ANOTHER VEIL DISCARDED
(This may get interesting)
Gordon Brown has finally let the cat out of the bag.
He now blames the high proportion of Britain’s trade with the euro area for Britain’s low growth. Yes, it is a statement of the bleeding obvious but it is usually a matter far too embarrassing for Westminster politicians to admit.
Gordon Brown’s article in the Financial Times (13/10/05) prior to the EU-China finance minister meeting said "For 10 years, Europe (sic) has grown at not only one quarter of the rate of China and India but at half the rate of the US. And while the whole world is affected by the trebling of oil prices, Britain exporting 50 per cent of its goods to the euro area, suffers more than most from low European (sic) growth. This year’s 1.2 per cent European growth is a wake up call we cannot ignore." (From now on I do not draw any more attention to his muddling of the EU or the eurozone with Europe.)
We note that Gordon Brown displays ‘unconscious narrow nationalism’ in that his definition of ‘European growth’ excludes Britain. He carries on in the same vein in excluding Britain from Europe by referring to "European unemployment approaching 10 per cent".
Gordon Brown draws the conclusion that with Britain’s growth suffering from close integration with the eurozone, "european economic reform" is required.
His analysis swipes at some fundamental EU ideas.
"The change we need is quite fundamental. For decades, the assumption has been that Europe’s nations would prosper as economic integration at a national level was superseded by economic integration at a European level."
"But globalisation has brought challenges none of Europe’s founders could foresee. It is global, not just European companies and global not just European brands, that now dominate. So pro-Europeans must honestly say that Europe cannot succeed as a trade bloc looking in on itself. Instead Global Europe must be outward not inward looking, focussed on external competition and adjust its social model to combine flexibility with fairness."
So, Gordon Brown concludes that Britain suffers from low European growth. An unbiased observer might conclude that the solution was to disentangle Britain from the EU and cease to promote economic integration. Gordon Brown, however, has decided to push water uphill. He identifies the scelerotic Brussels set-up as bad for Britain but he believes he can reform it in every field from labour markets, to reducing trade barriers, to monetary and fiscal policies.
He does not question why Britain’s trade is artificially channelled to the EU by the Customs Union. Some of his proposals seem quite fantastic, such as calling for "removing labour market rigidities" the same week as his government has concluded gold-plated pension deals with public employees together with preservation of early age retirement age. He also calls for a euro area symmetrical inflation target which it is simply fantastic to believe will be taken seriously by those ministers of finance who are actually in the euro.
Finally, he joins David Cameron in calling for the completion of the single market, the ‘good thing’ all Westminster politicians can agree on because they know little about it. David Cameron tells us in his website that the most important EU issue is the ‘completion of the single market’. The achievement of this goal is as likely as the dismantling of the CAP. Nor have the benefits ever been rationally examined while on the ground businesses complain that the single market at present is ineffective. One can observe that Britain has a permanent and large deficit in trade with the EU’s wonderful Single Market which can only be paid for by the surpluses earned on trade with the benighted outside world. A single market ruled by a single set of complex and infinitely expanding harmonized economic regulations buttressed by a Customs Union with heavy protection for industry and agriculture and huge commercial lobbying is precisely what any dynamic economy does not want.
So that’s it. Brown says our low growth is due to the high proportion of our trade with the eurozone. Brown and Cameron say part of the solution is the completion of the single market without offering the slightest shred of evidence. But isn’t the single market idea precisely designed to increase the proportion of our trade with ‘Europe’?
Surely even Gordon and David cannot believe a ‘successful’ single market will reduce the proportion of Britain’s trade with the EU.
FUTURUS/25 October 2005
He now blames the high proportion of Britain’s trade with the euro area for Britain’s low growth. Yes, it is a statement of the bleeding obvious but it is usually a matter far too embarrassing for Westminster politicians to admit.
Gordon Brown’s article in the Financial Times (13/10/05) prior to the EU-China finance minister meeting said "For 10 years, Europe (sic) has grown at not only one quarter of the rate of China and India but at half the rate of the US. And while the whole world is affected by the trebling of oil prices, Britain exporting 50 per cent of its goods to the euro area, suffers more than most from low European (sic) growth. This year’s 1.2 per cent European growth is a wake up call we cannot ignore." (From now on I do not draw any more attention to his muddling of the EU or the eurozone with Europe.)
We note that Gordon Brown displays ‘unconscious narrow nationalism’ in that his definition of ‘European growth’ excludes Britain. He carries on in the same vein in excluding Britain from Europe by referring to "European unemployment approaching 10 per cent".
Gordon Brown draws the conclusion that with Britain’s growth suffering from close integration with the eurozone, "european economic reform" is required.
His analysis swipes at some fundamental EU ideas.
"The change we need is quite fundamental. For decades, the assumption has been that Europe’s nations would prosper as economic integration at a national level was superseded by economic integration at a European level."
"But globalisation has brought challenges none of Europe’s founders could foresee. It is global, not just European companies and global not just European brands, that now dominate. So pro-Europeans must honestly say that Europe cannot succeed as a trade bloc looking in on itself. Instead Global Europe must be outward not inward looking, focussed on external competition and adjust its social model to combine flexibility with fairness."
So, Gordon Brown concludes that Britain suffers from low European growth. An unbiased observer might conclude that the solution was to disentangle Britain from the EU and cease to promote economic integration. Gordon Brown, however, has decided to push water uphill. He identifies the scelerotic Brussels set-up as bad for Britain but he believes he can reform it in every field from labour markets, to reducing trade barriers, to monetary and fiscal policies.
He does not question why Britain’s trade is artificially channelled to the EU by the Customs Union. Some of his proposals seem quite fantastic, such as calling for "removing labour market rigidities" the same week as his government has concluded gold-plated pension deals with public employees together with preservation of early age retirement age. He also calls for a euro area symmetrical inflation target which it is simply fantastic to believe will be taken seriously by those ministers of finance who are actually in the euro.
Finally, he joins David Cameron in calling for the completion of the single market, the ‘good thing’ all Westminster politicians can agree on because they know little about it. David Cameron tells us in his website that the most important EU issue is the ‘completion of the single market’. The achievement of this goal is as likely as the dismantling of the CAP. Nor have the benefits ever been rationally examined while on the ground businesses complain that the single market at present is ineffective. One can observe that Britain has a permanent and large deficit in trade with the EU’s wonderful Single Market which can only be paid for by the surpluses earned on trade with the benighted outside world. A single market ruled by a single set of complex and infinitely expanding harmonized economic regulations buttressed by a Customs Union with heavy protection for industry and agriculture and huge commercial lobbying is precisely what any dynamic economy does not want.
So that’s it. Brown says our low growth is due to the high proportion of our trade with the eurozone. Brown and Cameron say part of the solution is the completion of the single market without offering the slightest shred of evidence. But isn’t the single market idea precisely designed to increase the proportion of our trade with ‘Europe’?
Surely even Gordon and David cannot believe a ‘successful’ single market will reduce the proportion of Britain’s trade with the EU.
FUTURUS/25 October 2005