One of the most striking quotes ahead of Britain’s referendum was Michael Gove’s claim that “people in this country have had enough of experts”. As this polling data shows, the Brexit backing justice secretary was on to something, at least when it comes to Leave supporters.

The YouGov pollsters gauged public trust in the views of “experts” and politicians when they speak about the EU referendum. It is no surprise that both Leave and Remain supporters are wary of politicians – both at home and abroad – albeit by different margins.

When it comes to experts, though, there is an chasm. Remain supporters tend to believe academics, economists and people from the Bank of England. Leave backers mistrust them all, especially if they come from Threadneedle Street (net trust minus 45 per cent). You can add business leaders to that list too (plus 28 per cent trust among Remainers, and minus 28 for Leavers).

There is a paradox to this. As the FT’s Chris Giles notes today, there has rarely been such “expert” consensus on an issue. While economists argue over how harmful Brexit would be, there is near unity that it would be harmful to the economy. The dismal science is in speaking in concert for once and the public just don’t seem to be listening. As Tobias Buck found in a report from revolutionary Bracknell, middle England is in an iconoclastic mood. Read more

There are 8 days left of the campaign. Little wonder contingency planning is in overdrive. Three different perspectives are laid out today in the press: from the Leave side on the divorce; from the Remain side on the consequences; and the worried Remain side on last-ditch offers to save the campaign.

First for the Brexiters. Chris Grayling, leader of the House of Commons, outlines a detailed vision of Brexit to the Financial Times. It is a complex but significant insight on how a divorce may proceed, and it doesn’t match expectations in Brussels. The Leave side would legislate in the UK to leave by 2019, but would not necessarily invoke Article 50 of the EU treaty, aiming instead for an “informal” process that sets future trade termsat the same time. In other words, they do not want a trade deal taking longer than the EU break-up. So two years to do it all.

That takes goodwill on the EU side – and it will probably be in short supply. Mr Grayling says the UK will curb the powers of the ECJ straight after the referendum vote – andcurtail free movement rights before 2019 to avoid an influx into the UK. There is not much the EU can do about that; the EU is a sovereign club based on law and good faith. But it may be hard asking for favours. More positive for Brussels: Mr Grayling said budget payments would continue. “I don’t want to break the law as part of the process”. A cheeky European Commission may ask: can we have £350m a week please?

The fiscal contingency George Osborne, chancellor, has set out his post-Brexit budgetto The Times. Unsurprisingly there is no attempt at sugar coating. Income tax up, fuel duty up, inheritance tax up, beer tax up, dramatic cuts across the public sector, all aiming to fill a £30bn fiscal gap he argues was identified by the Institute of Fiscal Studies. The Leave side dismissed this as “hysterical” fear mongering (and think the chancellor will beout of a job anyway). The question is whether it is a sufficiently brazen a claim to move the subject back to the economy, rather than immigration. Remain’s fate may rest on it.

The panic contingency The poll momentum is against Remain and the panic is showing. Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy leader, raised the idea of pushing for urgent reforms to EU free movement – setting off speculation in Westminster about desperate last-ditch measures to rescue the campaignRead more

This is a day of reckoning for France’s union barons. Thousands of protesters are expected to take to the Paris streets again today, seeking to shame politicians into dumping already watered-down plans to reform labour laws. But all that noise may belie a more uncomfortable reality for Philippe Martinez, the union ringleader for the strike. He may have badly overreached.

The gruff, mustachioed boss of the General Confederation of Labour (CGT) said the demonstrations would be “massive”. His reputation is on the line in what Le Journal du Dimanche has dubbed the “final round” of his battle with the government. The New York Times does a smart job of looking at the stand-off. The piece highlights the complex undercurrents in the French labour movement – notably a bloody succession battle to lead the CGT as its fortunes have waned – that are driving militant action in what is ironically “one of the least unionised countries in Europe”.

