Angela Merkel and François Hollande during a press conference after their meeting at the Elysee Palace tonight. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

No relief in sight for Greece as Germany and the ECB toughen stances

Merkel warns that it is up to Tsipras to make new proposals as the country's banks are put under further strain. 

One of the main arguments made by Alexis Tsipras for a No vote in the Greek referendum was that it would strengthen his government's bargaining power. But a day after the country's decisive rejection of the previous eurozone offer, there is little sign that it has done so. At her joint press conference this evening with François Hollande following their meeting, Angela Merkel emphasised that the onus was on Greece to come forward with "very specific proposals" (offering no immediate concessions of her own) and even went as far as to describe the previous package as "generous". Sigmar Gabriel, Germany's vice chancellor and the leader of Merkel's coalition partners, the Social Democrats, has declared that "The ultimate insolvency of the country seems to be imminent". 

Hollande, as before, took a more accommodative stance. But while stating that "the door is open" (though not as open as he would like), he warned that "There’s not a lot of time left. There is urgency for Greece and there is urgency for Europe". Valdis Dombrovskis, the European Commissioner for the euro, similarly concluded that "The no result unfortunately widens the gulf between Greece and other eurozone countries … There is no easy way out of this crisis. Too much time and too many opportunities have been lost."

It is time that is indeed the biggest obstacle to a deal. Greek's banks are close to running out of cash (one of the four biggest is reported to be on the brink). But the European Central Bank, the institution keeping them afloat, has again capped the level of emergency liquidity at €89bn. Rather than offering greater relief, it has tightened the noose by forcing the banks to provide more assets to the Bank of Greece as security against the loans. Robert Peston reports that this has reduced the spare cash-raising capacity of the banks from €17-20bn to between €5-7bn. By acting in this way, the ECB has opened itself to the charge that it has exceeded its mandate by intervening in a political dispute. 

The danger is that unless Greece makes immediate progress with the troika in the next two days, the banks will no longer able to function even at their current limited level (with ATM withdrawals limited to €60 a day and overseas transactions banned). Such a financial collapse would force Greece to leave the euro in order to allow its banks to issue a new and heavily devalued currency. Few are confident that it will be able to make a scheduled payment of €3.5bn to the ECB in two weeks' times. 

Of the three main possible outcomes to the crisis - a long-term deal to keep Greece in the euro, another short-term financing arrangement ("kicking the can down the road" as it has become known) or Grexit - it is the third that appears ever more likely. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Like it or hate it, it doesn't matter: Brexit is happening, and we've got to make a success of it

It's time to stop complaining and start campaigning, says Stella Creasy.

A shortage of Marmite, arguments over exporting jam and angry Belgians. And that’s just this month.  As the Canadian trade deal stalls, and the government decides which cottage industry its will pick next as saviour for the nation, the British people are still no clearer getting an answer to what Brexit actually means. And they are also no clearer as to how they can have a say in how that question is answered.

To date there have been three stages to Brexit. The first was ideological: an ever-rising euroscepticism, rooted in a feeling that the costs the compromises working with others require were not comparable to the benefits. It oozed out, almost unnoticed, from its dormant home deep in the Labour left and the Tory right, stoked by Ukip to devastating effect.

The second stage was the campaign of that referendum itself: a focus on immigration over-riding a wider debate about free trade, and underpinned by the tempting and vague claim that, in an unstable, unfair world, control could be taken back. With any deal dependent on the agreement of twenty eight other countries, it has already proved a hollow victory.

For the last few months, these consequences of these two stages have dominated discussion, generating heat, but not light about what happens next. Neither has anything helped to bring back together those who feel their lives are increasingly at the mercy of a political and economic elite and those who fear Britain is retreating from being a world leader to a back water.

Little wonder the analogy most commonly and easily reached for by commentators has been that of a divorce. They speculate our coming separation from our EU partners is going to be messy, combative and rancorous. Trash talk from some - including those in charge of negotiating -  further feeds this perception. That’s why it is time for all sides to push onto Brexit part three: the practical stage. How and when is it actually going to happen?

A more constructive framework to use than marriage is one of a changing business, rather than a changing relationship. Whatever the solid economic benefits of EU membership, the British people decided the social and democratic costs had become too great. So now we must adapt.

Brexit should be as much about innovating in what we make and create as it is about seeking to renew our trading deals with the world. New products must be sought alongside new markets. This doesn’t have to mean cutting corners or cutting jobs, but it does mean being prepared to learn new skills and invest in helping those in industries that are struggling to make this leap to move on. The UK has an incredible and varied set of services and products to offer the world, but will need to focus on what we do well and uniquely here to thrive. This is easier said than done, but can also offer hope. Specialising and skilling up also means we can resist those who want us to jettison hard-won environmental and social protections as an alternative. 

Most accept such a transition will take time. But what is contested is that it will require openness. However, handing the public a done deal - however well mediated - will do little to address the division within our country. Ensuring the best deal in a way that can garner the public support it needs to work requires strong feedback channels. That is why transparency about the government's plans for Brexit is so important. Of course, a balance needs to be struck with the need to protect negotiating positions, but scrutiny by parliament- and by extension the public- will be vital. With so many differing factors at stake and choices to be made, MPs have to be able and willing to bring their constituents into the discussion not just about what Brexit actually entails, but also what kind of country Britain will be during and after the result - and their role in making it happen. 

Those who want to claim the engagement of parliament and the public undermines the referendum result are still in stages one and two of this debate, looking for someone to blame for past injustices, not building a better future for all. Our Marmite may be safe for the moment, but Brexit can’t remain a love it or hate it phenomenon. It’s time for everyone to get practical.