Latest news with #SingleMarket
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Sporting goods group backs EU single market strategy, unified EPR
The European Commision's strategy is aimed at revitalising the Single Market given the European market boasts a GDP of €18tn ($20.58tn) and stands as the world's second-largest economy (nearly 18% of the global economy). Encompassing 30 states, the European Market serves 450m consumers and includes 26m businesses, providing expansive access to an array of products, services, and investment opportunities. The new Single Market Strategy responds to the European Council's request in April 2024 for the commission to formulate a comprehensive single market strategy by June 2025. The comprehensive plan includes over 50 proposals designed to facilitate business operations within the Single Market by focusing on the elimination of trade barriers, fostering job creation, and driving economic growth. The strategy emphasises on priorities such as the removal of barriers to trade, injecting vitality into Europe's service sector, bolstering the development and expansion of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), simplifying current regulations, mainstreaming digitalisation, and enhancing collective governance and ownership of the Single Market. The sporting goods industry, represented by FESI, has expressed its support for the identification and planned removal of fragmented labelling requirements and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes, which are part of the "Terrible Ten" barriers addressed in the new Single Market Strategy. These issues have historically presented substantial hurdles for both large brands and SMEs, leading to administrative burdens, waste generation, and hindrances in adopting sustainable practices across national borders. FESI secretary general Jérôme Pero said: 'The recognition of packaging, labelling and EPR fragmentation as major market barriers is a direct reflection of the concerns our industry has raised for years. Today's strategy is a step in the right direction – we now want to see those words turned into action.' The implementation of these changes is anticipated to provide significant relief for businesses, particularly SMEs that have been grappling with varying compliance requirements across different countries. Despite this positive outlook, FESI expressed concern regarding recent actions by the EC which seem contradictory to the strategy's objectives. This concern stems from the commission's approval of France's Ecoscore system shortly before announcing the new strategy, a move that could potentially lead to further regulatory fragmentation. 'We welcome the strategy's ambitions, but coherence will be key. Approving national measures like Ecoscore while committing to harmonisation raises questions. We urge the commission to ensure its own actions do not undermine the goals it has set today,' Pero stated. FESI has pledged its support during the implementation phase of the proposed strategy and is keen on collaborating with both the commission and member states to achieve swift and enforceable results. In addition, the sporting goods industry in Europe, primarily composed of SMEs, expressed its willingness to contribute actively towards creating a more competitive, sustainable, and fully integrated Single Market. FESI represents approximately 1,800 manufacturers with 70 to 75% of its membership consisting of SMEs. In April this year, the federation welcomed the European Parliament's approval of the revised Ecodesign for Sustainable Product Regulation (ESPR), but raised concerns about plans to ban the destruction of unsold goods, particularly in relation to goods that infringe intellectual property rights. "Sporting goods group backs EU single market strategy, unified EPR" was originally created and published by Just Style, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Sign in to access your portfolio
Mint
6 days ago
- Business
- Mint
EU aims to cut red tape, boost funding to lure tech startups
The European Union set out plans to slash regulation and set up a special fund to attract tech startups as the bloc plays catchup with the U.S. on financing and innovation. The European Commission, the EU's executive arm, said regulatory fragmentation across the EU's 27 countries and inadequate financing were holding back growth for startups. Officials now hope to lower the administrative burden and launch a new fund to make it easier for startups to set up shop in the EU. Under the plans, the commission will seek to simplify rules, including on labor and tax law, so that startups can launch rapidly in Europe, ideally within 48 hours. Officials also plan to work with private investors to launch a new fund. The so-called Scaleup Europe Fund, privately managed and co-financed, will be part of the existing European Innovation Council Fund. 'We cut red tape, we facilitate their access to financing, we improve their ability to do business across our Single Market," Stephane Sejourne, EU executive vice-president for prosperity and industrial strategy, said in a statement. 