Simon Harris warns of Irish job losses if US imposes 30% tariffs
Tánaiste Simon Harris, who is also the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, will issue the warning at a Cabinet meeting, as the EU tries to avoid an all-out trade war with the US.
Advertisement
US president Donald Trump upended negotiations over the weekend by demanding a deal by August 1st or face a 30 per cent tariff on goods coming to the US from the European Uniop.
That scenario, according to EU trade chief Maros Sefcovic, would make it 'almost impossible to continue' current transatlantic trade, which is worth €4.4 billion a day.
At Tuesday's Cabinet meeting, Mr Harris is expected to tell Ministers that Ireland's focus over the next two-and-a-half weeks is on negotiations to reach a deal to avoid the imposition of higher tariffs that could precipitate a full-blown trade war between the EU and US.
He will tell colleagues that this scenario would see a significant impact on the economy, including devastating job losses.
Advertisement
Mr Harris will warn that the possibility of the EU imposing a revised list of counter tariffs, amounting to €72 billion, against the US if talks fail would 'cause pain on both sides'.
The coming weeks must, therefore, be used for a negotiated settlement to avoid such a scenario, Mr Harris will say.
The Tánaiste will also update ministers on plans to engage with the pharmaceutical industry this week.
Speaking on Monday evening, Mr Harris said there was a need to 'de-escalate the situation' through a framework deal that would provide certainty for businesses and protect jobs and investment.
Advertisement
The Minister for Foreign Affairs made the comments following a meeting with US ambassador to Ireland Ed Walsh.
Speaking at Government Buildings, Mr Harris said: 'The message I relayed to the US ambassador is a consistent one and a very straightforward one: we in Ireland, we in Europe, want a deal.
'We want a trade deal that is good for Ireland, good for Europe, good for the United States of America, and I believe there is a clear landing zone in relation to that.'
Mr Harris said: 'I believe there was a landing zone very nearly there last week, and it's regrettable that that wasn't arrived at.'
Advertisement
However, he said he remained confident that a deal can happen in the days ahead.
The European Commission is due to publish an expanded list of counter-tariffs that would be implemented if an agreement is not reached.
He said the 'optimal position' would be to get to a deal where 'we can rip up that list and never need to see it implemented'.
'A countermeasure list is an important step of saying to President Trump: 'Hang on, we want a deal here, we want a way forward, but if there isn't a deal Europe also has options at its disposal'.'
Ireland
Cork town nervous as Trump seeks to lure pharma in...
Read More
The Tánaiste said the Government will also analyse the list and engage with the Commission over any 'areas of concern for Ireland' that arise.
Mr Harris's discussion with Mr Walsh also touched on the issue of the pharmaceutical sector where there is an ongoing section 232 investigation being carried out by the US administration.
The Tánaiste said the pharma sector remains an area of significant concern for Ireland.
'Europe must remain calm, must remain united – our strength is in being united, 460 million of us – and must of course prepare for all scenarios.' – Additional reporting: Press Association
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
12 minutes ago
- Reuters
Renault lowers 2025 guidance, names Duncan Minto as interim CEO
PARIS, July 15 (Reuters) - Renault ( opens new tab named its finance chief Duncan Minto as interim CEO on Tuesday, and said it will step up cost cutting measures after cutting its forecast for full year operating margins following a worse than expected performance in June. Renault said it now aims to achieve a full year operating margin of 6.5% compared with more than 7% previously announced. And it aims for free cash-flow of 1-1.5 billion euros, versus over 2 billion euros previously. It said these results have been impacted by a lower-than-anticipated performance in June, including volumes slightly lower than expected, an underperformance of the light commercial vehicle business in a sharply declining market in Europe and a level of receivables impacted by billing timing differences. Minto, who has been in the Renault group since 1997, has taken over running the company from Tuesday as it searches for a permanent replacement for Luca de Meo who resigned suddenly last month to join luxury group Kering. Minto will ensure the day-to-day management of the company alongside Jean-Dominique Senard, who will hold the position of chairman, Renault said in a statement.
