world. I want to thank our shareholders for the constructive cooperation, my colleagues at the EIB Group for their hard work, and the hundreds of stakeholders that participated in the development of the Climate Bank Roadmap.”
In November 2019, the EIB Board of Directors agreed a new energy lending policy and confirmed the EIB’s increased ambition in climate action and environmental sustainability. By the end of this decade, the EIB Group aims to support at least €1 trillion in climate action and environmental sustainability investments. The EIB Group commits to align all its activities with the goals and principles of the Paris Agreement by the end of 2020. In addition, the EIB committed to raising its annual financing for climate action and environmental sustainability to more than 50% of our business volumes by 2025, up from just over 30% today. As part of its new Energy Lending Policy, the EIB stopped financing new energy projects reliant on unabated fossil fuels in November 2019. The last remaining projects grandfathered under the previous EIB Energy Policy must complete their ongoing EIB approvals by end 2021.
The EIB Group Climate Bank Roadmap operationalises last year`s commitments and focuses on four key areas:
1) Accelerating the transition: The Climate Bank Roadmap sets out support in the focus areas outlined in the European Green Deal, from building greater resilience to climate change through to protecting nature. This will be used to strengthen the dialogue with EU member states, as well as developing and emerging countries, and to shape business development and product innovation. The EIB Group is well placed to support the entire spectrum of technological innovation: from seed capital for very early-stage development through to senior debt for mature technologies. In 2021, the EIB will come forward with an Adaptation Plan (in support of the forthcoming EU Adaptation Strategy), and a new Transport Lending Policy (in response to new European Commission smarter, more sustainable transport strategy).
2) Ensuring a Just Transition for all: Supporting cohesion was one of the founding principles of the EIB when it was established in 1958. It continues to be a core priority – and hence the EIB Group will seek to ensure that no people or places are left behind along the transition pathway. The Just Transition Mechanism is the cornerstone of the EU response to this challenge. The EIB Group will play a central role within the Mechanism, supporting to varying degrees each of its three main pillars. The EIB will come forward with a detailed Just Transition plan in 2021, once the EU Just Transition Mechanism is agreed. Globally, the EIB is reinforcing its efforts around key themes that lie at the heart of social development, environmental sustainability and climate action: gender equality and conflict, fragility and migration.
3) Supporting Paris-aligned operations: the CBR puts the concept of alignment to the goals and principles of the Paris agreement into operation for the EIB Group. Clear criteria are presented for sectors, and interpreted and applied within the context of all EIB Group products. Examples of specific investments that the EIB Group will no longer support include projects expanding agricultural activity into high carbon stock areas, airport capacity expansions, and new conventional energy intensive plants. In addition, in the context of assessing the economic case for investment, the Bank will use a revised and increased shadow cost of carbon. This forms an integral part of an enhanced economic test towards new road projects. The EIB Group will come forward with detailed guidelines to cover counterparty alignment. This is expected in the course of 2021.
4) Building strategic coherence and accountability: The EIB Group approach will be based on three cross‐cutting aspects: (1) policy, to set out how climate‐related activities fit within the wider context of sustainable finance and overall environmental and social sustainability – including alignment with the EU Taxonomy; (2) transparency, accountability and quality assurance; and (3) institutional support to the EIB Group’s activities. In 2021, the EIB will consult on its EIB Group Environmental and Social Sustainability framework and the EIB Environmental and Social Standards.
NEW YORK, Nov. 13, 2020 /Christian Newswire/ — Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a lawsuit filed by the Diocese of Brooklyn:
Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio, who heads the Diocese of Brooklyn, has a lawsuit before the U.S. Supreme Court that could prove to be historic.
All reasonable persons understand the right of government to impose limited restrictions on the public during a pandemic, but only unreasonable persons maintain that such powers are boundless. It is more than unreasonable—it is unconstitutional—to target churches and other houses of worship for special treatment.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo acted irresponsibly when he placed greater restrictions on churches than he did on hardware stores. That is what the Brooklyn Diocese’s lawsuit contends. By declaring that pet stores and brokers’ offices should have greater freedom to operate than synagogues, for example, Cuomo is showing his animus against religion.
If anyone has any doubt that Cuomo exhibits a flagrant hostility to religion, let him read what the governor has said. At a press conference, he admitted that his Executive Order is “most impactful on houses of worship.” That is where he crossed the line. Not only are houses of worship not considered “essential” businesses, they are intentionally relegated to a second-class status.
The lawsuit nails this point just right. It argues that Cuomo’s Executive Order “expressly singles out ‘houses of worship’ by that name for adverse treatment relative to secular businesses, and does so in a way that is not narrowly tailored to any compelling government interest, in direct violation of the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause.”
Similarly, Cuomo put a cap on the number of people who can go to church in his so-called “red” and “orange” zones—10 and 25, respectively. As the lawsuit says, the “fixed-capacity limits imposed by Governor Cuomo on ‘houses of worship’—and only ‘houses of worship'”—proves once again his bias. When a 7-11 can have more people in its store than a church, it tells us volumes about what is really going on.
Bishop DiMarzio has once again done the right thing. When Covid-19 is behind us, Catholics will remember bishops like him who defended their religious rights, refusing to be treated as pawns of the state.
SOURCE Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights
WHO/Europe began testing its COVID-19 messages in Ukraine with the aim of reinvigorating public support for protective behaviours. The team tailored their messages to meet the needs of particular groups, and tested revised COVID-19 messages and visuals in individual focus groups.
