YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Soundcloud And More Face Article 13, New Law Written By The European Parliament; And They Are Huge Consequences For Everyone: Content Creators And Consumers Alike


Article 13 – THE END OF YOUTUBE! – There’s a better way

It’s Coming Article 13 | An Important Message For All Creative People

Article 13 is part of European copyright legislation created with the intent to better protect creativity and find effective ways for copyright holders to protect their content online.

We support the goals of Article 13, but the version written by the European Parliament could have large unintended consequences that would change the web as we know it.

Will this spell the end YouTube as we have known it? That kind be right; there must be a better way

There’s a better way. Learn more and make your voice heard.

  1. What is Article 13?
    • Article 13 is one part of a proposed European Union (EU) copyright legislation created with the intent to better protect creativity and find effective ways for copyright holders to protect their content online. (Official text here).
    • To be clear, we support the goals of Article 13 and its push to help creators and artists succeed; we want more effective ways for copyright holders to protect their content. But Article 13, as written by the European Parliament, will create large unintended consequences for everyone, so we’re asking to find a better way forward.
  2. What’s the status of Article 13?
    • On September 12th the European Parliament voted to move forward with Article 13.
    • However, Article 13 is not yet a law. The language is being drafted and revised in EU’s trilogue negotiations between representatives from the European Commission, Parliament and Council.
    • This language could be finalized by the end of the year, and EU member states may have up to two years to make the directive into national law.
  3. What changes with Article 13?
    • The proposed version of Article 13 would eliminate the existing notice-and-takedown system currently in place to protect rightsholders and platforms. This would make platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Soundcloud, Dailymotion, Reddit and Snapchat liable – at the moment of upload – for any copyright infringement in uploads from users, creators and artists.
    • This in turn would mean that platforms including YouTube would be forced to block the vast majority of uploads from Europe and views in Europe for content uploaded elsewhere given the uncertainty and complexity of copyright ownership (more on this below).
  4. What would be the impact if the European Parliament version of Article 13 passes?
    • The risks associated with accepting content uploads with partial or disputed copyright information would be far too large for platforms such as YouTube.
    • As a result, YouTube would be forced to block millions of videos (existing and new ones) in the European Union. It could drastically limit the content that one can upload to the platform in Europe.
    • Creators would be especially hard hit. Videos that could be blocked include: educational videos (from channels such as Kurzgesagt in Germany and C.G.P. Grey in the UK), a large number of official music videos (like Despacito from Luis Fonsi or Mafioso from Lartiste), fan music covers, mashups, parodies and more.
    • As such, Article 13 threatens hundreds of thousands of jobs, European creators, businesses, artists and everyone they employ.
  5. What does this mean for me as a YouTube creator or artist in the European Union?
    • YouTube and other platforms may have no choice but to block your existing videos and prevent you from uploading new ones in the European Union unless you can prove you own everything in your videos (including visuals and sounds).
  6. What does this mean for me as a YouTube creator or an artist NOT in the European Union?
    • YouTube and other platforms will likely block your videos (including existing ones) to users in the European Union if there is partial or disputed copyright information.
  7. What types of copyrighted content would I not be able to use in my videos?
    • Examples of copyrighted material possibly impacted in your videos include images, artwork, software, excerpts from books, music, parodies and much more. (Read more here).
  8. Why aren’t copyright matching tools like Content ID enough?
    • With Article 13 as currently written, copyright matching tools like Content ID wouldn’t help platforms such as YouTube to keep content on the platform.
    • Content ID works if rightsholders use it and provide clarity as to what belongs to them. However, in many cases information on copyright ownership is missing, or there is partial knowledge, meaning that no system could accurately identify full copyright information at the point of upload.
    • Put simply, a piece of content with partial or unknown ownership is – to YouTube – treated the same as a piece of content that is unlicensed and so would have to be blocked.
  9. Is there a better way forward with Article 13?
    • Yes! We’re asking lawmakers to find a better balance we all need to protect against copyright violations and still enable European users, creators and artists to share their voices online. In order to do that, we need a system where both platforms and rightsholders collaborate.
    • What this means in reality is three things:
      • Rightsholders should work with platforms to identify the content they own, so the platforms know what is protected under copyright and can give rightsholders control to block if they choose.
      • Platforms should only be held liable for content identified to them using tools like Content ID or through notice and takedown.
      • Platforms and rightsholders should negotiate in good faith where licenses and rights can be easily identified
  10. What can I do to help find a better way forward with Article 13?
    • European representatives are still working on the final version of Article 13 and there is time to work together towards a better path forward.
    • The European policymakers involved in negotiating Article 13 need to hear and see that real people could be negatively impacted if Article 13 goes into effect as written by the Parliament! That’s why we need you and your fans to make your voice heard now by:
      • Making a video about Article 13
      • Tweeting about Article 13 with the hashtag #SaveYourInternet
      • Joining the movement at
  11. What’s up with other players? Is YouTube alone in this fight?
  12. Which countries would be directly impacted by Article 13?
    • All member states of the EU: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland,Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the UK (at least for now, here’s more about Brexit).
  13. One last thing. What are common misunderstandings about Article 13?