And here lies the danger for Mr Martinez. The CGT-led strikes have been a costly nuisance but the disruptions don’t seem quite as bad this week. The rubbish in Paris is finally being collected again. The government seems to be standing its ground (albeit to protect far weaker reforms). Public patience is wearing thin. And most importantly, attention has turned to the football – and France won its first game. If turnout is mediocre on Tuesday, what Mr Martinez described as a protest airplane “just taking off” in late May could appear to be running low on fuel.

 Read more

The polls are tightening, markets are jittery, and Downing Street is so alarmed it is relyingon Gordon Brown to save the Remain campaign. It may be time to start talking about the day after Brexit, and whether there is a way to engineer a soft-landing.

The “what happens next” issue is tackled today by Donald Tusk, the European Council president, in a typically punchy interview with Bild Zeitung.

“The leave campaign contains a very clear message: ‘Let us leave, nothing will change, everything will stay as before’. Well, it will not. Not only economic implications will be negative for the UK, but first and foremost geopolitical. Do you know why these consequences are so dangerous? Because in the long-term they are completely unpredictable. As a historian, I am afraid this could in fact be the start of the process of destruction of not only the EU but also of the Western political civilisation.”

He later says divorce will be “sad” but manageable within 2 years. But he notes a parallel trade deal – setting the future EU-UK relationship – will be far tougher, and take at least another 5 years after the divorce, if it can be agreed at all. Long as it seems, this 7-year drift is actually optimistic version of the “decade of uncertainty” that David Cameron and Whitehall have described.

If markets react badly to a Brexit vote, there will be huge pressure to find a quick EU fix for a smooth transition (what Wolfgang Münchau calls letting the Brits go in peace). But even under such market duress the political options look poor. Read more

Welcome to Wednesday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

Voters are growing disenchanted with the EU – and Britain is far from being an outlier. That is the bottom line of Pew’s latest survey, which offers one of the best guides to opinion across the continent. For EU supporters it makes for sobering reading. We’ve picked out four charts.


Within the general decline in positive views of the EU over the past decade, one country stands out: France. While French views of the EU have see-sawed over the past few years, there was an extraordinary 17 point drop in respondents having a positive view of the EU this year. Only Greece – not included on our chart – has a more negative view (71 per cent have a unfavourable view of the union).

What explains the slide in support? Any gains that came from economic rebound seem to have been wiped out this year by the migration crisis.

Views of how the EU has handled the situation range from poor (Netherlands and Germany) to catastrophic (Sweden and Greece). Read more

Welcome to Wednesday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

Alongside Boris Johnson’s Brexit metamorphosis, it must be the transformation of the referendum campaign. For close to a quarter-century, Britain’s control-obsessed Treasury was the EU’s most eurosceptic finance ministry. Yet in recent months it became the go-to armoury for Remain campaigners, churning out ever more harrowing economic warnings on the consequences of Brexit. Whitehall’s broody power centre saw the light – or at least the costs of leaving.

Should Britain vote to stay in the EU, eternal optimists in Brussels – and there are a few left – might take this as a positive sign. In theory, the vote should “settle this European question in British politics” – just as David Cameron promised. The europhile Treasury could lead a mini-renaissance in British EU influence. The UK’s ambitious 2017 EU presidency could press for trade deals and deepening the single market. A multi-tier EU would give Britain the reassurance it craves; London’s defensive crouch on EU policy could end. The Economist’s Bagehot outlines just such an initiative.

Many will find it hard to believe. Read more

Welcome to Tuesday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

Here comes the digital cavalry. The European Commission will this week weigh-in on the side of business prodigies like Airbnb and Uber, warning European authorities to stop stifling the “sharing economy” with blatantly protectionist rules. It is only guidance. It may well be ignored. But it is a start.

Whereas free-wheeling Silicon Valley tends to see EU regulators as a nuisance or business risk, some companies actively want Brussels to intervene. That is especially true for businesses upending traditional models for selling transport or accommodation. Airbnb and Uber are trying to harness whatever pro-market forces they can to end incumbent-friendly, competition-killing rules from Paris to Barcelona.

