Showing posts with label European Union. Show all posts
Showing posts with label European Union. Show all posts

Friday, 14 October 2016

Diverging Capitalisms? Britain, the City of London and Europe

On 28th October Prof Lucia Quaglia will speak at the workshop  'Diverging Capitalisms, Part 2: Brexit and the new EU economic governance' at the Policy Network, London. This workshop is the second of a series of four events organised as part of the project Diverging Capitalisms? Britain, the City of London and Europe’, which is a joint venture between FEPS (Foundation for European Progressive Studies, Brussels), Policy Network, and SPERI (Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute, University of Sheffield). For more information see http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/events/diverging-capitalisms-part-2/.

Lucia's paper on 'European Union Financial Regulation, Banking Union, Capital Markets Union and the United Kingdom'  will examine post-crisis reforms in these policy areas by focusing on the preferences and influence of the United Kingdom (UK) in the policy process. It is argued that the UK has played a variety of roles – ‘foot-dragger’, ‘fence-sitter’ and ‘pace-setter’ - in the policies under discussion. The (at times considerable) British influence was geared towards the attainment of preferences that were shaped by domestic politics and political economy, first and foremost the interests of the financial services industry and the City of London.

Tuesday, 19 April 2016

The EU Referendum and the UK environment: An Expert Review

Professor Neil Carter is one of the contributors to 'The EU Referendum and the UK environment: An Expert Review', which provides a detailed review of the academic evidence on how EU membership has influenced UK policies, systems of decision making and environmental quality. Containing 14 chapters and over 60,000 words, it documents how the EU has affected UK environmental policy and how, in turn, the UK has worked through the EU to shape wider, international thinking. It has been authored by 14 international experts, who have drawn on the findings of over 700 publications to offer an impartial and authoritative assessment of the evidence. Overall, the report concludes that, on balance, the net environmental benefits of EU membership have been positive. Neil Carter's contribution focuses on the impact of EU membership on the response of political parties to environmental issues.


Tuesday, 29 March 2016

Applicants sought - EU Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowships

The Department is seeking applications from researchers with a PhD (or at least 4 years’ full-time research experience) to apply for an EU Marie SkÅ‚odowska-Curie Individual Fellowship. In all cases, the fellowship must involve an element of mobility (specified below).  
  • European Fellowships are held in EU Member States or Associated Countries and are open to researchers either coming to Europe or moving within Europe.  European fellowships are 12-24 months in length. To apply for a fellowship with York, you must not have been based in the UK for more 12 months of the 3 years preceding the call deadline (14/09/2016).
  • Global Fellowships are based on a secondment to a third country and a mandatory 12 month return period to a European host.  Global Fellowships are 12 to 24 months for the outgoing phase, plus 12 months for the return phase in Europe.  To apply for a fellowship with York, you must be an EU / Associated country national or have been resident in the UK for 5 years or more. You must also have spent you must not have spent more than 12 months of the 3 years preceding the call deadline (14/09/2016) in the third country.
In order to be considered, please submit the following documents to Ed Kirby (ed.kirby@york.ac.uk) by 4pm on Friday 27th May:
  • A copy of your CV (following the Marie-Curie Individual Fellowship guidelines – see p. 41 of the guide available here
  • A two page outline of the proposed research project
  • Up to 1 page on your proposed mentor, your reasons for this choice and the wider fit between your project and the Department 
It is recommended that you contact your proposed mentor in advance of applying. If you have any questions regarding the process please contact Ed Kirby.

Wednesday, 24 February 2016

The place of financial services in TTIP negotiations

In this policy brief commissioned by Policy Network, Lucia Quaglia examines the place of financial services in TTIP negotiations, highlighting the surprising fact that the US authorities are less keen than the EU authorities on regulatory cooperation in the field of financial services for fear of lower standards. Her paper was disseminated at an event on TTIP organised by Policy Network on 25 February in London. Several policy makers, including Commissioner Malmstrom attended the event. See here for further information: http://www.policy-network.net/news_detail.aspx?ID=4074

Professor Lucia Quaglia provides evidence to the House of Lords

In February Professor Lucia Quaglia gave evidence to the House of Lords Sub-Committee for Economic and Financial Affairs for the preparation of an inquiry on Economic and Monetary Union. The session discussed: the completion of Banking Union and in particular the setting up of a common deposit guarantee scheme and a fiscal backstop; the completion of Economic and Monetary Union and in particular the need for a mechanism for macroeconomic counter cyclical stabilisation, economic policy coordination and fiscal transfers; the external representation of the euro area; the implications of Banking Union and Economic and Monetary Union for euro area outsiders.