'In other words, we want to put Europe right in the middle of the global innovation map, for companies and investors." The plan underscores efforts from EU officials to make the bloc more welcoming for startups and narrow the financing and innovation gap with the U.S. The EU is home to startups like France's Mistral AI and Germany's Aleph Alpha, but companies in the bloc struggle to raise the billions of dollars in funding and venture capital that are available to U.S. rivals like Microsoft-backed OpenAI or Anthropic. A commission official acknowledged that access to finance is an area of weakness, saying that startups in the bloc have roughly seven times less capital available to grow than in the U.S. Speed is another factor holding back growth, the official said, noting the EU can be 'very slow" in granting approvals. Europe's fragmented regulatory landscape is a recurring frustration for startups, but fundraising remains the top concern for founders, according to a May report from Slush, part of the Finnish not-for-profit Startup Foundation. Out of 607 responses from early-stage European startups collected in the first quarter, just 18% of founders said it would be easy to raise financing right now, according to the report, while 57% actively disagree. Ekaterina Zaharieva, EU commissioner for startups, research and innovation, said the plans would remove those barriers that hold back entrepreneurs. 'Europe is ready to scale up." Write to Mauro Orru at
Scotsman
22-05-2025
- Business
- Scotsman
Readers' Letters: Aberdeen wind farm brings jobs and community benefits
It's just wrong to claim Aberdeen wind farm isn't good for local economy, says spokesman Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... It has been suggested that the Aberdeen wind farm has not created jobs or investment since construction was completed (MJ Salter, Letters, 20 May). In fact, research from Oxford Brookes estimates spending linked to the operations and maintenance (O&M) of the wind farm is likely to lead to between 40 and 50 full-time equivalent jobs being created each year, through locally based contracts with suppliers and onward spending within the local community. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad While it is true that the construction phase of wind farms generates a surge in employment, the long-term impact extends far beyond that. The Aberdeen Offshore Wind Farm supports a range of skilled jobs in operations, maintenance and environmental monitoring – roles that are vital and sustained throughout the life of the project. These are high-quality, future-facing jobs that contribute to the diversification of the regional economy. A ferry navigates past wind turbines off the coast of Aberdeen (Picture: Andy Buchanan / AFP) The economic ripple effect of the wind farm is substantial. Local supply chains, ports and service providers benefit directly from the presence of such infrastructure. Aberdeen, long a hub of energy expertise, is now evolving into a centre for renewable innovation – ensuring that the region remains at the forefront of the global energy transition. Equally important is the community benefit fund associated with the wind farm. This fund has provided over £1 million to local projects, education initiatives and environmental programmes, ensuring that the advantages of renewable energy are shared with the people who live nearby. It is a tangible demonstration of our commitment to inclusive growth and community empowerment. We welcome continued dialogue and scrutiny, but it is vital that the conversation reflects the full picture. Claus Wattendrup, UK Country Manager, Vattenfal Scotland ignored Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A rather interesting claim was made by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer when he announced the trade deal with the EU: 'Britain is back on the world stage!' Mr Starmer, Scotland never left the world stage, Scotland was dragged out of it. Scotland fully recognised the need to remain in the Single Market and the Customs Union, yet was dragged away from our largest and closest trading partners. So I very much welcome a closer relationship with the EU as it will benefit our export businesses. What will this new trade deal with the EU bring to Scotland? Well, Scotland and her Government at Holyrood had no prior notice because Scotland was not invited to the EU Trade Deal negotiations, despite the PM on taking office promising to 're-set devolution'. A clear example once again from the Labour Government at Westminster that Scotland is an afterthought and deserves no voice. The Scottish fishing industry is furious with the EU Trade Deal, because the EU will now have unlimited access to Scottish waters for the next 12 years. The PM and his Labour government, in the last ten days, have shown their total disrespect for our devolved nation and government and her people. They are closing the door to much-needed immigration without any negotiations with our government in Holyrood, and now EU trade deals are agreed, again with no input from Scotland. Scotland's public and private sector deserve a voice, we deserve to be heard. We simply cannot continue not being seen or heard, while having to endure the damaging impact. Catriona C Clark, Banknock, Falkirk Market rules Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Two letters caught my attention yesterday, one from Neil Anderson and one from Richard Allison. Both concerned the EU deal. Mr Anderson suggests membership of EFTA would maintain our