The Guardian
12 minutes ago
- The Guardian
UK's top defence maker BAE Systems ‘confident' of receiving orders for Typhoon jets
British weapons manufacturer BAE Systems has said it is confident of receiving further export orders of the Typhoon fighter jet, a development that would secure the future of several hundred jobs at its factory in Lancashire. The company is hoping for as many as 150 more orders for the jet, with up to two-thirds of those expected to be assembled in the UK. It comes after Unite, a union representing manufacturing workers, raised concerns over the future of the assembly line at Warton. Richard Hamilton, who leads work on the Typhoon for BAE Systems, said he was 'really confident' of future orders, with Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia the likely buyers. FTSE 100 manufacturer BAE Systems is the UK's dominant defence maker, producing weapons ranging from tanks, to warships and nuclear submarines, as well as fighter jets. However, Unite last week said work on the Typhoon's UK assembly lines had stopped because there were no future orders, threatening its closure. The Typhoon, also known as the Eurofighter, was developed as a joint project between the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain, and has been a mainstay of the Royal Air Force for two decades, including intercepting Russian aircraft since the invasion of Ukraine. Manufacturing work is shared out between the nations, but each country assembles the planes it has ordered, as well as those of export partners. In the UK's case, the Ministry of Defence has not ordered any more of the jets, despite recently confirming a further order of US-made F-35 aircraft. The UK has not secured further exports of the Typhoon to other nations, which has meant work has stopped on the final assembly line at Warton, raising concerns among unions over as many as 500 jobs. Hamilton said that 'we have no intention at the moment of reducing manufacturing headcount', and suggested that workers could be redeployed on other projects if there were an extended gap until the next orders. 'I want to build more Typhoons here, and I believe we will build more Typhoons here,' he said. BAE is working on upgrades to the Typhoon's electronics, including new computer systems and radar, to extend its time in service. Hamilton said a commitment to the upgrades by the UK government would make it more likely other countries would order the planes. New orders could mean continued production of the Typhoon in the UK for another decade. BAE is also a key part of a consortium of the UK, Italy and Japan producing a new fighter jet, known as Tempest, which is due to enter service in 2035. The UK government has backed Saudi Arabia's efforts to join the Tempest programme, despite controversy over the country's human rights record, including the allegedly state-sanctioned murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and its long involvement in the civil war in Yemen. BAE Systems executives said the company was on track to fly a demonstrator aircraft by 2027. Keir Starmer last month committed to raise defence spending to the equivalent of 3.5% of GDP in line with Nato allies. Part of that increase will be paid for by cuts to the international aid budget.
Telegraph
18 minutes ago
- Telegraph
‘Am I going bonkers?' Judge attacks government cover-up of Afghan leak
'Am I going bonkers?' Those were the words of a High Court judge as he discovered the full extent of the government cover-up of a secret immigration scheme. Mr Justice Chamberlain had just been told that £6 billion of public spending (now £7 billion) was being hidden with the use of an unprecedented superinjunction. While the cover-up was ostensibly to protect thousands of Afghans who had helped the British Government, as well as their families, ministers also appeared to be trying to protect themselves. John Healey, the Defence Secretary, said in one memo seen by the court that: ' Political and reputational considerations ' had been a key factor informing the Government's response. For the first time in British history, a government had used the courts to prevent anyone – and in particular the media and MPs – from revealing not only what they were up to, but the very existence of the court proceedings. Mr Justice Chamberlain recognised it for what it was: an unparalleled assault on free speech and, as one barrister put it, a way for ministers to 'deliberately mislead the public'. Superinjunctions, more commonly obtained by footballers to shut down reporting of extra-marital affairs, were 'interferences with freedom of expression which take place under the radar', the judge said, and when the Government obtained one it was: 'Likely to give rise to understandable suspicion that the court's processes are being used for the purposes of censorship.' Mr Justice Chamberlain rightly observed that the injunction – granted by another judge in September 2023 – was 'completely shutting down' democratic accountability and decided to lift it, only for the Court of Appeal to overrule him. He said it was 