As WHO Representative to Ukraine Dr Jarno Habicht reports, “Testing messages is vital because it allows us to provide messages that resonate with our audiences. People can feel overwhelmed with information about COVID-19, so throughout this challenging time it is crucial to engage effectively with them.”
Testing messages ensures that they are targeted towards an audience’s needs and preferences, which in turn fosters understanding and acceptance. In addition, message testing is an important way to avoid wasting resources on messages that do not resonate and materials that need to be revised. To support this practice, WHO/Europe has developed a guide for message testing.
WHO/Europe sought to gain insight into how different groups react to messages on 3 protective measures: washing hands, practising physical distancing and wearing masks. They used this information to evaluate and adapt their communication materials, thereby increasing the relevance of COVID-19 messages for these groups and creating impact without causing anger or alarm.
Message testing builds on behavioural insights (BI) research conducted in a number of countries in the WHO European Region. In Ukraine, nationwide BI survey results revealed that only 1 in 4 people washed their hands regularly and only 1 in 3 followed physical distancing guidelines. The BI surveys also identified young men with low levels of education as a group with low adherence and low risk perception regarding COVID-19.
The first group included men and women aged 18–60 who had a high level of education. The second group included men only, in the same age range but with a lower level of education. Feedback revealed that the second group liked business-style layouts, but did not respond to key messages when the text was too small, there were no pictures or there was too much writing. Shorter, hopeful messages worked better, as did a lively colour palette and appealing, easy-to-follow visuals.
“Together, we can beat the virus”
Following these results, the team changed the background colours from dark grey to blue or pink, dropped overly complicated messages, shortened sections of text and added graphics. They also focused on hopeful messages, especially those which inspire a sense of community spirit as well as control over the situation, such as “Together, we can beat the virus” and “Only by means of a concerted effort can we go back to normal life”.
Messages also need to be adapted to local languages rather than translated word for word to avoid losing their nuance. In Ukraine, the adapted posters have been used in an outdoor and digital campaign and widely distributed across the country, including in areas with high COVID-19 infection rates. They have appeared on billboards in city centres, in one of the country’s largest supermarket chains, and on the metro in the capital, Kyiv. This campaign is part of WHO’s ongoing support to the Ukrainian Ministry of Health and the Ukrainian Public Health Centre to communicate risk in the country.
While focus groups provide a way to revitalize health messages that are otherwise well known and widely distributed, WHO/Europe is also looking at developing other methodologies to test on a larger scale using online platforms. The goal is to make message testing a routine process for any information campaign in order to provide messages that resonate with audiences. This is important given that sustained exposure renders messaging less effective over time. Five more countries in the Region are now testing their messages to address COVID-19 fatigue among the public.
ONDON, Nov 13 (Reuters) – Britain and the European Union will resume trade talks in Brussels on Monday after so far failing to close gaps between their positions on two of the thorniest issues that have long dogged the negotiations: competition rules and fishing.
With just seven weeks before a status quo transition period ends and Britain completes its Brexit journey out of bloc, both sides have stepped up negotiations on a deal that would protect nearly a trillion dollars of trade from possible disruption.
But after missing a mid-November deadline, British officials say there has been little movement on stubborn differences over fair competition rules and fisheries, with London repeatedly pushing for a deal that would respect the country’s sovereignty.
The EU has urged Britain to compromise, saying its geographic proximity to the bloc means it cannot be handed a deal similar to those Brussels have agreed with countries such as Canada. So far, despite describing some progress, neither side has moved far enough to allow for any breakthrough.
“The talks are continuing in London today, there will be a pause over the weekend and then we are expecting the talks to resume in Brussels on Monday,” a spokesman for British Prime Minister Boris Johnson told reporters on Friday.
“The negotiating teams are working very hard to bridge the significant gaps between us. For our part, we continue to seek solutions that fully respect UK sovereignty but the familiar, difficult issues remain including on the so-called level playing field and fisheries.”
He also moved to deny suggestions that the departure at the end of the year by Johnson’s senior adviser, Dominic Cummings, would mean a softening of position in London, saying: “The government’s position in relation to the future trade agreement negotiations is unchanged.”
While many deadlines have been missed in the years of Brexit talks since Britain voted to leave in 2016, some businesses are getting increasingly twitchy over whether the government is prepared for January without, or even with, a deal.
Many hope that time pressure and a COVID-19 crisis spiralling across much of Europe will focus minds on clinching a deal to avoid chaos in commerce, energy ties and aviation. (Reporting by Elizabeth Piper and William James)
BRUSSELS, Nov. 13 (Xinhua) — The European Union (EU)’s international trade in goods partially recovered in September compared with August, but remained under the pre-pandemic levels, according to Eurostat.
The first estimate for extra-EU exports of goods in September 2020 was 171 billion euros (202 billion U.S. dollars), down by 3.8 percent compared with September 2019. The imports from the rest of the world stood at 146.5 billion euros, down by 8.9 percent compared with last year, it said in a news release Friday.
In August 2020, the year-on-year declines of exports and imports were 14 percent and 15.6 percent respectively.
According to the EU’s statistical office, China was the main partner for the EU in the first nine months.
In September, the exports of goods decreased year-on-year in 16 EU member states and ten countries’ exports showed an increase. The largest decrease, at minus 23.0 percent, was registered in Greece, while the largest increase, at 24.7 percent, was recorded in Estonia. (1 euro = 1.18 U.S. dollars)