sovereignty while getting better access to the EU Internal Market. It was the UK who helped found EFTA in 1960 as a rival to the then EEC. However, a nation of 55 million selling to fellow EFTA member states with a combined population of only 20m made no economic sense, especially as the EEC population was by then close to 200m. To sell into the EU Internal Market EFTA members have to follow EU rules. These are enforced outwith the EU by the EFTA Court. It follows European Court case law, otherwise you would end up having to choose between two separate case law verdicts to solve the same problem. And the EU is not a political union. The Maastricht Treaty rejected supranationalism for intergovernmentalism, ie collective decision making. The latter is more cumbersome to operate but protects national rights. However, like any organisation the EU can still take a political stance. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad As regards fishing, all EFTA states have signed up to the Common Fisheries Policy allowing mutual access to one another's waters subject to agreed quotas, so it's no different from being in the EU. Mr Allison, meanwhile, suggests that we would fall under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights as a result of the latest deal. But we are already under its jurisdiction because it is a completely separate entity from the EU. The European Court can intervene in human rights issues only in relation to the operation of the Internal Market such as women being paid less than men for doing the same job. It cannot intervene on issues such as prisoner's rights. Robert Menzies, Falkirk Pot, kettle It's frankly hilarious to hear John Swinney having a grievance-stoking whinge about the PM's EU fisheries giveaway. He moans that 'the Scottish Government was not consulted' (your report, 20 May). Yet this is a First Minister who would take an 'independent' Scotland back into Europe and whose government tried to decimate our fishing industry through the Highly Protected Marine Areas legislation, yet another hastily abandoned separatist policy. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad As party leader, he boasts that he's stabilised a divided, scandal-hit SNP. Having the appearance and mannerisms of a boring bank manager undoubtedly helps Mr Swinney project a certain false gravitas which reassures many of his followers. However, given the ongoing ferries fiasco, repeated use of the phrase 'steadying the ship' is perhaps an unfortunate choice of maritime metaphor in praise of this false fisherman's friend. Martin O'Gorman, Edinburgh Wrong move It must have been difficult for the SNP to make a mess out of the cards they were dealt – with regards to Labour's attempt to reset relations with the EU – but they have succeeded. Surely, after years of telling everyone that membership of the EU was their one goal in politics, it would have been sensible for the nationalists to claim that Labour's attempts to reset the relationship were a step in the right direction but fell miles short. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But, no, being who they are, they tried to cash in politically and even talked of 'surrender' and jumped on the passing bandwagon and aligned themselves directly with Kemi Badenoch's Tories, Nigel Farage and others, using many of the same phrases. With leaders like John Swinney and Stephen Flynn, this was inevitable. Of course, their sheep-like supporters will follow and parrot the same lines. But the party bosses must know they have their votes anyway. To get within a mile of their Holy Grail they have to convince a great chunk of the thinking centre ground of Scottish politics to change their opinions, something they have never come close to doing. And this latest example only makes that gulf even wider. Alexander McKay, Edinburgh Untrue claims The letter from Peter Hopkins (20 May) contains two startling claims regarding the new UK-EU agreements – both of which are blatantly untrue. The use of Scottish fishing grounds by EU vessels remains as it was before the new agreement – and will be reviewed every 12 years instead of annually. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad There is no discussion of a 'Euro Army' currently in Europe, and in any case, the UK has a veto. Peter Burke, Carnoustie, Angus Losing 'friends' Surely Israel is fast losing its 'friends'. One of them, David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, condemns its recent actions in Gaza as 'monstrous, extremist and dangerous' (your report, 21 May). To say the least, that's putting it mildly. Gaza has been reduced to the status of a ghetto, squeezing its beleaguered citizens ever more tightly into an ever tinier territorial space. Israel's stated aim is to remove them altogether. Upwards of 14,000 babies are at severe risk of dying in the next 48 hours. Even Donald Trump, described by the egregious Benjamin Netanyahu as 'Israel's best friend', is losing patience, opining, in a masterful understatement, that 'a lot of people' have died, adding 'we'll have to sort it out'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Sorting it out is indeed urgent, and as Israel's best friend, Donald Trump, of all people, is the one to do it, with the leverage he has over Benjamin Netanyahu, who is surely, nobody's best friend. Ian Petrie, Edinburgh Vile style? Am I alone in hoping the 'fashion students' whose fatuous 'creations' adorned The Scotsman front page (21 May) are not receiving grants from taxpayers employed in proper jobs and trade apprenticeships? As that noted expert Oscar Wilde himself said: 'Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable we have to change it every six months.' John Birkett, St Andrews, Fife Write to The Scotsman