By that measure, the Commission guidance is positive for the sector. Outright bans or quantitative restrictions on services are cast as unnecessary and harmful. So, for instance, it is seen as a bad thing to fine Berliners up to €100,000 for renting out their homes on Airbnb. The decision of a Milan court to ban the “unfair competition” posed by Uber probably falls into that category too. Equally hard to justify: a Madrid court ruling asking telecoms operators to disable access to Uber. Read more

Welcome to Friday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

Britain’s administration is now in hibernation. The civil service has entered Purdah – a term derived from the Persian word for curtain and the practice of shielding a woman from prying eyes. In practice in Brussels the pre-referendum asceticism means British diplomats must doggedly stick to their pre-agreed positions, show no flexibility or original thinking and avoid socialising with foreigners. Some EU types may joke: has anything changed?

The polls are looking slightly better for the Remain side. But it is close and European leaders aren’t taking chances. As we report today, Plan B is being worked up: how should the EU respond to Brexit?

The topic has been raised at high levels in Hanover, Rome, and Brussels (all slightly different configurations). Discussions were expected on the sidelines of the G7 too (the communique has depicted Brexit as “a serious risk to growth”). A small group of leaders’ sherpas also met on Monday at the European Commission. And this wouldn’t be a crisis unless the Commission’s anti-populist Martin Selmayr had a Plan B locked in his safe – right next to the Grexit one that was never used. Read more

Welcome to Thursday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

What halted the main wave of Europe’s epoch-making migration crisis? Was it the fences of the western Balkans route? Or a transformative deal with Turkey? That is more than just an academic question as Europe wrestles with how to deal with Ankara, and the other policy dilemmas that stem from a world on the move.

This chart, inspired by some conversations with officials in Brussels, attempts to differentiate the two:

The first two lines show the political chain reaction triggered by the Austrians and others imposing quotas on their borders and effectively closing off the western Balkans route migration route. Read more

Welcome to Monday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

By Mehreen Khan Read more

Welcome to Monday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

Austria’s presidential vote on Sunday was billed as a political landmark for Europe: the first election of a far-right populist head of state since the second world war. Then thevote count started. The Freedom party’s Norbert Hofer may still end up in the Hofburg palace, elected for a party founded in the 1950s by a former SS general. But the result ison a knife edge and the Green party’s Alexander Van der Bellen could easily prevail. It’s down to postal votes. Vienna hosted two victory parties last night: a surreal end to a surreal campaign.

Regardless of the outcome, Mr Hofer’s rise is a reminder of some political chill winds in Europe. Other European far-right politicians have not yet come as close to power as the Freedom party. But if Mr Hofer succeeds, it would be possible to trace an arc of illiberal politics through Poland, Hungary (and to some extent) Slovakia and Austria that stretches from the Baltic sea to the gateway of the Balkans.

To varying degrees some of their ruling politicians share a nationalist, anti-immigrant, anti-Islam, anti-EU message. And, for all the grumbling, there isn’t much the EU can do about it. The main question is where populists, the far-right or anti-establishment parties will make their mark next, be it in France, Holland or some day in GermanyRead more

Welcome to Friday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

 Read more

Welcome to Thursday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

Gold prices down, sterling sharply up, bookies chalking Brexit at the longest odds since the campaign began (around 3/1). Has the Remain side in Britain’s EU referendum campaign made a decisive breakthrough?

Money is certainly moving against Brexit. A mini-trend of moderately better polls for the pro-EU side was buttressed on Wednesday by an ICM phone survey putting Leave 18 points behind. Referendum campaigns can break sharply as the public begin to seriously engage. Remain campaigners will be hoping this is that moment. Indeed after firing-off their big guns – the US president, macabre Treasury reports, Bank of England recession warnings – they may also be thinking: what took so long?

If a lead is sustained, two factors potentially play a role. ICM picked up a swing to Remain among Conservative voters, with around 60 per cent backing David Cameron’s position. They are still open to changing their minds, but for now the increasingly vicious Tory infighting seems to be encouraging a bit more loyalty to their prime minister. The second is that Remain are faring well on the economic argument – and that is where Mr Cameron thinks he will clinch the vote.