British Prime Minister Theresa May to Discuss New Brexit Compromise to Remain in Customs Union


© REUTERS / Angela Weiss

BREXIT – Theresa May discusses Brexit compromise Tuesday with her Cabinet to remain in Customs Union

© REUTERS / Angela Weiss

|© REUTERS / Angela Weiss|AIWA! NO! |Tuesday, UK Prime Minister Theresa May will hold an extended discussion with the Cabinet over further compromise measures regarding Brexit, in order to keep the country in a de-facto customs union with the EU.
A cabinet meeting will be held ahead of May’s trip to Brussels, slated to start on October 17, where she hopes to outline a plan for a compromise deal on the Irish border.

Theresa May will reportedly discuss an obligation to keep the country in an effective customs union with the European Union following Brexit, but having “a clear process” for steps to end it later.

The cabinet meeting will take place on October 16, the Times reported.

“I remain confident we will reach a deal this autumn … [It is] time for the EU to match the pragmatism we have shown,” BREXIT Secretary Dominic Raab said, as quoted by the Sky News broadcaster

A source in the British government has said that ministers feared they could be bounced into accepting several potential changes to the customs arrangement and the areas of EU law that the UK must follow after Brexit. The Times reports that some ministers, including Home Secretary Jeremy Hunt, Environment Secretary Michael Gove and Brexit Minister Dominic Raab might refuse to accept the proposed changes.

However, later on Tuesday, ITV reported that the PM’s Europe Advisor, Oliver Robbins, managed to achieve substantial progress with EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, which might be an indirect confirmation of The Times report, as since the UK and Northern Ireland would remain within the Customs Union, there would be no obstacles preventing the free movement of goods and labor between the two Irelands.

READ RELATED: UK Brexit Secretary Confident of Reaching Brexit Deal With EU by Fall’s End

In June 2016, the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union. Although Brexit is scheduled for late March 2019, London and Brussels still cannot agree on a number of key issues, including the Irish border and customs arrangements, making a no-deal scenario a possibility.

United Kingdom Likely To Adopt ‘Canada-style’ Trade Deal With European Union; How Does It Work?


What is a ‘Canada-style’ trade deal?

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionHarvesting Canadian oats, which used to attract a 54% tariff in Europe

Free trade comes in many forms

|AIWA! NO!|It ranges from single markets to customs unions, to association agreements, to free trade agreements (FTAs) and beyond.

The EU has negotiated 35 trade agreements for its member states, with another 22 pending.

But it says “the most ambitious trade agreement that the EU has ever concluded” is with Canada.

It’s called the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA).

Signed in October 2016, it provisionally came into force last September. The only remaining step is for all the countries to ratify it, which could take several years.

But exporters and importers have been working under its rules for a year, and many now believe the CETA model could be a template for the UK’s trading relationship with the EU after Brexit.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionEuropean Council President Donald Tusk, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker at the CETA summit in October 2016

What does CETA do?

Some 98% of all tariffs on goods traded between Canada and the EU have become duty free. Most tariffs were removed when the agreement came into force a year ago. All will be removed within seven years.

