Mandelson downplays Van Rompuy and Ashton – and bigs up the EU's financial influence
Peter Hoskin 12:14pm
To my eyes, there's more than a little dose of mischief in Peter Mandelson's article for the FT today. Discussing the recent EU jobs grab, he seems to suggest that the new economic and financial commissioners may have a more important role to play than either Herman Van Rompuy or Lady Ashton, the EU’s president and high representative, respectively:
"Some commentators felt that the EU’s choices for its new president and high representative for foreign affairs lacked this kind of continental ambition. Herman Van Rompuy and Lady Ashton will no doubt aim to prove them wrong.But Europe’s dilemma is not just one of influence projection. Europe’s influence will inevitably be tied to its economic strength. Over the next decade Europe will have to meet the competitive challenge of the emerging economies, decarbonise its economies and create tens of millions of jobs. Fail in this and the identity and stature of the EU’s president and high representative will hardly matter...
...This makes the EU’s strategy for jobs and growth and the distribution of the big economic portfolios in the next European Commission critically important. It is why the UK will publish proposals for a new European growth strategy in December. The men and women that José Manuel Barroso, Commission president, appoints to key dossiers such as competition, the internal market and trade will carry much weight in defining the direction of EU policy."
Which couldn't be an attempt to rile the Tories – who recently accused Brown of selling out the City by backing the appointment of a French politician as the commissioner in charge of financial services and the internal market – could it? Surely not.
Previous
Percy
November 24th, 2009 12:40pm Report this commentLord Peter's looking pretty sad over this, not quite the mighty lord of a couple of weeks ago. What does he expect Sarko doesn't like him but getting Lady Ashton a nice little number was well worth Mr Tony giving away our rebate.
Chris lancashire
November 24th, 2009 1:05pm Report this commentIt's likely to rile Brown a hell of a lot more than the Tories. It means he expended all that effort and political capital on securing an appointment that doesn't matter whilst the French and the Germans carved up the real jobs between them.
Which I believe to be the case.
Publius
November 24th, 2009 1:07pm Report this commentParaphrasing Gibbon, I view these changes in our remote Euro masters with the indifference of a slave.
Has the noble lord made clear what appointment would constitute success or failure? Is he perhaps in the running?
R King
November 24th, 2009 1:15pm Report this commentHow does this non person have so much influence?
Is there something that we should be told?
The Laughing Cavalier
November 24th, 2009 1:19pm Report this commentIf the position of Lord (or Lady) High Panjandrum of Foreign Affairs is such a non-job why did he lobby for the position for himself? Surely it couldn't have been for the vast salary, perks, expenses and 7,000 staff.
Holly ......
November 24th, 2009 1:26pm Report this commentYou reap what you sow.
He invented Mandyland along with Brown, Draper & Co.Now he doesn't like it....tough.
We plebs will just sit on the sidelines laughing until the GE.
TrevorsDen
November 24th, 2009 1:31pm Report this commentIts surely as CL says more of a dig at Brown by Lord Snooty.
Meantime we see that HBOS/RBS were secretly bankrolled by the govt.
So lets get this right ... Brown encouraged the Lloyds Chairman to take over HBOS knowing full well that the govt was propping up the bank with billions?
None of this was disclosed to either set of shareholders when Lloyds bought the bank and now the shareholding is worth less than toilet paper and shareholders are stuck with paying billions in fees for the privilege of being propped up by ... Brown.
toco
November 24th, 2009 1:48pm Report this commentPatriotism doesn't feature on whatever the hapless and embittered Brown uses for a moral compass.His sole interest is to make life as difficult and unpleasant as possible for whoever takes over from him.
Ken
November 24th, 2009 2:05pm Report this comment@ TrevorsDen
" ... Brown encouraged the Lloyds Chairman to take over HBOS knowing full well that the govt was propping up the bank with billions?"
It's difficult to understand why no sharp commercial lawyers have yet cobbled together an effective court case against Brown and his lackeys. This massive financial deception must surely be actionable.
He'd have been taken to the cleaners long ago if he were in the US.
Naomi Muse
November 24th, 2009 2:46pm Report this commentTrevorsDen and Ken:
It's chilling, isn't it?
How could LloydsTSB do anything like its due diligence prior to the takeover of HBOS?
We know that Gordon Brown was hurrying Lloyds TSB to take over HBOS in great haste. Could it be that Mr Brown did not realise that the government was propping up HBOS with our money to the extent we now understand?
Could it be that Mr Brown was also unaware how much of our money was already surreptitiously propping up RBS when he presented with Darlin Alistair that RBS was to be bought out?
If these sins of omission were 'overlooked' in doing their sums, then how does that square with the EU directives to increase competition in the wake of the public ownership of these banks?
How will it sit with the latest EU statements on bank bale outs?
The due diligence of looking after the shareholder's interests was the specific responsibility of the Chairman of LloydsTSB. If the government kept this information from the Chairman then, surely it makes the takeover, and any costs and consequential losses should be repayable, should it not?
Would this misrepresentation of the true facts be the equivalent of not putting up a true letter of disclosure and therefore make the take over nul and void?
With potential attempt to defraud action to follow?
Oh ho, what mud!
Frank P
November 24th, 2009 2:47pm Report this commentMandleslime looks like a pantomime dame in that costume; only it would have the vanity to deck itself out in the robes of undeserved office and attach such a string of meaningless titles to its disreputable moniker. Why does this notorious, mendacious mutation of the species continue to be thrust onto the pages of this website? Has he got a file on you lot and is threatening to 'out' you all if you don't comply. Were you all on Oleg Deripaska's yacht, summer 2008?
JohnPage
November 24th, 2009 2:53pm Report this commentAs I said in another thread, brown's choice - against advice - only makes sense as a scorched earth policy for an incoming Tory government.
peter
November 24th, 2009 3:59pm Report this commentAlmost the best reason for desiring a Tory victory next year is for the demise of this duplicitous slimeball.
Hysteria
November 24th, 2009 10:09pm Report this comment"bigs up".....sheesh
Lady Amelia
November 25th, 2009 7:33am Report this comment"The Spectator - Champagne for the brain".
Mandelson "bigs up...."
Cheap cider more like - if you aspire to entertain inform and stimulate those of us who fondly think we still have a brain, please attempt to actually do so. If I want to read sloppy, ill thought out and badly sub-edited articles I'll buy the Guardian.
Back to top