France blocking Britain from EU's massive defence fund
France is trying to shut out British arms firms from the EU's defence industrial programme despite the post-Brexit reset.
A diplomatic source told The Telegraph that Paris was seeking to restrict member states looking to make a purchase under the scheme to weapons made mostly within the bloc.
The European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP) is being touted by the European Commission as the largest overhaul of the Continent's industrial base.
It will see EU cash pumped into joint procurement projects and the production of weapons, ammunition and other military hardware.
EDIP, which has been six months in the making, is part of a wider scramble to spend €800 billion on defence by the end of the decade.
French diplomats have insisted the tool should be solely used to boost firms based inside the EU, as well as Norway and Ukraine.
This means any member states looking to make a purchase under the scheme will be restricted to technologies with at least 85 per cent of its parts made in the bloc.
The demand means that Britain, which recently signed a flagship defence and security agreement with Brussels, will be shut out from the majority of projects being funded by the EU's budget.
The UK will also be blocked from joint procurement projects under the EDIP scheme.
'Not even a month ago, we solemnly declared the turning of pages and opening of new chapters in our relationship with the UK,' an EU diplomat told The Telegraph.
'Yet, at the first occasion to turn those words into action, we have slammed the book shut.'
There are also fears the hard-line French position will see potential EU funding cut from factories producing Patriot surface-to-air interceptors, because they are a US technology.
It comes at a time when Nato's European allies and Canada were warned they would have to increase air defence systems by 400 per cent to protect against the prospect of a Russian attack.
'It seems self-defeating to exclude investments in the one readily available air defence system, simply because it's American,' the diplomat added.
Emmanuel Macron, France's president, has consistently pushed for EU defence schemes to be used to boost the Continent's own industry, rather than allowing funds to be invested in foreign firms.
Bogged down in red tape
Many militaries across the EU, such as the Netherlands, Romania and Greece, have built their defensive strategies around the procurement of American systems, like Patriot air defence batteries.
To mitigate concerns, there are discussions over allowing the transfer of technologies from non-EU defence firms to businesses based in the bloc.
But insiders have said this mechanism will likely become bogged down in red tape, making it practically impossible to secure funds for.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
34 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The ‘experts' you've never heard of inspiring Rachel Reeves's disastrous economic policy
A little like the Chagos Islands giveaway and, more recently, the apparent Gibraltar sell out, it's almost impossible to work out the motivations behind each and every idiotic decision this Labour Government takes. There's a palpable sense of incredulity spreading across Britain as the Prime Minister and Chancellor continue to insist that everything is going swimmingly despite most key markers showing precisely the opposite is true. Take the economy. In Wednesday's Spending Review, Rachel Reeves boasted that she had 'wasted no time' removing the barriers to growth. Less than 24 hours later, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) revealed that UK GDP had shrunk by 0.3 per cent in April. Labour continues to splurge taxpayers' hard-earned cash despite the national debt sitting at around 96 per cent of GDP, the budget deficit more doubling in the past seven years, and public spending being on a par with the profligate Labour government of the 1970s, which almost bankrupted the country. Back then, taxes as a share of GDP were around 33 per cent. Forecasts suggest that, by 2027, they could reach 37.7 per cent. Unemployment is at its highest level in four years, UK payrolls have lost 276,000 employees since the autumn Budget, and a millionaire is reportedly leaving the UK every 45 minutes under Labour. Still, no one in the Cabinet appears able to rule out further tax rises, with Paul Johnson, the outgoing chief of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) concluding that 'council tax bills look set to rise at their fastest rate over any parliament since 2001-05.' Who is advising Reeves on tax policy, and her relentless assault on our wallets? Readers may not have heard of Arun Advani and Andy Summers, but these little known academics may have been the inspiration for Labour's seemingly never-ending tax grab. They run the Centre for the Analysis of Taxation (CenTax), which some credit for Labour's farm tax. Advani, who is associate professor in the economics department at the University of Warwick, called for inheritance tax 'loopholes' on farms to be scrapped in two reports for the Institute for Fiscal Studies, as well as writing a further report for CenTax making the same arguments for changes to both Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR) last October. After Advani boasted at the Labour Party Conference that he was 'optimistic' because the Labour government is 'genuinely listening' to his ideas, Reeves announced in the Budget that the availability of 100 per cent relief for agricultural and business property would be capped at £1 million. So far, so predictable, you may argue. What's the harm in tapping up Left-wing think tanks for radical tax ideas? Do Conservative governments not rely on the research of free market institutes? Well, some