It means Canadian importers will not have to pay €590m (£529m) in taxes on the goods they receive from the EU, and European importers will see tariffs reduced to zero on some 9,000 Canadian products.

The EU and Canada will open up public contracts at local, regional and federal levels to each other’s contractors – that means Canadian companies, say, pitching to build French railways or British builders bidding to construct an Ontario school.

It protects EU “geographical indications”, meaning you can only make prosciutto di Parma ham in Italy and camembert cheese in France, and Canada can’t import something that calls itself camembert from any other country inside or outside the EU.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionA sweet deal: EU chocolates are tariff-free in Canada

How will trade change?

These are the kinds of changes CETA brought in:

  • EU tariffs on Canadian goods reduced to zero – frozen mackerel (previously 20%), oats (51.7%), maple syrup (8%), auto parts (4.5%)
  • Canadian tariffs on EU goods reduced to zero – chocolate (previously 10%), textiles and clothing (16%), medical equipment (8%), machinery (9.5%)
  • Tariff-free quotas (limits) on EU cheese exports to Canada: raised from 18,500 tonnes to 31,972 tonnes
  • Tariff-free quotas on Canadian sweet corn exports to the EU: raised from zero to 8,000 tonnes over five years.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionCheese anyone? Camembert must be made in France under CETA rules

Does CETA affect services?

It offers more protection for intellectual property rights. So for instance a European artist can obtain royalties from a Vancouver cafe or department store that plays music to attract new customers.

The EU and Canada will co-operate on standards, so that a piece of equipment made in an EU country can go through all its safety and quality checks there without needing to have them repeated in Canada – and vice versa.

CETA will also allow professional qualifications to be recognised both in Canada and the EU, making it easier, for example, for architects or accountants to work in both places.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionCETA allows Canada and the EU to recognise each other’s quality standards

What CETA doesn’t do

It is not a customs union or single market so the two parties are free to do trade deals with any other country.

It does not remove border controls, but it encourages the use of advanced electronic checking to speed customs clearance.

CETA does little for trade in financial services that is not covered by World Trade Organization rules that both sides are already signed up to.

Canadian financial companies will not get “passporting”, which would allow them to sell their products across the 28 nations of the EU. The same limitations apply for EU banks in Canada.

Tariffs will remain on poultry, meat and eggs. Several other agri-products will be given quotas. For instance, the EU will allow Canadians to export increasing amounts of duty-free meat to the EU – up to 80,000 tonnes of pork, 50,000 tonnes of beef – as well as 100,000 tonnes of wheat.

But the EU insists those products meet its quality standards – so that’s no hormone-treated beef, and tightly controlled GM cereals.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionCETA faced tough opposition over its environmental and civil liberties provisions

Is it popular?

Politicians like it, some businesses are taking advantage of it but a lot of civil liberties and environmental groups are less happy.

Critics argue it will erode labour laws, not enforce environmental standards and allow multinational companies to dictate public policy.

CETA does change the way trade disputes are settled, using a new type of tribunal, the Investment Court System (ICS). But not everyone is convinced.

Protesters took to the streets in Brussels as the deal was about to be signed.

The French-speaking Walloon region of Belgium brought the whole process to a virtual halt by objecting to the way dispute settlement procedures were to be conducted.

Even now Italy has threatened not to ratify it because it claims it does not sufficiently protect some of its “geographical indications”.

The threat could theoretically scupper the deal but the European Commission has said as a last resort it may settle the matter in court. Meanwhile the EU (including Italy) and Canada have been trading under the terms of CETA for over a year.

Could it work as a Brexit model?

There are big differences between the EU-Canada and the EU-UK trading relationship.

Firstly, there is a difference in the value of goods and services traded.

Only 10% of Canada’s external trade goes to the EU. Total trade between the two is worth about C$85bn (£50bn).

About 43% of UK external trade is with the EU. It is the UK’s biggest trading partner. Total trade between the two is worth about £318bn.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionCanada’s main exports include mineral ores

In addition, the nature of the trade is very different.

