PhD placement students, Andrew Booth and Rowan Campbell write: Have you ever wondered how linguistic researchers find people to interview? In this final episode, Andrew and Rowan discuss the methods they use to carry out their research on the Isle of Man and Cardiff, and how these are different to…
The European Investment Bank (EIB) has signed a EUR 78 million loan to Kainuu Social and Health Care Joint Authority (“Kainuun sote”) in North-Eastern Finland. The loan will support the construction of the new hospital in the city of Kajaani, to replace the current outdated facilities. As the existing facilities are no longer fit for purpose, the new construction will allow the hospital to provide more efficient healthcare services.
The hospital will provide all major healthcare specialties for the regional population, as well as primary healthcare functions in Kajaani city area. The new building will be designed and equipped with a strong emphasis on the integration between primary and specialised care, as well as social services. The layout of the building is also expected to lower the workload of resident staff compared to the current, outdated facilities.
Vice-President Alexander Stubb, responsible for EIB-lending in Northern Europe, said: “After other recent care-related loans, I think this further operation clearly underlines the EIB’s intent to support the Finnish healthcare sector. It is necessary to provide top class healthcare all over Finland, also in very sparsely populated areas like the Kainuu region. I think we can only be proud to support this project.”
Director of Kainuu Social and Health Care Joint Authority, the patron of Kainuu new hospital project, Maire Ahopelto, emphasises the opportunities opened up by the new central hospital to develop digitalised services in a large scale: ”The new central hospital will be a modern example of an intelligent hospital reaching its operations far beyond its walls. This kind of opportunities are even more important here than in big cities.”
Yesterday was another Groundhog day when we are asked once again to debate the customs union. Twice we have had major debates and decisive votes on this issue, and twice the Commons has voted to leave the Customs Union when we leave the EU. One was on an amendment to the Queen’s Speech, and one was on an amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill. That’s as well, as the EU is not offering us free membership of the Customs Union when we leave anyway!
Yesterday the Conservative party did not vote on the motion. The motion was not to embed this approach in law, so the government decided it was not binding. Another possible binding vote on this issue will be held again if Labour wishes to change its former position in the Commons when the EU Withdrawal Bill returns from the Lords, if the Lords have passed an amendment to that bill which Labour now likes. Labour abstained on the two important votes held so far on the two rebel Labour proposals to stay in the customs union.
The problem with all these motions and amendments to draft legislation, binding or not, is they are requiring something which is not in the gift or control of the UK government. Were the government to give in and accept we should belong to the Customs Union after leaving, or want a customs union look alike on departure, that would require an offer and consent from the EU. I do not think the EU would give us such membership without also demanding we accept freedom of movement, budget contributions and obedience to many of their laws, as if we were still in the EU.
I have often made the case why many of us prefer not to be in a customs union anyway. I think we will be better off out. Yesterday there was a tired old rehash of the Remain arguments from before the vote. Most of those contributing have clearly never run a complex supply chain in their lives and have no idea how modern business works. Their speeches were peppered with words like “paperwork” and “form filling”, conjuring images of queues of lorries at borders as staff tried to work out what the lorry had on board, how much customs dues it should pay and how each product conformed or not with rules of origin. There was no talk of electronic manifests, filing in advance, electronic debits for customs dues as for VAT and Excise at the moment, no mention of Authorized Economic operators with rapid transit at borders, no mention of TIR and all the other ways that have already been developed to ensure the free flow of goods. In modern complex industrial supply chains each item is recorded in detail so its past can be traced, and this is recorded on electronic manifests which can be made available to the authorities to settle any issues and money owing without needing to do that at a border post. There is today complete electronic visibility of goods in transit by all Authorized Economic operators. Nor in the debate was there any acknowledgement let alone understanding of the WTO’s wide ranging Trade Facilitation Agreement which binds both us and the EU, nor of how the rules of origin are currently policed without border hitches.
There was a concerted effort to try once again to undermine the UK’s negotiating position. Sending a loud hint that the government might be forced to change its mind on customs union membership was obviously designed to weaken the UK’s position and give the EU more reason to delay serious talks in the mistaken belief that the UK position on that matter might alter. There is clearly no point in negotiating a free trade agreement between the EU and the UK if the UK is going to stay in the customs union after all. Instead we would just face dictation of terms, as an EU that could not believe its luck would set about recreating all features of our membership of the EU as the price for such a concession, rightly claiming that you cannot be in a customs union unless you go along with much of the rest of their project.
Press contacts
On 26 April 2018, the Council adopted revised rules on the funding of European political parties and foundations.
The new rules target certain abusive practices such as the creation of spurious entities for the purpose of receiving EU funding. Some of the changes will facilitate access to EU funds; others will help tackle fraud. Transparency will be increased.
This reform is important and timely. It will ensure that EU funds go to European political parties with a distinct political agenda, corresponding to the European citizens’ needs and expectations. It also includes tougher measures against misspending and abuse. I very much hope that, with elections to the European Parliament coming up next year, there will also be much greater public awareness of the links between political life at the European level and in member states.
Monika Panayotova, Deputy Minister for the Bulgarian Presidency of the EU Council
The main changes are the following:
The formal adoption of the new rules by the Council today concludes the legislative process. They are expected to be signed on 3 May. They will then be published in the EU Official Journal and enter into force the following day.
The funding for the current financial year (2018) will not be affected. However, in order to receive EU funds for 2019, the parties and foundations will have to comply with the new rules.
In some cases, such as for the display of logos and programmes, transitional arrangements will apply to ensure a smooth introduction of the new rules.
