Category Archives: France

12/4/17: European Economic Uncertainty Moderated in 1Q 2017


European Policy Uncertainty Index, an indicator of economic policy risks perception based on media references, has posted a significant moderation in the risk environment in the first quarter of 2017, falling from the 4Q 2016 average of 307.75 to 1Q 2017 average of 265.42, with the decline driven primarily by moderating uncertainty in the UK and Italy, against rising uncertainty in France and Spain. Germany's economic policy risks remained largely in line with 4Q 2016 readings. Despite the moderation, overall European policy uncertainty index in 1Q 2017 was still ahead of the levels recorded in 1Q 2016 (221.76).

  • German economic policy uncertainty index averaged 247.19 in 1Q 2017, up on 239.57 in 4Q 2016, but down on the 12-months peak of 331.78 in 3Q 2016. However, German economic uncertainty remained above 1Q 2016 level of 192.15.
  • Italian economic policy uncertainty index was running at 108.52 in 1Q 2017, down significantly from 157.31 reading in 4Q 2016 which also marked the peak for 12 months trailing period. Italian uncertainty index finished 1Q 2017 at virtually identical levels as in 1Q 2016 (106.92).
  • UK economic policy uncertainty index was down sharply at 411.04 in 1Q 2017 from 609.78 in 4Q 2016, with 3Q 2016 marking the local (12 months trailing) peak at 800.14. Nonetheless, in 1Q 2017, the UK index remained well above 1Q 2016 reading of 347.11.
  • French economic policy uncertainty rose sharply in 1Q 2017 to 454.65 from 371.16 in 4Q 2016. Latest quarterly average is the highest in the 12 months trailing period and is well above 273.05 reading for 1Q 2016.
  • Spain's economic policy uncertainty index moderated from 179.80 in 4Q 2016 to 137.78 in 1Q 2017, with the latest reading being the lowest over the five recent quarters. A year ago, the index stood at 209.12.

Despite some encouraging changes and some moderation, economic policy uncertainty remains highly elevated across the European economy as shown in the chart and highlighted in the chart below:
Of the Big 4 European economies, only Italy shows more recent trends consistent with decline in uncertainty relative to 2012-2015 period and this moderation is rather fragile. In every other big European economy, economic uncertainty is higher during 2016-present period than in any other period on record. 

15/4/16: Slovakia v France: Risk Divergence


I love it when the good guys lead: "Slovakia leaps ahead of France, reveals country risk survey

Full article available here: http://www.euromoney.com/Article/3545875/Slovakia-leaps-ahead-of-France-reveals-country-risk-survey.html?copyrightInfo=true

My full comment on the matter:

"From macroeconomic perspective the two economies appear to be heading in the opposite direction.

While France is experiencing weakening growth momentum with forecast real GDP growth rates for 2016-2017 at around 1.55 percent on average and declining (1H 2015 compared to current, a forecast swing of around 0.05 percentage points), Slovakian economy is gaining speed, with current forecast growth rate at around 3.57 percent for 2016-2017, representing an upgrade of around 0.3 percentage points.

Much of this is accounted for by differences in investment (rising in Slovakia, as a share of GDP, while relatively stagnant in France), as well as growth in exports of goods and services (with Slovakia expected to outperform France in terms of growth in exports in both 2016 and 2017 - a reversal on 2015 outrun).

In fiscal policy terms, both countries are expected to post modest reduction in total burden of Government in the economy, reflected in the declining ratio of Government revenues to GDP over 2016-2017. However, in France, this forecast is less certain due to political cycle and ongoing lack of progress on both structural reforms and fiscal targets. In contrast, Slovakia already runs relatively lean, strongly value-for-money focused public spending policies. As the result, even under relatively rosy projections, France will continue to post greater Government deficits than Slovakia through 2017. Crucially, even with negative Government yields on French debt, France is currently running deeper primary deficits than Slovakia, which suggests that the French fiscal space is much thinner than headline difference between the two countries suggest.

The above dynamics also point to continued divergence between the two countries' paths in terms of external balances. Slovakia's current account surplus in 2016-2017 is likely to average at around 0.15 percent of GDP. In contrast, France's current account deficit is expected to be around 0.37 percent of GDP.

In simple terms, diverging macroeconomic and political risks paths do warrant risk repricing in the case of both Slovakia (to the downside of risks) and France (to the upside in terms of risks assessment) into 2016, and possibly into 2017."

