This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.
X
MM-Cover-Small-210814.jpg
Categories:Politics,Regulation

Osborne denies UK damaged by euro treaty snub

  • Print
  • Comments (1)

Chancellor George Osborne denies that the UK Government’s refusal to back a treaty aimed at stabilising the eurozone will damage British influence over European financial regulation.

In an interview with Money Marketing, the European parliament’s economic and monetary affairs committee chair and Liberal Democrat MEP Sharon Bowles says negotiations have already moved away from ground favoured by the UK since the European council summit last December.

But, giving evidence to the Treasury select committee last week, Osborne said: “In the directives I have negotiated on hedge funds, short selling and the current one on derivatives, we are securing British interests directive by directive with some tough negotiations.”

Bowles says the “stupid” British approach to the summit has left it isolated in negotiations over derivatives and the detail of Solvency II.

She says: “Where are our friends? They say you would not help us save the euro, so why should we help you with your pensions?”

Last December, the UK Government said it would not back EU treaty changes to impose strict fiscal rules on eurozone countries without a string of assurances about financial regulation. Bowles says the demands made Britain look like “a sulky child” trying to renege on previous agreements.

Cicero Consulting Brussels analyst Tim Gieles says the UK’s demands dealt a blow to negotiations but that hostility has softened since the immediate aftermath of the summit, when even reopening deals sealed in the UK’s favour was moote d.

He says: “Nevertheless, Britain will have to show it is willing to come back to the table to secure its interests, it is a give and take process.”

The Investment Management Association says the Government’s stance will make defending UK interests more difficult.

A spokeswoman says: “Britain already has an uphill battle and this is going to make it that much harder.”

The Chancellor on…

Danger that Europe could interfere with plans to split retail and investment bank operations:
“The European Commission is looking at possibly separating retail and investment banking but it cannot mandate it, the council has to agree. I am encouraged it is looking at this because people worried we were only doing this in Britain, now it is being looked at elsewhere. There should not be maximum harmonisation, it is important that countries are able to erect on top of minimum standards appropriate to national circumstances. We will have to see what the EU legislation looks like to make sure assurances that we will be able to do that are correct.”

Possible costs to consumers of the retail/investment split:
“It is good value for money, the benefits are the British taxpayer is better protected from bank failure. The cost comes from the removal of an implicit subsidy from the Government. I do not accept the only way banks can absorb these costs is to increase the cost of lending, they could actually reduce, shock horror, their remuneration.”

Excessive bonuses:
“My hands are tied on bonus arrangements agreed by the previous government but when it comes to new bonuses arrangements, you can be sure this Chancellor will be taking a keen interest.”

  • Print
  • Comments (1)

Daily Email Updates
If you enjoyed this article, sign up to receive the latest news and analysis from Money Marketing.

The Money Marketing CPD Centre
Build your annual CPD - you can log and plan your CPD hours for free with The Money Marketing CPD Centre.

Taxbriefs Advantage
Advantage is a digital reference source giving unbiased, independent, answers to your technical queries. Subscribe to Taxbriefs Advantage.

Readers' comments (1)

  • Might it not be a good idea to look at the economies of Norway, Switzerland and maybe even Lichtensein as the basis for an analysis as to whether even partial membership of the Eurozone has been or is in any way likely to be of any tangible benefit to that of the UK?

    Unless there's any clear evidence that pulling out entirely would in any way harm international trade between the UK and the 15 counties that constitute the Eurozone, why not simply go back to running our country the way we want to without the relentless imposition of unwelcome and frequently stupid laws and regulations from Brussels?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your sayEdit my profile/screen name

You must sign in to make a comment

Fund Data

Editor's Pick



Poll

Should the FCA relax pension transfer qualification requirements?

Job of the week

Latest jobs

View all jobs

Most recent comments

View more comments