New Statesman
20-05-2025
- Business
- New Statesman
Why Kemi Badenoch's Brexit attacks won't work
Photo byLate-night negotiations, last-minute breakthroughs, furious accusations of 'selling out' and 'surrendering'. No, this is not 2018. Welcome to Keir's Starmer's EU reset and the right's backlash. In February, Kemi Badenoch channelled her inner Gordon Brown and set 'five tests' for the big renegotiation with the EU – and breaching any one would make any potential deal unacceptable to the Conservatives. Readers of this newsletter will not be surprised to learn that, in the Tory leader's view, the deal announced on Monday (including access to a £126bn EU rearmament fund, an agri-food agreement and the reopening of e-gates for Brits, in exchange for dynamic alignment on food standards, a youth mobility scheme and an extension of existing fishing rights for EU vessels for 12 years) breaches all of them. As such, Badenoch has vowed that the Tories will reverse the deal… just as soon as they get back into power. There is so much that could be said about this mindset, but let's start for a moment with the deal itself. It is neither as sensational as Labour figures trumpet nor as disastrous as the Conservatives howl. It's a series of good, solid steps in building closer UK-EU relations after Brexit. Like any trade agreement, it involves trade-offs on both sides and small wins taking on symbolic importance. (As a former trade secretary, you might think Badenoch would know all of this.) Those hoping Britain might soon rejoin the Single Market or Customs Union (or, indeed, the EU itself) will be disappointed at the lack of ambition, but perhaps reassured that something is better than nothing – £9bn, which is what the government says will be added to the UK economy by 2040 as a result, is not to be sniffed at. As for the concessions, well, the Mail on Sunday commentator Dan Hodges put it best: 'none of the concessions to the EU – and they are there – come close to the concessions granted by Theresa May, Boris Johnson or Rishi Sunak'. This puts the Conservatives in their usual post-election quandary. As with so many policy areas (NHS waiting lists, immigration, economic stability), their attack lines at Labour are hampered by the memory of their own recent policy failures. But it is particularly potent on this issue because of how Brexit became part of the Conservative Party's core identity over the past decade, and the subsequent memories this evokes. Take David Frost and his outrage at the extension of the very fisheries deal he himself negotiated, which he tried to argue sacrifices a hypothetically better fisheries deal which sadly he wasn't able to negotiate at the time. (Speaking of fish, incidentally, we should probably add some context. The UK fishing industry is worth an estimated £1.1bn. It directly employs 6,800 people, around the same as the employee headcount at Harrods and just half the number of yoga instructors working in the UK. It's true that we can't feed ourselves on yoga, but given the UK exports most of its fish, it's not like we're eating what we catch anyway. And for all the talk of selling out, some parts of the UK fishing industry – Salmon Scotland, for example, which represents the Scottish salmon industry – are delighted with a deal that will make it easier for exporters to sell to Europe.) But back to Kemi Badenoch. 'We've got to be a little bit more realistic and a lot less naive,' she told a press conference on Monday afternoon, flanked by Victoria Atkins and Priti Patel for emotional support, shortly after saying she was gobsmacked by Starmer doing a fairly run-of-the-mill trade negotiation. This was accompanied by an awkward video of various Conservative shadow ministers explaining why they had misgivings about Starmer's deal, trying to look natural while boiling a kettle or stacking papers and speaking to camera at the same time. It was just as excruciating as it sounds – although not quite as excruciating as Boris Johnson branding Starmer 'the orange ball-chewing gimp of Brussels' (not an image I wanted either) and knocking Badenoch off the splash of the GB News website. