Category Archives: European Union

European Union, Politics, Russia, Society, Ukraine

Ukraine, Russia and the wider issue of morality…

TUG OF WAR

Many Ukrainians are now so desperate to join the European Union that they are prepared to protest in ways not seen before in the country. They run the risk of brutality from President Viktor Yanukovych’s security forces, for whom the concept of community policing remains alien and an anathema. Mass anti-government protests in Ukraine have brought large swathes of the country to a standstill, largely prompted by Moscow’s strong-arm and bully-boy tactics aimed at halting Kiev’s attempts to improve the country’s trading ties with the EU. This fervour stems from a particular theory of Ukrainian nationhood, where many of its electorate believe the country should be an equal partner in the European Union, rather than remaining little more than a Russian satellite.

International opinion has, at times, questioned the morality of Russian decisions, such as that in 2009 when Moscow turned off the gas supplies to Ukraine in the middle of winter to dissuade it from forging closer ties with Brussels. The arrogance of Russian ambitions towards Ukraine could hardly have been laid barer. Continued threats over the continuity and supply of gas, as Russia continues to apply its power over Ukraine, underlies more cynical Russian ambitions. Mr Putin’s plan is for Ukraine to join Belarus and Kazakhstan in a political trading bloc to be known as the Eurasian Union.

For many Ukrainians, though, that is not only a poor substitute for the EU, but also an uncomfortable reminder of Ukraine’s position as a member of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Russia is seeking to capitalise on how Eurasian integration will likely generate increased interest from its other neighbours through the usual warm rhetoric of international diplomacy. But, in truth, the West would be right to assume a more menacing aspect to it. As Mr Putin is the dominant partner in this new Eurasian Union, it is worth examining and putting into perspective some of his recent comments and actions. For example, what of his attitude to the legitimate interests of other nations in the Arctic and his unnecessarily harsh treatment of those seeking to preserve the environment there? Russia is motivated by the rich new oil wells recently located in the Arctic and the huge benefits that exploration will bring to the Russian economy. Mr Putin’s rather indifferent attitude to human rights doesn’t bode well, either, for the Eurasian Union becoming a model template of tolerance and openness.

However, not all people in Ukraine are worried over Russia’s attempt to wrest control over its affairs. Many Ukrainians do support President Yanukovych’s decision to ditch his negotiations with the European Union and seem undisturbed about the record of human rights in their own country or in Russia.

The tragedy of Ukraine being forced to choose between traditions and that of regional power blocs is its nemesis. Geography dictates that fate, at least to some degree, is inevitable. Ethnic, economic and cultural ties do naturally tug in the opposite direction when a country is caught between two bigger powers. Yet, in all practicalities Ukraine should not have to make such a choice and would not need to if Russia would allow her to develop her links with Europe.

Conceivably, Ukraine could do that as well as being closely aligned to Russia. Ukraine should be allowed to maintain her trading and other relationships, but as part of a wider settlement between the EU on one hand and Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus on the other.

Mr Putin’s stance between his own nation and that of his close neighbours is generally perceived and accepted as a zero-sum game – the EU’s gain, for instance, must be Russia’s loss. But persisting with such a position will leave Ukraine at best in a state of uncertainty or limbo, and at worst a target for permanent bullying.

..

DURING last week’s annual state of the nation address, Vladimir Putin emphasised his belief that Russia takes a morally superior world-view to the West. It is hard to credit Mr Putin with that surprising claim considering the level of violence taking place on a daily basis in countries such as Syria and Ukraine.

Moscow’s staunch and unrelenting support for the dictatorial regime of Bashar al-Assad has been a prime reason why diplomatic efforts to stem the bloodshed have been thwarted in a raging civil war that has now claimed the lives of more than 100,000 people and displaced millions more.

Mr Putin claims that there is a clear moral compass behind his government’s domestic policies. But where is the evidence? Modern day Russia is a country where political opponents are killed or dispatched to Siberian labour camps, where gangsterism is rife, and where free speech is actively discouraged. Widespread and endemic corruption has persuaded Russian businessmen to flee the country in their droves to escape the constant threat of state-sponsored violence and extortion.

Mr Putin’s personal ambition of reviving Russia’s fortunes as a world power is a self-evident prophecy. He may well believe that, by resisting the tide of what he refers to as the West’s ‘non-traditional values’, his aspirations will be realised. In truth, so long as the Russian President remains intent on crushing political dissent at home and intimidating his enemies abroad, no one is going to be endeared to his sense of moral teaching.

Standard
Britain, Economic, Energy, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

Reduction in energy bills following the removal of green levies – a step in the right direction…

ENERGY BILLS

Householders will be somewhat relieved to hear that the UK government will be pegging back the recent increases made to electricity prices by all the major suppliers. The reduction is being made because the government is removing some of the green levies applied to bills to pay for policies designed to either reduce energy use or to encourage renewable energy development. These levies can be as much as 11 per cent that are directly added on to domestic bills. The impact of green levies on suppliers is to be lessened and the savings passed on to consumers. Utility bills will still go up by an average of around £70, rather than £123, a saving of about £50 this winter.

Changes are being made to two of these levies, the Energy Company Obligation, which commits energy firms under statute to assist with the costs and installation of better insulation, and the Warm Home Discount, which reduces bills for elderly consumers over 75. The idea is to transfer some of the money raised to pay from these schemes to general taxation so the taxpayer rather than the energy consumer foots the bill.