Now for the caveats. The Ipsos MORI poll on Wednesday could be an outlier. And even if it isn’t, why believe it? Pollsters called the last UK and Israeli elections dead wrong. Even pollsters are wary of polls these days. A debate over phone (better for Remain) versus online surveys (better for Leave) rages on in Britain. And in any event predicting behaviour in this vote is hard because there is no good quantifiable precedent. Read more

Welcome to Wednesday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

Jean-Claude Juncker promised to lead a political European Commission and boy did he deliver. Compared to some politburo-like lifeless debates of the past, his college of commissioners have made a fair few touch-and-go decisions and late-turns (one mini-proposal on visas this month was commissioned and written within 12 hours of the meeting).

Today’s college clash over EU budget rules could be the most contentious yet. The issue is whether to start a process to fine Spain and Portugal for breaching their remedial deficit targets — a sanction never used since the creation of the single currency. What is at stake though is the Commission’s credibility as guardian of the EU’s fiscal regime. How far can it bend the rules?

There is little dispute over the economics. The vast majority of commissioners agree both countries took insufficient action to fix excessive deficits, a judgement that triggers a sanctions proposal. The question is when to announce it, and whether to signal that the fines, once set, may be tiny or indeed zero. Read more

Welcome to Monday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

By Aleksandra Wisniewska

In March, Europe’s leaders gambled their political futures, diplomatic credibility and the lives of hundreds of thousands of migrants on a deal with Turkey.

After two months of raking over the terms of the deal, a simple question can be asked: has it worked on the ground? These four charts demonstrate the good, the bad and the ugly of the situation on the frontline of Europe’s refugee crisis.

The refugee crisis, at least when it comes to the Aegean, shows signs of abating. Arrivals to Greek islands dropped significantly from an average of 2,000 per day to under 100.

This does not mean Europe’s migration crisis has gone away. Read more

Welcome to Thursday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

Is Recep Tayyip Erdogan bluffing? Almost every day this week, Turkey’s president has taken a crude swipe at the “hypocritical” EU. An EU-Turkey deal that has stopped the migrant boats looks in danger. He hasn’t quite repeated his past threat to arrange Berlin-bound buses for refugees. But Mr Erdogan has cast the coming months as a historic turning point. If the EU fails to deliver billions of euros in funding and visa-free travel rights, he warns, the migration deal will die and with it Turkey’s EU orientation.

Take this extract from Mr Erdogan’s speech on Thursday, where he lashed out over EU demands that he soften terrorism laws as a condition of visa-free travel:

“They believe they have the right [to fight terrorism] but find it a luxury and unacceptable for us. Let me say it clearly – the name for this is hypocrisy. A EU that tramples on its own values and principles will be worth nothing to its members, or the world …The visa business … we sorted it, we signed it … now they come with 72 conditions. They squeeze terrorism [reforms] in there. Where did that come from? Show me where that’s in the acquis, in the visa rules …. Did they demand it when South American countries were given visa-free travel? We know very well what the reason is – don’t let anybody be fooled. We’re waiting for this union’s warped and wary attitude to Turkey to end. In the near future we will either strengthen our ties with the EU, or we will find ourselves a new path. Our preference is to build new Turkey with our European friends. We’re waiting for their response.”

Where will this end? The positive scenario you hear in Brussels and Berlin casts this all as bluster. Mr Erdogan is brashly talking up his negotiating hand, tickling nationalist sentiment at home, while aiming to bag vote-winning visa rights to propel him in his real goal: an executive presidency giving him boundless power in Turkey. These officials think his bravado hides vulnerability. Turkey’s economy has weaknesses. And failing to deliver travel rights could also hurt Mr Erdogan at the ballot box. As Jean-Claude Juncker, European Commission president, claimed: “that will be his problem.”

The EU side think a compromise is in sight if they hold their nerve. Read more

Welcome to Thursday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.


So she finally got to say no. Every EU competition chief blocks a handful of mergers; Margarethe Vestager’s first veto was on Wednesday and it was delivered with some relish, stopping a £10.5bn tie-up between the UK mobile arms of Telefónica and CK Hutchison. The FT’s Lombard column has the Dane dispatching the deal to Valhalla. But this was more than routine deal-killing – it arguably marked the start of Vestager 2.0.