The risk trends are indeed showing counter-movement:


17/5/2015: BlackRock Institute Survey: N. America & W. Europe, April


BlackRock Investment Institute released the latest Economic Cycle Survey results for North America and Western Europe:

"This month’s North America and Western Europe Economic Cycle Survey presented a positive outlook on global growth, with a net of 48% of 56 economists expecting the world economy will get stronger over the next year, compared to 52% from previous report. The consensus of economists project mid-cycle expansion over the next 6 months for the global economy. At the 12 month horizon, the positive theme continued with the consensus expecting all economies spanned by the survey to strengthen or stay the same except Canada and Denmark."

Country results 6 months forward compared to current conditions assessment:


Note: (0,0) Corner point denotes Austria, Denmark, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the Netherlands

Country results 12 months forward:

"Eurozone is described to be in an expansionary phase of the cycle and expected to remain so over the next 2 quarters. Within the bloc, most respondents described Finland, Greece and Italy to be in a recessionary state, with the even split between contraction or recession for Portugal. Over the next 6 months, the consensus shifts toward expansion for Italy. Over the Atlantic, the consensus view is firmly that North America as a whole is in mid-cycle expansion and is to remain so over the next 6 months except Canada where the consensus is split between mid-cycle or late-cycle states."

Note: these views reflect opinions of survey respondents, not that of the BlackRock Investment Institute. Also note: cover of countries is relatively uneven, with some countries being assessed by a relatively small number of experts.

Open letter of the members of the French Resistance to President Hollande


The voice of France, the UN and Russia, an open letter to Monsieur le Président de la République

Monsieur le Président de la République

Fascisme is reemerging everywhere in Europe, singularly in countries which have been freed from the USSR where powerful and dark forces are using NéoNazism as an ideological vector for their national emancipation and their territorial sovereignty .In these circles and beyond them, the Ukrainian crisis, which is politically and diplomatically overexploited to undermine the Russian Federation is used as a pretext for multiple attempts to rehabilitate the Third Reich, especially in the Baltic Countries, where monuments commemorating the 1945 victory are often desecrated with the covert or overt complicity of the concerned governments.

The Western world is in no way immune from these dangerous overflows. In defiance of it's historical status, the European Union tolerates within itself, political movements which have been able, with impunity, to send to the EU Parliament, legally elected deputies, although self styled Nazis.

In face of this situation, which is fed and worsened by a never ending economical crisis on the old continent, Russia submit every year to the general assembly of the United Nations, a resolution calling for the refusal of « this glorification of Nazis and their collaborators who, waiving Swastika banners and marching with their right arms held up, are overtly promoting xenophobia and racial superiority.

Unfortunately, The United States of America, Canada and the Marshall Islands, systematically oppose this text and the European Union - among which is France-, choosing in that respect to renew with the disastrous spirit of Munich, chose to refrain.Opponants and abstentions, put forward as an excuse... Respect for freedom of expression, to justify their decisions. Under the same pretext, they block the passing of similar decisions within the OSCE. This attitude is pitiful and dangerous and can be considered as a signed blank paper for the Fascists to keep on with their criminal activities.

This year, the pretext put forward for a 'no' vote or abstention to the resolution, is the Ukrainian crisis and the « annexation » of Crimea. Putin should be made to understand that the West won't tolerate an expansionist Russia. This is of course only a pretext because in November of 2013, as the Ukrainian crisis was just unfolding, their was no separatists claims of any sort in Eastern Ukraine or in Crimea. The vote had been the same. Most noticeable is the 2010 vote, during which the Russian President was Medvedev, known to be closer to the West than the actual President.

The fact that the Russian diplomatic initiatives are thus subjected to contempt is unacceptable. The tremendous death toll paid by the USSR during the second world war, morally forbid it. Resistants in Europe and especially in France, know what they owe to the Red Army. Without the decisive victories over Hitler, the world battle for liberty wouldn't have been possible and the allies would have never landed in Italy nor on the Coast of Normandie. Must it be reminded, that on the D Day, June the 6thof 1944, the Werhmacht was collapsing everywhere on the East front and that Hitler had thus already lost the war ? Must it be reminded that, without the Soviets sacrifices, France would have never recovered it's freedom ? Must it be reminded that without Moscow, Stalingrad and Koursk's victories – the mains Nazis military defeats- the world could never have freed itself from fascism and the United Nations Organisation would have never existed ?

We would also want to remind you, mister President, that during the spring and summer of 1942, the General De Gaulle had, in vain, tried to persuade the allies to open a « second front ». If the General De Gaulle had been heard, millions of people in the Soviet Union and in the concentration camps, wouldn't have lost their lives. Must we remind you that the landing in France as suggested by the General de Gaulle, was replaced by a landing in North Africa and that the first version of the now famous American « regime change » took place at that time, the Americans having chosen the General Giraud instead of De Gaulle.