Canada’s main trade with the EU is in precious stones and metals, machinery, mineral ores, mineral fuels and oils, aircraft, aircraft parts and pharmaceuticals.

Agri-food trade between the two amounts to about £5bn.

Canada’s services exports amounted to £11bn and were largely in management, research and development (R&D,) financial and IT services.

In contrast, the UK exports £27bn in financial services alone to the EU, and a total of £90bn in all services.

Agri-food trade between the UK and the EU amounts to about £30bn.

The UK exports goods worth £236bn to the EU across a wider range of industries than Canada. Motor vehicles and parts worth £18bn are the largest single sector followed by chemicals and chemical products worth £15bn.

Does CETA work?

It is early days but most observers say it’s good for business.

Exports to the EU during the six months to July rose about 6% on the same period a year earlier, to C$19.7bn (£11.6bn), according to Statistics Canada.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionThe Port of Montreal has seen 20% more traffic since CETA came into force

Jim Carr, Canada’s Minister of International Trade Diversification said: “At the Port of Montreal alone, we have seen 20% more traffic in goods headed across the Atlantic.

“This enormous step in growth for Canada and the EU has been the reason why new shipping lanes have been added to accommodate container traffic.”

The European Commission is equally ebullient about the deal, pointing out the successes of small companies such as Belgium’s Smet Chocolaterie which is opening shops across Canada, or Italy’s San Daniele ham producers who have increased sales to Canada by 35%.

It estimates exports to Canada are up by over 7% year-on-year.

Europe reacts to Juncker’s “The Hour of European Sovereignty” speech


Open Europe’s Anna Nadibaidze overviews the European responses to Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s last State of the European Union speech.

The European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker yesterday delivered his annual State of the European Union speech, – “The Hour of European Sovereignty” – the last one before a new European Parliament gets elected and before the UK leaves the EU in 2019.

In his proposals for the future of the EU, Juncker called for greater solidarity and unity among member states, as well as for more “European sovereignty – the capacity to play a role, as a Union, in shaping global affairs.”

The proposals listed in his speech include strengthening the EU’s Border and Coast Guard with 10,000 additional guards by 2020, developing the European Asylum Agency, and increasing the return of illegal migrants. The Commission does not seek to “militarise the EU,” Juncker explained, while pledging to make the European Defence Fund and the Permanent Structured Cooperation in Defence (PESCO) fully operational in the coming months. In the sphere of security the Commission is also suggesting “new rules to get terrorist content off the web within one hour,” and to allow the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to take care of terrorist offences.

Juncker also voiced proposals for a new partnership with Africa, a new Alliance for Sustainable Investment and Jobs between Europe and Africa and “a continent to continent free trade agreement.”

69% of and showed their commitment to protect rule of law and fundamental rights in . Now its up Council to bring process forward and bring Hungary back to the right path

On Brexit, Juncker pointed out that “the UK will never be an ordinary third country for us. The UK will always be a very close neighbour and partner, in political, economic and security terms.” However, he also warned the UK Government that “If you leave the Union, you are of course no longer part of our single market, and certainly not only in the parts of it you choose,” referring to the UK’s proposal for a future partnership which suggests a free trade area in goods, but not in financial services.

Despite the fact that most of yesterday’s attention focused on the European Parliament’s vote to launch Article 7 procedures against Hungary, there was also a variety of mixed reactions to Juncker’s proposals. Here is an overview of what European politicians and media had to say:

European Parliament members:

Ahead of the speech, the leader of the European People’s Party (EPP) group and candidate for the post of President of the Commission, Manfred Weber, released a video message in which he supports the proposals to strengthen Frontex and fight illegal migration. He also later urged to switch for qualified majority voting in the Council on foreign affairs, saying, “Europe is an economic giant, but also has to become a political one.”

Manfred Weber


Today @JunckerEU is holding State of the Union speech. We are looking forward to raising awareness on two main issues: keeping people safe & working for a fairer EU. Watch my video update

Leader of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) group, Udo Bullmann, argued that many of the Commission’s proposals “are not enough,” calling for a “radical change” in the EU. In particular, the group “urges the European Commission to concentrate on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) in the upcoming months,” adding, “Our priority from now on is to make sure that the Parliament can fully use its prerogatives to scrutinize the Commission proposal.”