First the deal. The consolidation-obsessed telecoms sector tried desperately to ignore the signals, but for more than a year Ms Vestager was all but breathing fire on mobile deals, making plain her fears that they can raise prices while not really helping investment. In part to draw a line under the more accommodating approach of her predecessor Joaquin Almunia, she wanted to make a stand over a Danish telecoms tie-up, but the parties pulled out and stole her thunder. Wednesday’s decision was no surprise, but it has left the sector in a tizzy.

More broadly this was a milestone for Ms Vestager’s term in office: a threat carried through, a final decision taken, and a distinct approach set on merger control. Now her challenge is to make her mark in the biggest antitrust and state aid cases. There she has set many hares running. But issuing charges is the easy part. She has to show she can close tough cases too, including on Google, Gazprom and the blockbuster tax fight over AppleRead more

Here we go again. The protesters are back in Syntagma square. The EU’s summer has officially begun.

Yesterday’s anger was easy to explain. Shortly after midnight, the Greek parliament voted through contentious pension cuts and income tax increases, covering the bulk of a €5.4bn package of austerity measures demanded by creditors. That sets the scene for a meeting of the Eurogroup today to decide how much more the Greeks still need to do.

The Greek parliamentarians already appear to have been shaving close to their own jugulars. Kerin Hope, the FT’s correspondent in Athens, notes that riot police had to block the entrance to the assembly after members of Poesy, their own union, tried to force their way past security guards.

But despite the successful vote, Greece is far from in the clear. Before closing a review of Greece’s bailout and providing Athens much-needed aid, the IMF and the German government are insisting Athens go a step further an legislate an additional €3bn in “contingency measures” in case the agreed cuts prove insufficient to meet budget surplus targets. Read more

Welcome to Monday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

Another big Brussels week on migration is upon us. The flow of migrant boats to Greek islands has almost stopped, but Brussels is only in the foothills of the political trek to make the Turkey deal stick and the EU asylum system work properly. The European Commission will try to chivvy the pace on Wednesday with three contentious initiatives on visas, borders and asylum rules.

1. An overhaul of the Dublin asylum system

This revamp of the EU’s asylum rules is well-flagged but still hot politics. A Commission discussion paper last month raised two main reform options – and we understand the final proposal will be a blend of the two. So the first EU country an asylum seeker enters would still handle their claim (a crucial Dublin principle for immigration-wary northern states and the UK). But if a frontline state receives 150 per cent more claims than its set asylum capacity, a quota system automatically kicks in to distribute migrants around Europe (which is more to the liking of Greece and Italy). It is a halfway house that leaves plenty for EU states to fight about. There is perhaps even some fodder for Brexit campaigners (the question of whether Britain can stay in Dublin but remain exempt from automatic burden sharing will not be answered in the proposal). Read more

Welcome to Friday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

Will Sunday's referendum help or hurt Beppe Grillo, right, leader of the FIve Star Movement?

Referendums in Europe are often a blunt weapon against the establishment. Italians will be voting in one on Sunday and, of course, it could end badly for Matteo Renzi, the country’s restless centre-left premier. But more likely the result will buck the trend. Indeed this referendum may actually turn the tables and leave the anti-establishment Five Star Movement licking its wounds.

The issue is slightly obscure – oil and gas drilling rights – and the politics is far from straightforward. As the FT’s James Politi explains, Italians will vote on whether to stop renewing offshore licenses for facilities within 12 miles of the coast. The latest polls show the pro-ban environmentalists will win handsomely. But the critical question is whether they will come near the 50 per cent turnout threshold. That is where the real politics comes in.

Mr Renzi is firmly on the side of indifference. He says the referendum is a waste of time and has urged voters to not to bother. In an interview today with La Repubblica he calls it “a hoax”. This all conveniently helps him hedge his position and avoid looking too friendly with Big Oil and Italy’s energy giant Eni. More importantly, it also puts Italy’s leading populist party, the Five Star Movement, to the test.  Read more