Analyst John Whitby has shared his point of view on the possibilities of resolutions to the current stalemate between the EU and the UK.

Sputnik: What effect will this visit from Gove have on negotiations between the EU and the UK? Will it change anything at all?

John Whitby: I would doubt it. I think the positions are fairly well-established and the main problem there is, is that we want to be independent and the EU want to retain control. I think the two are completely incompatible.

Sputnik: With talks setting up again and the messaging still remaining the same after four years of talks, is it time for the UK to just walk away?

John Whitby: I think the problem you’ve got is that nobody wants to actually do that, because they know if the UK walks away, then the EU will turn around and say “you never wanted to have a deal in the first place”, etc., etc. – and vice versa. I think the answer is yes, we wanted a deal, but we wanted a deal based upon a free trade agreement between two independent groups – the EU and UK. I don’t think the EU has ever really wanted that, because they can’t afford, in many ways, to let the UK be outside of their control and be successful.

Sputnik: What areas does the UK desperately need to prioritise to avoid chaos and further challenges in January? 

John Whitby: I think what they’re doing at the moment in Kent, and I was a little bit peeved listening to the reporting on it, where it was basically: you need to have a passport to get into Kent. Well, no, what they’re saying is you can’t go into Kent if you are planning to go across the channel and you don’t have the right paperwork, because otherwise you will block Kent, effectively. That seems to be very sensible. You wouldn’t go to the airport without your passport and this is very much the same sort of thing.

We need to make sure that we have the right streamlined processes in place and unfortunately that relies on the border force and HM Revenue and Customs, who are not always the quickest at reacting or implementing what would be sensible. I think whatever happens there’s going to be problems. I think there would be problems no matter what you did because I don’t think it’s in some people’s interest to have a smooth transition. There is a lot of time and money invested in the European project.
If you go back to the week after the Brexit vote, where the BBC’s Katya Adler was going around all of the European capitals, she made a very telling point at one of her last points of call – which I think was Rome – where she said “the one thing I’m getting from all these senior EU European leaders is that they are absolutely scared stiff of having a free, independent, flexible UK sitting on their doorstep”.

Because that would then encourage others to think “well, why are we paying for all this bureaucracy? Why are we paying for the European Commission? Why are we paying for the five presidents? Why are we paying for all this? If we could just have a free trade agreement with the UK and everybody else and just go ahead without the European Union infrastructure” – and that I think is the big, big problem.

The views and opinions expressed in the article do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.

BEIRUT — The European Union expressed “disappointment and concern” Monday about the resignation of Lebanon’s prime minister-designate over the weekend and urged the country’s leaders to do their best to form a Cabinet that meets the demands of the people.

Mustapha Adib’s resignation during a political impasse came amid Lebanon’s worst economic and financial crisis in decades — made worse by a massive explosion in Beirut in early August that killed and wounded many and caused widespread damage.

Adib, who handed in his resignation Saturday, nearly a month after winning majority support from the Parliament, left Beirut early Monday to return to his post as Lebanon’s ambassador to Germany.

Adib’s resignation was a blow to French President Emmanuel Macron’s efforts to break a dangerous stalemate in the crisis-hit country. Macron assailed the militant Hezbollah group and the entire Lebanese political class Sunday, and warned of a new civil war if they can’t set aside personal and religious interests to unlock international aid and save Lebanon from economic collapse.

Macron has been pressing Lebanese politicians to form a Cabinet made up of non-partisan specialists that can work on enacting urgent reforms to extract Lebanon from a devastating economic and financial crisis.

The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, urged Lebanon’s leaders to “unite and do their utmost for the timely formation of a government that must be able to meet the legitimate needs and demands of the Lebanese people.”

Borrell said the new Cabinet should be “committed to address Lebanon’s acute and multiple challenges — notably its humanitarian, socio-economic and financial crises, the coronavirus pandemic and the reconstruction of Beirut.”

He underlined the EU’s continued support for Lebanon and its people.

The international community has repeatedly said that Lebanon will not get financial aid before carrying out reforms to end decades of corruption and mismanagement by the ruling class that brought the tiny country to the verge of bankruptcy.

Macron on Sunday accused Lebanon’s political leaders of “collective betrayal” and choosing “to favor their partisan and individual interests to the general detriment of the country.”

Lebanon’s two main Shiite parties, Hezbollah and ally Amal, led by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, had insisted on retaining the Finance Ministry in the new government and on naming all the Shiite Cabinet ministers. Adib rejected those conditions and stepped down.

On Monday, the dollar was trading at 8,200 pounds on the black market, an 8% drop by the local currency since Adib’s resignation. The official rate remains 1,507 pounds to the dollar.

The crisis is expected to worsen as the central bank’s reserve’s are being depleted in what could force the government in the coming months to end subsidies for medicine and fuel, sharply increasing their prices.