These charges are not being scrapped, but diverted. According to Ed Davey, the Energy Secretary, this will cost the taxpayer somewhere in the region of £600 million. The problem, however, goes much further than the bills themselves. Whilst Labour have proposed a freeze or cap on bills from 2015, this is wholly unrealistic since energy companies cannot control wholesale costs and will be required to invest for the future. The dilemma of market failure arising, something which is still to be investigated, will be attributable to Labour – because when the party took office in 1997, there were 17 companies in the energy sector that kept the market competitive. By the time Labour left office in 2010, there were just six remaining. Most analysts now perceive the energy market as operating like a cartel where energy prices are effectively rigged.

All the main political parties must share some responsibility for the confusing mess that passes for an energy policy. They are now engaged in a political battle over who can promise the lowest prices. Yet, the biggest problem concerns energy security.

Next winter looks certain to be affected by a coalescence of factors that will alter the capacity of the electricity system. A recently published report from the Royal Academy of Engineering suggests that the mothballing of gas-fired power plants and decarbonisation targets could lead to a ‘significant reduction in the resilience of the system’.

Undoubtedly, the cheapest way to generate electricity at the moment is by burning coal. The global price of coal has dropped substantially in recent months as coal mines in many parts of the world, including America, remain under-exploited. Yet, amendments to the UK Energy Bill are expected to force coal stations to close earlier than planned. In addition, there are also doubts in the medium term over the nuclear power programme planned at Hinkley Point, with questions in Brussels over the payments of subsidies to French and Chinese companies. Future supply, then, is the critical issue: energy consumers may be pleased to see their bills go up less than originally planned, even though many will still be paying for it through taxation. But they will be appalled if the lights go out. And for those who believe that green energy is greatly over-valued will complain that the government is just shifting the burden from one set of people to another.

The finer details of the changes also reveal that homebuyers will become eligible for a £1,000 contribution towards insulating their new home. Mr Davey has said this will be paid via a reduction in the stamp duty paid on the purchase price.

The changes to energy bills might just cause the energy companies and the government to be more transparent about exactly what makes up the unit price of gas and electricity on our bills. Hopefully, that might lead to them being more sensitive to that information, delivering consumers a far better deal in the longer term.

Standard
European Union, Government, Politics, Scotland

Scottish Government’s white paper on an independent Scotland published…

SCOTLAND

The Scottish Government’s white paper that runs to 670 pages is an insight into what an independent Scotland will look like. The Referendum for Scottish independence will be held in September 2014.

The Scottish Government’s white paper that runs to 670 pages is an insight into what an independent Scotland will look like. The Referendum for Scottish independence will be held in September 2014.

For all the pro-Unionist harping, it could never have been expected that, for all its length, the independence white paper could provide clear, definitive answers on many key issues including the status of our membership of the European Union.

Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond, like many of us, will be convinced that the EU would wish for a resource abundant independent Scotland to be a member. The assertion that Scotland should continue to be regarded as still being within the EU while negotiations are held on the terms and conditions of our membership as a separate state are pointedly correct, though Unionists will probably play hard and fast with the notion that conviction and assertion are not the same as hard and fast constitutional fact. Yet, the United Kingdom itself has no written constitution.

Mr Salmond’s assertions have also been challenged by comments last week from the Spanish prime minister, Mariano Rajoy,  to the effect that, if a ‘region’ opted to leave a member state, it would ‘remain outside the European Union’. It would then, he added, require the agreement of all 28 EU members before it was allowed to join. Scotland, however, is not a mere extension or region of England but a country in its own right. Mr Rajoy has missed the point completely, though he may have been speaking bluntly and loudly enough for Catalan nationalists to hear what he was implying. Whether he speaks with the authority of the Treaty of the European Union (TEU) behind him is highly debateable.

Of course, numerous voices have been raised and will continue to be raised in support of the premise that a region choosing to secede from a member state automatically ceases to be part of the EU. Consider the comments made by José Manual Barroso, the president of the European Commission, or Romano Prodi, his predecessor, to the effect that a secessional territory ‘would no longer be a member.’ Or the unequivocal statement, too, from Viviane Reding, commissioner in charge of justice and vice-president of the Commission, who wrote to the Spanish government last year insisting that… ‘Catalonia, if seceded from Spain, could not remain in the European Union as a separate member’.

But, according to Articles 49 and 50 of the TEU, the EU Commission has no say in who ceases to be a member or becomes a member. This is a matter that is entirely left to the European Council and the European Parliament. The First Minister might invoke Article 48 of the TEU which provides for treaty amendment in the event of the council failing to unanimously agree, though any such change would still require agreement ‘by common accord on the part of the representatives of the governments of the member states’. Here, Spain may invoke its right to exercise a veto. None of this immediately precludes Scotland becoming a full EU member, but it is a hurdle Mr Salmond will need to clear if Scotland is to retain full EU membership rights if negotiating after a Yes vote following next September’s referendum on whether Scotland should become an independent country.

Unionists have been knocked down a peg too when it comes to the other thorny issue of a currency union. Bank of England governor Mark Carney says he would welcome the opportunity to hold talks with the Scottish Government. Mr Carney is the only person within the British establishment thus far that has had the decency to admit such dialogue should take place. Other than Pound Sterling being as much Scottish as it is England’s apparent inalienable right to continue using sterling after Scottish independence, Mr Salmond’s government should accept this opportunity with alacrity and get round a table with Mr Carney and officials from the Bank of England.

– The writer seeks an independent Scotland

Get your hands on a copy of Scotland’s Future:

Standard