have alleged the Treasury relied solely on CenTax's projection that the changes would raise £520 million, without doing its own calculations. As it conceded in response to a Freedom of Information request: 'H M Treasury does not hold a disaggregated cost projection for the revenue raised from the measure announced at Autumn Budget 2024 to restrict these reliefs. This is a combined policy across the reliefs, rather than separate policies for each relief.' Even more problematically, the £520 million figure has been challenged. The OBR itself said it was uncertain how much would be raised as a result of behavioural responses, whilst CBI Economics calculates that the new tax on both family firms and farms will actually cost the Treasury £1.9 billion over the next five years. Advani claimed that only around 500 farms would be affected by the tax. As the Adam Smith Institute points out, however, 'the government's much-quoted '500' a year is really 15,000 a generation.' The true number of farms could be more than 40,000. Separate research, commissioned by Ashbridge Partners, found that one in 10 farmers surveyed said they will face an IHT bill of more than £1 million due to the inheritance tax hike, with 31 per cent expecting to pay more than £500,000. Why didn't Labour listen? Treasury minister James Murray, who referenced back in 2022 how many Zoom meetings he'd held with Dr Summers, even hosted CenTax's official launch in Parliament last November when he declared his desire 'to make sure that collaboration between CenTax, Treasury and HMRC continues for many years into the future.' Advani and Summers also influenced Labour's pledge to scrap non dom status with Treasury ministers again seeming to unquestioningly swallow their claim that it would raise £3.2 billion, a figure repeatedly cited by the Government. The trouble is, that number was also based on some misguided premises, perhaps including Advani and Summers' quite ludicrous prediction that out of 70,000 non-doms, only 77 would leave. As other economists later pointed out, the projection did not take into account the impact of abolishing non-dom inheritance tax protections. Even the OBR assumed that the changes would likely lead to a loss of 25 per cent of non-doms with trusts, which could cost the UK more than £12 billion during the course of the parliament. Still the Government swallowed the £3.2 billion figure hook line and sinker despite some now estimating that 10 per cent of non-doms may have already left the UK. A report by the CEBR predicts the ongoing exodus could reach 40 per cent – costing the Treasury a self-defeating £7.1 billion over this parliament. This combined with the £1.9 billion revenue lost as a result of the farm and family firm tax could mean the Government is down £9 billion thanks to listening to these nitwits. CenTax also wrongly predicted that increasing the tax rate on carried interest to 45 per cent would raise additional revenue of £0.8 billion per year. Labour settled on 32 per cent – but a January 2025 estimate by the OBR suggests that only £100 million will be raised and since then Reeves has watered it down. Labour claim to be a 'party of business'. So why are they seemingly listening to two economists who are laying the intellectual groundwork for an expansion in taxation that could come to look like Corbynism on steroids.
BBC News
37 minutes ago
- BBC News
The BBC World Service debate: Is Donald Trump making the world safer or more dangerous?
Update: Date: 18:45 BST Title: The BBC World Service debate: Is Donald Trump making the world safer or more dangerous? Content: Lyse DoucetChief international correspondent Hello and welcome to the BBC World Service debate, live from the Radio Theatre in Broadcasting House in London. Events are moving quickly. We're recording our discussion as tensions escalate sharply in the Middle East and beyond after Israel attacked Iran, and Tehran retaliated. President Trump promised to be a peacemaker - can he end this confrontation? He also boasted he would end the wars in Ukraine, as well as Gaza. He has put peace talks on the table in many places, and pushed his allies in many regions to take more responsibility for their own security. But his critics say his approach to diplomacy is reckless and chaotic, and so far the dealmaker in chief has not delivered a deal. Is Donald Trump making the world safer or more dangerous? Lyse will be joined by a panel of guests to discuss the escalating tensions in the Middle East, and the rapidly changing international landscape during President Trump's second presidency. Watch the debate live at the top of this page from 19:00 BST (18:00 GMT).
Reuters
41 minutes ago
- Reuters
UK's Spectris rejects second KKR takeover approach in favour of Advent's $5 billion proposal
June 13 (Reuters) - Britain's Spectris (SXS.L), opens new tab said on Friday it has rejected a second takeover proposal from private equity firm KKR, days after the scientific instruments maker backed a possible competing $5 billion bid from Advent. Spectris did not provide details on KKR's proposal, noting only that it was the second proposal by the PE firm it had rejected. The company, which provides hardware and software solutions to sectors such as pharmaceuticals, steel and automotive, said on Monday it would accept private equity firm Advent's proposal of 37.63 pounds per share if a formal offer was made. Advent and KKR did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment. The competing proposal by KKR was first reported by the Wall Street Journal on Friday. Spectris is the largest takeover target this year in Britain, a country that has attracted overseas buyers in recent years due to relatively cheap valuations. Under UK takeover rules, KKR has until July 11 to make a formal offer or walk away.