France, which as a member of the Security Council, have a right of veto, must not forget history and the lessons it teaches. France must not forget the responsibilities which have been bestowed to her by the fact of having been able to sit at the winners table. France must not forget that without the resistance movement, without the commitment of the General De Gaulle saving the honor of our country from London, France wouldn't enjoy the diplomatic weight and prestige which it has acquired. Consequently, it's voice, which is heard, when relying on historical principles, used and exalted by the National Resistance Council, it's voice must be heard in the fight against the rebirth of Nazism, which is to say, in fact, it's own values. Values that you invoked during your multiple public interventions, especially during the commemorations of the landings in Normandie and Provence.

As a Head of the State, it thus belongs to you to break the guilty and spineless caution of a Europe which flimsiness in foreign affairs never stops to tarnish the brilliance.

Consequently, the signatories request from you, that next year, the signature of France be added to those of the nations having already backed the resolution of the Federation of Russia.

Armand Conan, Résistant, membre du Comité Départemental du Morbihan
René Jassaud, Résistant, ravitailleur du maquis « camp Robert » dans le Var
Colette Lacroix, Résistante, membre du réseau SOE « pimento » dans l'Ain
Antoine Payet, Résistant, membre du groupe de St Fons dans le Rhône
Paul Raybaud, membre du réseau Camp Robert dans le Var

Glorification of terrorism: a teenager prosecuted in France because of a cartoon on Facebook

by numerama, 17/1/2015
Translated by Jenny Bright for Tlaxcala

A 16 year-old teenager in France was indicted for glorifying terrorism after he published a cartoon representing a character with the Charlie Hebdo journal, hit by bullets, with an accompanying ironic comment.

The current situation is, to say the least, paradoxical. Last weekend, following the terrible attacks that took place right in the middle of Paris, large rallies were held throughout the country to denounce terrorism and to remind the world of France's commitment to the fundamental principles of freedom of expression and freedom of the press.
But since last week, it has become clear that a stiffening is taking place in France with the appearance of dozens of lawsuits based on the “defense or glorification of terrorism” offense, which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment and a fine of 75,000 euros (or 7 years in prison and 100,000 euros fine if the Internet is involved, because the latter is now an aggravating circumstance).

For example, midweek, the Associated Press identified 54 legal proceedings running on that ground, sometimes with other grievances held against those arrested. In some cases, the judgment has already been made: fifteen months imprisonment for this Ardennes inhabitant, three months imprisonment for this one living in Toulon or a year imprisonment for this Nanterre inhabitant.

The number of cases has since increased. Le Monde listed 70 in an article published a few hours after that of the AP.

A CARTOON ON FACEBOOK

Lately, a young man of 16 was arrested and placed in custody. France 3 indicates that on Thursday, the teenager was presented before a juvenile judge to decide if he should be indicted for glorifying terrorism. For its part, the Public Prosecutor’s Department for minors of the city of Nantes asked the next day for his release on bail until the Court hearing.

His fault? Having published on his Facebook profile "a cartoon representing a character with the Charlie Hebdo journal, hit by bullets, accompanied by an ironic commentary" the TV channel explained.

[Here is the cartoon, as published by Norman Finkelstein, and which was widely pubished on the Net]



FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND ITS LIMITS

The multiplication of procedures for glorification of terrorism poses the question of the limits of freedom of expression, which seems to be getting cracked down on since the attacks. A situation that alarms many non-governmental organisations such as the League of Human Rights, which fears the reflex of drastic security measures, and Amnesty International.

“Freedom of expression does not have favourites. Now is not the time for knee-jerk prosecutions, but measured responses that protect lives and respect the rights of all” explains the NGO, which fears that some arrests made ​​in the heat of emotion and firmness in fact violate freedom of expression.

Because although everyone may agree to defend freedom of expression when it's all plain sailing into the wind, we should not forget that it also applies to messages that may be unpleasant or revolting. “If we do not believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we do not believe in it at all[1]” explains philosopher Noam Chomsky.
Does this mean that we must stand idly by? No, of course not. Some cases likely deserve legal punishment if there is anything to punish (especially if other grievances are included in the procedure). But the emotion aroused by the attacks raises fears of a general lack of discernment that does not contribute to the administration of justice in good conditions

[1] Interview by John Pilger on BBC's The Late Show, November 25, 1992. See also : “If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.” Noam Chomsky, in Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, 1992.