'the first contra mundum superinjunction ever granted'. The Latin phrase for 'against the whole world' explains what the court order meant. Instead of being granted against a named individual, or news organisation, anyone at all who learnt of the leak was banned from talking about it under threat of imprisonment. Grant Shapps had been granted the injunction on his second day as defence secretary, after journalists approached the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to comment on a story about a vast data breach that exposed the identities and addresses of Afghan soldiers seeking asylum in the UK. Rishi Sunak's government decided the public must not find out about a secret plan to offer 24,000 Afghans asylum. It argued that lives would be at risk if the media or Parliament revealed the existence of the leak, or the asylum scheme that followed, because the Taliban would be alerted to the existence of the list and would target those who had helped the US-led coalition before its withdrawal in 2021. Instead of being in place for four months – as originally requested while the MoD organised an airlift of those affected – the Sunak government, and then the Labour government that replaced it in 2024, kept the injunction in place for nearly two years. During that time there was a sinister shift in ministers' reasoning for keeping the public in the dark. The Government's lawyers told Mr Justice Chamberlain that it wanted to put an 'agreed narrative' in place to explain away the arrivals of large numbers of Afghans – in other words, lie to the public. The judge warned that: 'Open justice is a cardinal constitutional principle, from which derogations can be justified only in exceptional circumstances,' and as the case wore on over the course of dozens of hearings, it became clear that he felt that definition was not being met. Tom Forster KC, who was appointed by the judge as a special advocate to challenge the Government in court, told him the lack of scrutiny had put 'the democratic process in the deep freeze'. In February last year, he invited journalists from media organisations that knew about the leak (and who had been threatened with jail if they reported it) to question Natalie Moore, a senior MoD official, at a hearing held behind closed doors. The journalists pointed out that the issue could affect the forthcoming general election and made the case anew for the public to be told the truth. By May last year – before the election – the judge's patience had run out. He ruled that the 'continued stifling of public debate' could no longer be justified and said the injunction was 'closing off public debate on an issue of profound moral and economic significance'. The MoD immediately appealed, hiring one of the country's most eminent barristers, Sir James Eadie KC, at taxpayers' expense. He persuaded the Court of Appeal to overrule Mr Justice Chamberlain and keep the injunction in place. In October, a Cabinet sub-committee chaired by Pat McFadden, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster – and attended by Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, Mr Healey, the Defence Secretary, Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, and Shabana Mahmood, the Lord Chancellor – decided provisionally to expand the asylum scheme. By then, the projected costs had increased to £6 billion, and at another hearing last November, when Mr Justice Chamberlain was told how much public spending was being concealed, he spluttered: 'I am starting to doubt myself – am I going bonkers, because it really is £6 billion?' He added: 'When you are dealing with public expenditure of that magnitude…it's not possible to lose that amount of money down the back of the sofa. 'It's not secret intelligence programmes, it's putting real people up in real accommodation in the UK without revealing it's happening…the basis of the expenditure of all of this money isn't going to be revealed.' 'Provide cover' Ms Moore told the court a statement would be made to Parliament to 'provide cover' for why so many Afghans were arriving in Britain. A government briefing paper shown to the court said that ministers wanted to 'control the narrative' and use a 'robust public comms strategy' to set out 'the scale but not the cause' of the Afghans arriving. The judge said: 'How feasible [is it] to spend that amount of money without the facts coming to light? But we are now seeing how it was feasible: making a statement that provides cover and agree a narrative which is not a true narrative.' He added: 'It is a very, very striking thing.' Mr Healey made a statement to Parliament in December in which mention was made of the resettlement scheme, followed by another statement earlier this month saying the scheme had ended. Last week the Government decided that the threat to Afghan lives was 'less than previously thought', and that the superinjunction might actually have made the situation worse. It paved the way for the injunction to be lifted – and for the media to finally tell the truth to the public – after being gagged for 683 days.