Further details can be found at: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/eu-financial-affairs-subcommittee/news-parliament-2015/lilico-quaglia-marsh-evidence-session/





Wednesday, 21 October 2015

Here’s what Britons really want David Cameron to get from Brussels

The victory of the Conservatives in the 2015 UK parliamentary election has paved the way for a referendum on the UK’s EU membership by 2017. British Prime Minister David Cameron has a mandate to hold the referendum on the question of whether Britain should remain a member of the EU.

Prior to the referendum, Cameron is expected to renegotiate the UK’s place in the EU on a number of key issues, which include giving greater powers to national parliaments, cutting red tape, an opt-out for Britain from the principle of ever-closer union, and restrictions to welfare entitlements of EU migrants. Britain’s place in the EU is now one of the most important questions in British politics.
 
But how Eurosceptic is the British public? Research I carried out recently on British attitudes towards the EU and which is presented on the Policy Network website suggests that there is great variation not only on how much power Britons want to give to the EU but also in their support for specific policy areas.
 
Somewhat against expectation, there is a substantive section of the population that supports a greater role for the EU in all EU policy areas. About a quarter of respondents on average also neither agree nor disagree with the statement that the EU should have more authority over the EU member states in specific policy areas, which suggests that they are broadly happy with the current levels of integration.

The British public tends to support a greater role for the EU in policies that are perceived to be optimal for all countries involved, such as trade and the digital economy. They also support integration in policies such as environment and climate change, which by their nature require international cooperation. They tend to oppose further integration in social policies, such as labour market, employment and social affairs, education and health, as well as economic and monetary policies, which are perceived to belong to the realm of the nation state.

Britons are reluctant to support policies that entail a level of redistribution across the EU that goes beyond traditional EU funding, such as EU citizens’ right to work and access to the welfare state of another EU country. Only 27 per cent of respondents disagree with the statement that the right of EU citizens to work in other EU countries should be restricted; 17 per cent neither agree nor disagree with the statement, while over half of the respondents (56 per cent) think that this right should be restricted (although to varying degrees). The overwhelming majority of respondents (73 per cent) agree that EU citizens should be allowed to receive welfare benefits only in their country of origin, and only 13 per cent disagree with this statement.

This is problematic as opposition to free labour movement infringes upon a fundamental EU principle. Changing this may require a full EU treaty change, which is unlikely to occur by 2017. Consistent with previous research, opposition to EU citizens’ right to work in another EU country derives primarily from older, less educated and working-class citizens, who may feel threatened by such mobility. UK Independence party and Conservative party supporters tend to be less supportive of free movement of labour within the EU.

Britons tend to have a utilitarian perspective on their country’s EU membership as they support policies where no one is perceived to be worse off as a result of European integration, and they tend to agree that Britain has benefited from being a member of the EU. Yet, the EU also provokes emotive reactions among British citizens, which range from uneasiness to hopefulness and to indifference.
 
UK government contributions to the EU budget
UK government contributions to the EU budget  Photo: HM TREASURY

When asked to describe their feelings about Britain’s membership of the EU, almost half of respondents reported that they felt uneasy about it. Other negative emotions that the EU provokes are anger (18 per cent), fear (16 per cent) and disgust (15 per cent). Quite strikingly, a quarter also feels indifferent, which indicates that this pool of voters may not turn out to vote; or if they do turn out to vote, they might decide how to vote quite late. In addition, although on average the EU provokes less positive emotions, data suggest that a quarter of the respondents feel hopeful about Britain’s membership of the EU.

This suggests that there is a clash between interest-based rational thinking and emotional attitudes to Britain’s EU membership. Beyond economic calculations, emotional reactions may be central to determining the outcome of the forthcoming referendum. There is room for media and political campaigns to tap into people’s emotions, especially when it comes to uneasiness and fear, as people expressing these emotions may be more prone to changing their opinion on the EU as a result of exposure to information.

This is even more important now that Jeremy Corbyn has been elected as Labour party leader. His ambivalent view on the EU is revealing disagreements within the party and may contribute to further dividing public opinion.

This piece by Dr Sofia Vasilopoulou, Lecturer in Politics at the University of York and an awardee of ESRC's UK in a Changing Europe programme, was originally published in The Daily Telegraph

Thursday, 28 May 2015

Thursday, 21 May 2015

Wednesday, 6 May 2015

Friday, 13 February 2015