Lebanon defaulted on paying back its debt for the first time ever in March. Talks with the International Monetary Fund on a bailout package have stalled.

The crisis has been compounded by the coronavirus pandemic and more recently by the Aug. 4 explosion at Beirut’s port caused by the detonation of thousands of tons of ammonium nitrates. It killed nearly 200 people, injured thousands and caused losses worth billions of dollars.

Cook reported from Brussels.

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – Germany, current president of the European Union, has proposed a scheme that links access to EU money, including the 750 billion euro recovery fund, to respecting the rule of law, a document seen by Reuters showed on Monday.

The proposal will underpin negotiations between the European Parliament and the 27 EU governments, which in July agreed to such a mechanism in principle but left out much detail to avoid a veto from Poland or Hungary, whose nationalist governments stand accused of flouting EU democratic norms.

Warsaw and Budapest are under EU investigation for undermining the independence of the judiciary, media and non-governmental organisations, and both could lose tens of billions of euros in funding if the rule of law mechanism is established.

In the recovery fund alone, excluding the linked long-term EU budget for 2021-27, Poland would be at risk of losing access to 23 billion euros ($26.84 billion) and Hungary to six billion.

“The rule of law requires that all public powers act within the constraints set out by law … under the control of independent and impartial courts,” reads the proposed draft regulation, which needs the approval of the European Parliament.

But the vast majority of EU lawmakers want the link between money and the rule of law to be stronger than agreed in July and the German proposal – sticking closely to the leaders’ summer agreement – is all but certain to disappoint the chamber.

Liberal German EU lawmaker Moritz Korner, who leads the chamber’s work on the matter, said Berlin was “cuddling” with eurosceptic, nationalist rulers in Warsaw and Budapest.

“Without an automatic sanction system, Germany’s proposal fails to defend the rule of law and the correctness of the EU budget spendings,” he told Reuters when asked about the scheme.

According to the German document, punishment for rule of law breaches would include suspending the flow of EU money to capitals seen as breaching democratic checks and balances. It would be decided by a majority vote of EU governments on a recommendation by the EU’s executive European Commission.

This could allow other governments to override opposition from Poland and Hungary.

But those seeking a stronger link argue that a majority of EU governments should be needed to decline, rather than endorse any recommendation by the Commission, to suspend funding for those flouting the rule of law.

That formula would make penalties more likely by leaving governments less room for political horse-trading.

“FINGER-WAGGING”

Some have cautioned, however, that seeking too ambitious a solution could backfire, given that Warsaw or Budapest might withdraw their support if the proposal is changed from what they signed up to in July after four days of tortuous talks.

“It is important that all sides stick to the delicate compromise reached. What didn’t find the support of the (leaders) at that time, will certainly not find it now,” said one official working on the matter.

Germany has already called on EU lawmakers to speed up work on approving the bloc’s next budget, the recovery fund and the related rule of law conditions so that money can start flowing, including to the ailing south of the EU, from 2021.

Asked about the Reuters story on Monday, Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said Poland would stick to the July agreement.

“There is no consent in Poland to allow for arbitrary application of various clauses and finger-wagging only because someone doesn’t like our government,” he told reporters.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban threatened to veto a related decision if the July agreement on the rule of law mechanism is not honoured, which would derail the next EU budget and the recovery fun, together worth some 1.8 trillion euros.

($1 = 0.8568 euros)

The EU’s recovery package is the not-to-be-missed opportunity to lead us to a healthier future and should not extend a lifeline to the pollution that is making us sick, writes Peter van den Hazel.

Peter van den Hazel, medical doctor and co-founder, International Coordinator of International Network for Children’s Health, Environment and Safety (INCHES), is the President of HEAL (Health and the Environment Alliance).

It’s every doctor’s first prescription of choice: prevention before cure. Stop smoking, exercise more, eat a balanced diet. Take care of your body, and you will minimise the risks of illness and injury and boost your resilience to whatever ailment you cannot prevent.

The same applies to our planet. If we take care of our planet, our planet will take better care of us. It will reduce the risks from viruses and vector-borne diseases; from the fumes, chemicals and plastics that weaken our bodies; and from the malnutrition and heat stress intensified by climate change.

Investment in the health of our planet is itself a public health tool. It’s an investment in our own health and resilience to future shocks, be it pandemics, floods, wildfires or other catastrophes.

Just this month, a new report by the European Environment Agency underlined the urgency of tackling pollution and climate change in the interest of health, with the worrying number that poor quality environments contribute to one in eight, or 13%, of deaths in Europe.

In the next few months, the European Union has the power to either set us on a path towards that healthier and more resilient future or to turbo-boost polluting industries and infrastructure and exacerbate the global health crisis we find ourselves in.

