Negotiating a deal

Both the EU and the UK government would be wise to study why their last negotiation before the referendum went so wrong. The two parties wanted the same outcome – a deal which enable the UK to vote to stay in the EU. Their failure has left the EU struggling with the departure of one of its largest paymasters, and saw the end of the Prime Minister and Chancellor in the UK who signed off the deal.

On that occasion with full civil service encouragement the UK Prime Minister went round the EU asking leaders what they might grant the UK. They told him they could not grant much, so he asked for not much. As this was always going to be a negotiation the EU did not feel they could let him have all he asked for, so a low bid which he had made was scaled back further. When the UK voters saw it gave us no remission from high financial contributions, prevented us running our own migration policy and did not even fix the issue of letting us make our own decisions about benefit payments, they rejected it.

There is now a strange German movement to say they might be able to fix some of the things Mr Cameron said he wanted fixed, now they have seen the outcome. The truth is it’s too late to do that. Many UK voters anyway do not think Mr Cameron asked for enough. He made a mistake, but so did the EU in refusing even his modest demands.

Today the UK government now needs to be sure to ask for enough from a Future Trade and Partnership Agreement, otherwise what has currently been outlined will be judged a bad deal by many UK voters. The EU would be wise to understand if they deliberately set out to make a tough deal which the UK thinks is an unfair deal that could backfire. It might result in the UK leaving with no deal. The UK government has rightly said on many occaisons No deal is better than a bad deal. Past experience shows the EU quite likes bad deals. That is why it is facing the exit of one of its major paymasters and one of its main single country export markets.




Statement by the Eurogroup President on the nominations for the post of ECB Vice-President

At the 22 January Eurogroup, I asked euro area members to send their nominations for candidates to replace Vítor Constâncio as ECB Vice-President after his term ends on 31 May.

I have received two names.

Ireland has proposed its central bank governor, Philip Lane, and Spain, its economy and competitiveness minister, Luis de Guindos. These are two excellent candidates and I welcome the initiative of both countries to make their nominations public. 

I look forward to our discussion at the next Eurogroup on 19 February which will pave the way for a formal recommendation to the European Council. 

The selection process will continue to be fully in line with Treaty provisions, and will be conducted in an open and transparent way based on the candidates put forward by member states. This will include opinions from both the European Parliament the European Central Bank. 

The Eurogroup meeting of 19 February will consider and discuss the applications. On the following day, the Ecofin Council, by reinforced qualified majority voting of the euro area members, will formally adopt a recommendation to the European Council.

Such majority requires 72% of euro area members in favour (i.e., at least 14 out of the 19), representing at least 65% of the population of the euro area.

On 22 March, after consulting with the ECB and European Parliament, the European Council will take its final decision.




Q&A on MiFIR data reporting

Download PDF



Declaration by the High Representative on behalf of the EU on the alignment of certain third countries concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

On 22 January 2018 the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2018/89[1]. amending Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/849.

The Decision amends the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures as set out in Annex III to Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 by adding seventeen persons to the Annex.

The Candidate Countries the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia*, Montenegro*, Serbia* and Albania*, the country of the Stabilisation and Association Process and potential candidate Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the EFTA countries Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova and Armenia, align themselves with this Council Decision.

They will ensure that their national policies conform to this Council Decision.

The European Union takes note of this commitment and welcomes it.


[1] Published on 22.01.2018 in the Official Journal of the European Union L 16 I/9

*The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and  Albania continue to be part of the Stabilisation and Association Process.




Q&A on MiFIR data reporting

Download PDF