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe All of which is to say: does this look like a government-in-waiting? You could argue that no opposition licking its wounds 10 months after an election would do, but then, you could equally argue that no opposition licking its wounds 10 months after an election would be threatening to reverse the reset anytime soon. Nigel Farage, incidentally, has also said he'll tear up the deal if he gets into Downing Street. But he hasn't spent the past 24 hours having the very public breakdown the Tories have (no domination fantasies or gimmicky videos of him trying to slam UK veterinary policy while closing a car door). No doubt he knows he doesn't need to. Voters who still view a modest realignment of the UK's trading relationship with Europe as total Brexit betrayal are already going to vote Reform. And, as George pointed out yesterday, they are in a minority: two thirds of voters supporter closer relations with Europe and over half actually want to rejoin the EU. Farage has the Brexit purist vote locked in, and is now casting his net further afield. Badenoch, meanwhile, is fishing in a dwindling pool of voters who have, if their primary concern is immigration, probably already abandoned the Tories, while further alienating the majority who really do favour some common-sense cooperation. Though Badenoch is claiming her approach will stop us 'reopening the Brexit battles of the past', she more than anyone else seems stranded in 2018, when another beleaguered Conservative leader tried to dig in her heels against the combined forces of commercial reality and electoral maths. And we all know what happened to her. This piece first appeared in the Morning Call newsletter; receive it every morning by subscribing on Substack here [See also: The dangerous relationship] Related
Telegraph
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Starmer does not care what the British people think
To understand Keir Starmer's real view, just rewind to the chaotic period where the members of the House of Commons, egged on by the Speaker John Bercow, were attempting to thwart the referendum result by blocking Brexit. As shadow Brexit Secretary, Starmer fought to keep alive the prospect of a second referendum because, he said, 'After all, deeply embedded in our values are internationalism, collaboration and cooperation with our European partners.' There is no doubt that Labour's manifesto commitment not to re-enter the Single Market or the customs union was a cynical but necessary political manoeuvre that went against all his own personal beliefs and long-held views. There has always been an argument for working more closely with our European partners since Brexit particularly in the areas of common interest such as security, just as long as it doesn't breach the principle of Brexit itself. It has become increasingly clear recently that the remaining establishment, as typified by the Governor of the Bank of England, had become increasingly emboldened to pursue their programme of trying to reverse some of the key principles underpinning Britain's key directed freedoms. Since a return to the Single Market or the customs union would be a public and fully fledged betrayal of the referendum result, the strategy is instead to adopt a stealth approach to reintegration with the EU. For those of us who were 'constitutional leavers' our prime objective was to ensure that the sovereignty of Parliament was restored and that no foreign court could overrule what British voters had decided at the general election. The most unacceptable betrayal would be any new role in UK law for the European Court of Justice. This is the real problem that lies behind the seemingly benign terms 'regulatory alignment' and 'dynamic alignment'. The area chosen to advance this agenda is the ostensibly innocuous area of plant and animal health, known as SPS rules. In order to make the passage of some food and animal products easier, the United Kingdom is agreeing that its rules in this area should always be in line with that of the European Union. Let's be clear what this means. From now on, the United Kingdom will be required to follow rules set by Brussels that are made without any British representation in the room. We will become rule takers, supplicants at the hands of the European Union, including ECJ legal authority. In these areas of policy we will be in a worse position than we were when we were members of the EU itself. This will tie Britain's hands in any future trade agreements with the growing part of the global economy that is outside the EU since Britain would not be able to negotiate different terms in these areas of policy, even if it were to be a lever to greater advantage elsewhere. And let's remember that many of the EU rules are themselves backdoor protectionist measures designed to protect European (largely French) farmers from competition. It is one of the areas where President Trump was entirely correct: the EU was using non-tariff barriers such as environmental, consumer or health and safety legislation as an alternative to monetary tariffs. SAFE (security action for Europe) is another protectionist ploy by Paris designed to force EU members of Nato to support the French defence industry by cutting out its main rivals, the United States and the UK, from European procurement. It is unsurprising given the French antipathy towards Nato since its creation. The proposals would effectively cut EU countries off from defence capabilities produced in Britain or America, a plan that could have been purposely designed to put a more permanent smile on Putin's face. The UK has been not only a European but a global leader on the Ukrainian issue and any attempt to lock the United Kingdom out of wider European security would be reprehensible. Thankfully Germany, Poland, the Nordics and Baltics and Italy can see through this pernicious French move and look likely to demand a compromise. No matter how these issues pan out, Keir Starmer has shown his complete disrespect for what the British people want and need.