Guy Verhofstadt, the leader of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) group and the EP’s Brexit coordinator, called for the EU Commission to “be a new type of European government that realises the legacy of Juncker and the vision of [French President] Emmanuel Macron. We will offer an alternative to nationalists and populists in Europe ahead of the next election.”

Guy Verhofstadt


The European Commission we need in the future will be a new type of European government that realizes the legacy of @JunckerEU & the vision of @EmmanuelMacron. We will offer an alternative to nationalists & populists in Europe ahead of the next elections

Syed Kamall, leader of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group, stated the group calls on the Commission “to start delivering the kind of EU people want and deserve… It is time to move on from the 1950s model of a federalised EU, an outdated vision of yesterday. It is time to deliver an EU shaped by the wishes of its people who want a better tomorrow.”

Dutch MEP Hans van Baalen, a member of Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s governing VVD, commented that Juncker’s speech was “a federal sprint before the finish,” rejecting Juncker’s proposals to scrap the veto in foreign policy and in taxation plans. However, he called a greater role for a European coast guard “crucial.”

Dutch MEP Marietje Schaake, from the Democrats 66 (part of the ALDE group), argued that more proposals should have been voiced in order to react to the events in Syria, as “Europe cannot be a bystander” when facing such crises. According to Schaake, Juncker’s speech “underlines the fact that we are not strong enough…that we do not have our defence cooperation in order.”



| Dutch MEP Marietje Schaake (@MarietjeSchaake) gives her view on Jean-Claude Juncker’s final state of the union. 

Danish MEP Anders Vistisen from the ECR criticised the proposals for more integration on migration, calling for greater sovereignty on asylum policies.

Anders Vistisen MEP@MEPvistisen

’s answer to the migration crisis? Abolishing internal border controls, more legal migration & forced redistribution. This is not the way forward! EC has to respect the sovereignty of EU Member States over asylum policy!

EU leaders and politicians respond:

Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz branded Juncker’s proposal to give Frontex a stronger mandate as “an important step” and expressed support for closer cooperation with African countries.

Sebastian Kurz


Die heutige Rede von Kommissionspräsident Jean-Claude @JunckerEU gibt ein starkes Bekenntnis zu einem ab, das gemäß dem Prinzip der groß in den großen Fragen ist, wie etwa dem -Außengrenzschutz.

Sebastian Kurz


Besonders der Vorschlag der -Kommission, rasch aufzustocken u mit einem stärkeren Mandat auszustatten, ist nach der Trendwende in der europ im Sommer ein weiterer wichtiger Schritt. @JunckerEU

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said he “really liked the speech” and supported the proposals for a stronger external border, saying that Juncker’s goal to control migration is right, and that collective protection of borders “is an important tool.” However, he also called the proposals to add an additional 10,000 border guards a “little wild,” saying that the 12bn euros that these guards would cost is “a lot of money.” Rutte also disagreed with the proposal to expand the tasks of the European Public Prosecution Service.

Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte noted that the proposals for a partnership with Africa and on accelerating the return of illegal migrants are particularly welcome.  He added that it will be “crucial to undertake a shared path towards the management of migration” and that Italy will be waiting for the reaction of the European Council to Juncker’s proposals, while supporting the message that Europe needs to stay strong and united.

Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen also focused on the challenge of migration, calling for further cooperation with third countries and border protection.

Lars Løkke Rasmussen


Pleased that @JunckerEU in remains dedicated to tackling the challenge of migration. Preventive action is key: building partnerships w/third countries and ensuring strong and efficient border protection. We must show the citizens that the EU can deliver.

The French European Affairs Minister, Nathalie Loiseau, said France fully supports Juncker’s initiative for a new partnership with Africa.

Nathalie Loiseau


@JunckerEU propose ue nouvelle alliance avec l’Afrique. Il a tout notre soutien.