Europe’s €1.8 trillion seven-year budget and its Next Generation EU recovery package, under negotiation over the next few months between the EU Council and the European Parliament, will set the contours of our long-term recovery from the coronavirus crisis.

EU countries and MEPs therefore have the opportunity — and the duty to the European people — to prioritise public health and rebuild an economy based on jobs and industries that support it.

Political leaders have already committed to zero pollution under the EU Green Deal. As such, the prescription from health professionals to leaders is very simple: put people’s health at the core of whatever you agree.

In doing so, create a list of polluting industries that should be explicitly excluded from future public spending. If a production or service makes us sicker and weaker, it should not benefit from taxpayers money.

Unfortunately, in the budget agreed in July, EU heads of state and government seemingly have not learned the lesson on greater health protection. Their agreement doesn’t even mention the word “pollution”, let alone talk about how to tackle its effects on health.

The European Council wants to reduce the EU4Health budget to a mere €1.7 billion, from the European Commission’s proposal of €9.4 billion, jeopardising the EU’s ability and ambition to strengthen healthcare systems and public health protection.

It has also cut the proposed budget for the Just Transition Fund by €30 billion – meaning less money for the much-needed transformation of regions that are still highly coal dependent towards a healthy energy future.

The European Parliament has made clear that it disapproves of the Council’s cuts, saying they will “undermine the foundations of a sustainable and resilient recovery.” Now it’s up to MEPs to fulfill their promise not to accept the final budget until it is improved.

Pollution from dominant industries such as chemicals and pesticides, petrol and diesel cars, coal-fired power generation and agricultural activities increase the risk of developing pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung cancer, heart disease and strokes, make those ailments more severe and affect those most vulnerable the worst — as 40 million health professionals pointed out in an open letter to G20 leaders in May.

From a health perspective, the only logical principle can be ensuring zero pollution and transforming any industry or service that does not adhere to this principle.

The World Health Organization, which also supported the open letter, has set out concrete steps that all governments should take to forge a healthy recovery.

They include protecting nature; investing in essential services including water, sanitation, clean energy and healthcare facilities; and an end to taxpayer-funded pollution, including subsidies for fossil fuel power and polluting modes of transport.

The European Union should take WHO’s recommendation to heart and consult with medical and scientific advisors, the wider health sector and civil society.

Healthcare professionals, scientists and academics are guiding us through this pandemic, and people are listening to them — they are wearing masks, working from home and refraining from hugging their friends and family, to save lives. People trust the experts, and our leaders must too.

BRUSSELS/LONDON (Reuters) – The European Union and Britain both said a post-Brexit deal was still some way off and differences persisted on Monday over putting in place their earlier divorce deal as they began a decisive week of talks in Brussels.

Britain left the EU last January and is locked in negotiations on a new trade deal from 2021, as well as on implementing the divorce, as set out in the Withdrawal Agreement, especially on the sensitive Irish border.

EU national leaders will assess the state of play at a summit next month, with a no-deal Brexit still possible.

Negotiations have stumbled over fisheries, fair competition and settling disputes, and Brexit descended into fresh chaos this month when London proposed draft laws that would undermine the earlier agreement.

“The UK’s positions are far apart from what the EU can accept, a deputy head of the bloc’s executive Commission, Maros Sefcovic, said on Monday after talks with Michael Gove, the minister handling the divorce deal.

“We maintain that the bill, if adopted in its current form, would constitute an extremely serious violation of … the Withdrawal Agreement and of international law,” he said, urging speedy progress before he meets Gove again in mid-October.

Gove said the clauses of the Internal Market Bill that undercut the Withdrawal Treaty would remain.

“We want to make sure that the Withdrawal Agreement is implemented in full,” Gove told reporters. “But those clauses are there, they’re in legislation … And those clauses will remain in that bill.”

TRADE TALKS

Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s spokesman said in London that Britain’s focus was on progress in trade talks.

“Although the last two weeks of informal talks have been relatively positive there remains much to be done,” he said.

“We simply want the standard free trade agreement … we continue to be asked to accept provisions that do not reflect the reality of our status as an independent country.”

Trade talks resume in Brussels on Tuesday. Lasting until Friday morning and also due to cover energy links and transport, they are the final round of negotiations scheduled so far.

EU leaders meeting in Brussels on Thursday and Friday are expected to authorise more talks before their next summit on Oct. 15-16. They will then assess whether to try push a deal over the line or prepare for the most damaging Brexit at the end of the year.

The EU says negotiators must seal an agreement by the end of October or early November, to leave time for ratification by the European Parliament and some national parliaments in the EU so that it can take effect from 2021 when Britain’s standstill transition ends after Brexit.

Otherwise, the delicate peace on the island of Ireland as well as an estimated trillion euros worth of annual EU-UK trade would be at risk as the sides would fall back on general World Trade Organization rules that include tariffs and quotas.