Modern business adores a good acronym and one which has been gaining currency recently is ‘EMEA’ which, for the uninitiated, describes a region comprising Europe, the Middle East and Africa”. Increasingly companies are creating strategies that address the EMEA region as a whole. For example, InterContinental Hotels Group is reported in this week’s Marketing magazine (12/03), to be looking for a marketing services agency to create its advertising for this region as part of a £500m brand overhaul.
This commercial focus on EMEA serves at one level to highlight the growing economic influence of this “region” as large multi-nationals seek to address it as a single trading area and also to underline its relatively compact geography too with the wide sweep of north Africa and the Middle East facing and meeting the southern borders of the EU.
It also serves to point up some of the issues identified in a report published this week by Javier Solana and Benito Ferrero-Waldner, which predicts widespread social unrest by 2020, as falling harvests and environmental conflicts trigger a wave of immigration up into north Africa and then into mainland Europe.
Against this backdrop the importance of ensuring that the environmental measures agreed at the spring heads of state meeting in Brussels (12-13/03) are pursued and don’t simply become the sort of aspirational targets which are such a strong feature of government rhetoric here in the UK.
As Giles Chichester MEP pointed out in a speech supporting Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso’s call for greater economic liberalisation, globalisation has delivered a range of benefits, low cost imports, low inflation and low interest rates but member states still need to ensure that they concentrate on their competitiveness and drive out bad regulation at all levels within the system.
However, what is increasingly clear is that unless the environmental dimension is addressed too, anti-competitive vested national interests challenged and effort focused upon meeting the challenges which global poverty pose, then the economic and security implications for European nations could be grave.Welcome news from the Commission on competition
7th March 2008
Welcome news this week as the EU Commission affirms that the use of "Golden Shares" has no place in a single market. The Commission's statement comes hard on the heels of the news that Airbus is part of the consortium (with the US defence firm Northrop Grumman), which has successfully outbid Boeing for the US$40bn contract for new in-flight refuelling aircraft for the US military - a development which should secure thousands of UK based aviation jobs.
As someone who for a number of years wrote and edited a specialist London insurance market publication on aviation issues, I am well aware of the long running battle between these two aviation giants and the propensity of Boeing to cry foul whenever it perceives that EADS has been handed any form of commercial advantage. For its part EADS has long pointed to the very large element of hidden subsidy which it considers Boeing receives in the form of military research and development spending.
The fact that Airbus has secured a part in this huge military contract is already raising protests from US politicians who have large Boeing plants in their home states. For its part Boeing is reported to be seeking an explanation for the decision prior to considering whether it will appeal.
Therefore, the news that French and German attempts to use golden shares to acquire extra voting rights to block foreign purchasers from investing in EADS is welcome as it reaffirms the importance of free trade on a global scale.
There are those commentators who have argued that investment in Airbus by less friendly nations should be grounds for the US military witholding such contracts. However, as Northrop Grumman itself has pointed out, "all modern jetliners are built from a global supplier base... The Boeing tanker includes parts manufactured in Japan, United Kingdom, Canada and Italy.".
Above all, our instincts must be to preserve the paramountcy of free trade. There is much that the EU Commission gets wrong but here, for once, its instincts are entirely correct.
Great news, with the results from Iwantareferendum's (IAWs) ten ballots showing conclusively that the people of this country do want a say in a referendum on whether or not the Government should ratify the European Constitution, now masquerading as the Lisbon Treaty.
The following is the text of IAWs press release (02/03/08):
I Want a Referendum today announced the results of ten referendums which have been running in ten marginal constituencies.The referendums have been carried out for IWR by Electoral Reform Services - a leading firm of independent election scrutineers recognised by the United Nations, the British Government, and used by all the three main parties for their internal elections.
Despite several of the sitting MPs leafleting constituents telling them not to vote, the referendums have led to an unprecedented response from voters.
Key results:
Stunningly, 152,520 people voted across just ten parliamentary constituencies. Of these 133,251 voted for a referendum.
Even though the poll was unofficial, the 36.2% turnout means that a higher proportion of people voted in these unofficial referendums than in real elections in their local area. The average turnout for local elections (when not held with general elections) since 1996 is 35.4%. The average turnout in referendums on directly elected mayors - including in
This is the highest ever turnout in such an unofficial ballot.
Voters were asked two questions: Should the hold a national referendum on the EU's Treaty? 88% voted yes and 12% voted no. Less than 1% did not answer.
Should the approve the EU's Treaty? 89% voted against the Treaty and 8% voted in favour. 3% did not answer.
* In eight of the ten seats a greater proportion of people voted for a referendum than voted for the sitting MP. On average the sitting MPs won 27.5% of the available vote. But of those balloted in this campaign, 31.2% voted for a national referendum.
A full table of the results in detail is available at:
There was a real buzz at yesterday's mass lobby of parliament organised by Iwantareferendum.com.
Not even the presence, earlier in the day, of six people protesting about Heathrow expansion by climbing on to the roof of the Palace of Westminster, could distract the media's attention from the thousands of people from all over the counry and all walks of life, who had travelled to Westminster to tell their local MP's why they wanted politicians across the spectrum to keep the promises they made to 'let the people decide' on the very significant changes which ratification of the Lisbon Treaty (the EU Constitution in all but name) will bring about.
The House of Commons is due to debate the referendum question on 5th March and the second reading vote is expected before the Budget - which is on 12th March - at which point the action moves to the House of Lords.
If you aren't one of the thousands of people who have signed up to the petition then please visit Iwantareferendum.com and add your support. It's a great site with lots of really useful information.
14th March 2008
7th March 2008
Great news, with the results from Iwantareferendum's (IAWs) ten ballots showing conclusively that the people of this country do want a say in a referendum on whether or not the Government should ratify the European Constitution, now masquerading as the Lisbon Treaty.
28th February 2008