Prime Minister Theresa May agreed with Juncker’s comments on Brexit, adding that even after Brexit, the “EU will also never be an ordinary party” for the UK.

Portuguese Prime Minister Antonio Costa praised the speech, focusing on the “the importance of a united Europe in the fight against climate change, in promoting a sustainable response to migration, peace and international security.”

António Costa


He recalled that only by standing united can we overcome the challenges of the future; in the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights, in the Digital transition, in the deepening of the Eurozone and in trade.

António Costa


And the importance of a united Europe in the fight against climate change, in promoting a sustainable response to migration, peace and international security. Thank you, @JunckerEU, for your inspirational defense of our Europe.

Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borissov expressed his support for Juncker’s calling the EU to be a more active player in the Western Balkans.

Boyko Borissov


I fully support @JunckerEU’s words: „We must find unity when it comes to the – once and for all. Should we not, our immediate neighborhood will be shaped by others.”

European media responds:
With the headline “Juncker delivers his last great speech in a dark atmosphere,” Les Échos newspaper focuses on the multiple issues the EU is facing, such as the migration question (which “poisons the European debate”), the turn to illiberal democracy in several member states, the stalled Brexit negotiations and conflictual discussions on the next European budget. In Le Point, Juncker’s task is described as “making a speech on the State of the Union to cover up a state of disunion,” with a warning that the President has 250 days left to convince European voters. But this is not enough for the Commission to advance its proposals, notes the article. On a similar note, Le Monde points to one “handicap” in the speech – the lack of time to put into place Juncker’s proposals, given that campaigning for the European election has already begun.

The Guardian points to Juncker’s dismissal of the Government’s Chequers proposals and notices that he “scorned the British government’s plans to build a rival to the EU’s Galileo satellite project.” The paper adds that the “Commission president’s tone was generally gloomy.”

In today’s The Times, an editorial says Juncker “painted an over-flattering picture” of the state of the EU during his presidency, noting the lack of unity among member states on key issues such as migration. It concludes,

Britain needs to find a way between the rigidity of the commission position on Brexit and [Juncker’s] apparently gentler promise of close partnership… If this co-operation ends up aligning Britain with an increasingly hostile position towards the US, then this country’s interests will not be best served. Mr Juncker’s time in office is running out, as is Britain’s time in the European Union. His successor should focus on a guiding principle which Mr Juncker has let slip: the EU must reform on all levels if it is to survive.”

Meanwhile, The Independent editorial notes that “It may have been a thoughtful and reflective speech, but on [neither Europe’s problems nor Brexit] did he offer much evidence that the commission has all the answers.” It concludes,

Stormy as Mr Juncker’s presidency has been… He can point to real achievements, especially in trade and most recently defusing a potential trade war with the Americans. There have, though, been failures, in the sense that the commission is as insensitive to the mood of Europe’s electorates as ever.


Centre-left weekly Der Spiegel writes that while Juncker “demands off the EU to again show strength on the global stage,” he also “conceals the massive obstacles. For a good reason.” It adds, “For his high-flying plans to have even just a small likelihood of being realised, the EU would need to act quickly. But, so far, this is not foreseeable. Because the most dangerous enemies of the EU and its values are not Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, but Viktor Orban, Jaroslaw Kaczynski and Matteo Salvini.” The paper also writes about Juncker’s speech,

Many of his proposals aim at making use of the vacuum created by Trump. Juncker’s motto could also be: Make Europe great again.

For n-tv, Juncker’s speech and the following debate showed the two realities of the EU: one a “success story,” and the other, the lack of unity on several issues, including the vote on Hungary’s respect for EU values. The article concludes that the debate over European sovereignty at the end of Juncker’s term is not less fierce than when he came to office.

National newspaper Die Zeit reviews Juncker’s presidency term overall, concluding that he has made progress on some economic matters such as the Greek debt crisis, the unemployment situation in the EU and the potential trade war with the US. “Juncker’s problem is not the economy,” the paper notes, adding that Juncker “has to ask unpleasant questions” on Brexit and on the state of the rule of law in countries such as Hungary and Poland. It also argues that the President tries to find European solutions to issues such as migration, and that his proposals “are ready for implementation,” but it remains to be seen whether EU heads of state will support him in the last plans of his term.

For the Suddeutsche Zeitung, Juncker is not as aggressive as he used to be and “is more concerned with seeking unity in this divided union.” The paper also notes that his proposals come from the fact that he “is determined that the EU must change its role in the world if it does not want to go down.”

Der Tagesspiegel writes that the speech “provided a sober assessment of the state of the EU.” The paper comments that due to rising nationalist sentiments in member states, “It would certainly not have hurt if Juncker had spelled out the possible long-term consequences of an escalating nationalism.” Overall, Juncker left only a vague rejection of ‘exaggerated nationalism’… He said that “Europe remains,” but the question is: which Europe?”


Austrian Daily newspaper Die Presse focuses on Juncker’s calling on the Austrian EU Council presidency to develop more sustainable solutions in the sphere of migration, while in Der Standard, Juncker’s “soft tone” and calls for rejecting nationalism are contrasted with Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán’s “wild nationalist attacks on parliamentarians and the common Europe.”


Irish headlines mostly focused on Juncker’s commitment to “show loyalty and solidarity with Ireland when it comes to the Irish border” in Brexit negotiations, as well as on the proposals to move to qualified majority voting on taxation matters. The Irish Independent points out that

such changes would undermine the competitiveness of the 12.5% corporate tax rate offered by Ireland. [Irish] Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe and colleagues have vehemently insisted that they will resist any such changes and that Ireland retains a valid veto.


Il Sole 24 Ore comments that the proposal to reinforce Frontex is “ambitious, as it effectively means reducing national sovereignty.” The paper notes that that unlike in previous speeches, Juncker has maintained his speech on a “low profile, avoiding excessive and unnecessary rhetoric.”

La Stampa evaluates Juncker as “a little tired, with arguments that do not succeed to warm the audience of the European parliament, and with decidedly unambitious proposals.” The paper adds, “It seemed an intervention from the past, too old for a Europe that finds itself in a critical phase on the eve of a decisive election.” Juncker’s call to reject “the kind of nationalism that points the finger at others instead of searching for ways to better live together” attracted much attention in Italy even though Juncker did not name names, according to the paper.


On a similar note as above, El Pais writes that Juncker pronounced the speech with a “slow, almost deadly” pace, noting that his words sounded like a “testament to a Europe of yesterday that does not know if it has a tomorrow.”


An op-ed for L’Écho points out that “even if Europe is going through an existential crisis…the Commission President delivered a speech in which we might have read some optimism.” This “optimism of the willingness” to reinforce European integration without making concessions to the extremist nationalists is the heritage that Juncker seeks to leave behind.


Dutch weekly news magazine Elsevier states that “Juncker’s words were more of the same – that more integration to solve migration issues is needed.” However, the magazine judges the proposals to make more issues an EU competence as “impractical” and “unnecessary.” It concludes that Juncker supports EU integration in itself rather than evaluating its feasibility and usefulness for citizens.

No-deal Brexit will cost you more when online shopping and on holiday


bY KATE BUCK//AIWA! NO! Then press ~~//The fallout from a no-deal Brexit has been predicted in Government papers – and it’s not good news.

They state that consumers face a multi-million pound hit in the event of a no-deal Brexit due to a ‘likely increase’ in the cost of card payments between the UK and EU. Cross-border payments would no longer be covered by a ‘surcharging ban’ that prevents businesses adding an extra levy when people use a specific payment method. The ban prevents businesses from charging customers for paying by the likes of PayPal or debit or credit cards, which the Treasury earlier this year characterised as ‘rip-off fees’. The Treasury had said that the card charges, which were banned in January, cost Britons £166 million in 2015.

UK citizens living in Europe also face the possibility of losing access to their pension income and other financial services. The warnings are contained in 24 technical papers released on Thursday covering preparations consumers and businesses should take in case the UK and EU cannot agree a deal before Britain leaves the trade bloc in March.

Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab reiterated the Government’s conviction that it can and will agree a deal with the EU. The new Brexit secretary Dominic Raab has lain down what is expected to happen in the event of a no deal.

Dominic Raab giving a speech in Westminster to mark the publication of Brexit no deal planning papers.
Photograph: Peter Nicholls/AP

But he told reporters on Thursday that plans were being made to recruit an extra 9,000 staff into the civil service to deal with Brexit, in addition to 7,000 already working on preparations. A further 1,000 more Border Force staff are to be recruited, more than triple the additional 300 previously planned for. Mr Raab dismissed ‘misinformation’ about what may happen in the event no deal is reached by March, saying his stress levels were ‘fine’.  Claims by Amazon’s UK boss that there could be civil unrest within weeks of a no-deal Brexit are ‘not credible’, he added, saying: ‘There’s no suggestion of bringing in the military.’

The first raft of papers included banking, medicines and clinical trials, nuclear research, workplace rights and farm payments. They represent around a third of a total of some 80 technical papers due to be released in tranches by the end of September.

Shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer said Mr Raab’s speech was ‘thin on detail, thin on substance and provided no answers to how ministers intend to mitigate the serious consequences of leaving the EU without an agreement”.

Sir Keir Starmer – Image credit: PA images
A Labour government would scrap Theresa May’s plan for Brexit and offer a unilateral guarantee to three million EU citizens that they can continue to live in the UK, Sir Keir Starmer will say today.

He added: ‘We are eight weeks out from the deadline for reaching an agreement. Ministers should be getting on the job of negotiating a Brexit deal that works for Britain, not publishing vague documents that will convince no-one.’

Lending and deposit services, insurance and annuities – which people rely on for a regular pension income – are among the financial products which expats could struggle to access, it has been suggested.  Documents said that ‘in the absence of action from the EU, EEA-based customers of UK firms currently passporting into the EEA, including UK citizens living in the EEA, may lose the ability to access existing lending and deposit services, insurance contracts [such as life insurance contracts and annuities] due to UK firms losing their rights to passport into the EEA’. Consumers would face another potential cost increase when shopping online, with parcels arriving in the UK no longer liable for Low Value Consignment Relief (LVCR) on VAT, the papers confirm. For businesses, the papers include warnings of extra logistical and financial hurdles over VAT and customs arrangements.

One paper covering trade with the EU also highlights potential new costs for firms trading with Europe.

Just five sectors – finance, automotive, agriculture, food and drink, and consumer goods – would bear 70 per cent of the burden. A no-deal Brexit would cost companies in the UK and the EU £58bn a year, with Britain’s financial services sector taking the biggest hit, according to new research. ( Getty )

It says companies should ‘if necessary, put steps in place to renegotiate commercial terms to reflect any changes in customs and excise procedures, and any new tariffs that may apply to UK-EU terms’. It adds: ‘Businesses should consider whether it is appropriate for them to acquire software and/or engage a customs broker, freight forwarder or logistics provider to support them with these new requirements.’

The Irish border, one of the most contentious issues in Brexit negotiations, is also mentioned – with firms trading across it told to ‘consider whether you will need advice from the Irish Government about preparations you need to make’.

‘Not possible’ to avoid post-Brexit hard border in Ireland, say MPs. The House of Commons’ Brexit committee is warning they “do not currently see” how a customs border can be avoided with Ireland.

Importing nuclear materials from the EU may require a licence under a no-deal outcome, according to a paper outlining the impact on civil nuclear regulation. Licences are not required under current arrangements, but the document warns that after March 29, 2019, ‘importers may need to obtain an import licence for imports of relevant nuclear materials from the EU’.

The rest of the papers, 80 in total, are to be released before the end of September. New medicines will need UK approval before they can be made available to patients in the event of a no-deal Brexit. The Medicines Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which regulates drugs in the UK, will take on the functions of the EU if an agreement is not reached by March 29.

Products will have to go through national assessment before they receive market authorisation to be sold in the UK, according to the relevant technical paper. Even health warnings on cigarette packets would change if there was no deal. Copyright for the current hard-hitting images of lung damage and dead bodies is owned by the European Commission, so the UK could no longer legally use them and new images would need to be created.



Adapted from: METRO