aggi wrote:Which bit of It is understood that the government will help in the form of loan guarantees and other financial support. is confusing you?
I'm not sure why you keep banging on about state ownership. Unless you meant to type:
The EU says, "No can do , UK" if the sole method of rescue that you're considering is state ownership with a subsidy for a non-profitable company.
I thought an early night would have cleared your head
This is what I said.
"2008- Labour bail out the banks and saves London based bankers jobs. Costing the nation billions.
The EU says , " that's fine."
2019- The tories want to save thousands of steel workers jobs in the industrial north. Costing the nation millions.
The EU says, "No can do , UK"
Like the old Real Labour MPs always said, "the EU is a bankers club."
I'm now quoting directly from the actual letter sent to the government from its legal advisors.
"We cannot demonstrate the necessary commerciality required by State Aid Law to provide such support"
In other words , perhaps "simplistic", The EU says, "No can do , UK"
"There is no evidence that any earlier funding options involving government would have been lawful either"
In other words , The EU says, "No can do , UK"
"It would be unlawful to provide a guarantee or loan"
In other words , The EU says, "No can do , UK"
"We do not believe there is currently any level of investment government could make ( above the State Aid de minis of €200000 that could be deemed commercial and so legal"
In other words , The EU says, "No can do , UK"
It was not possible to fund a traditional loan financing that would be deemed to be successfully commercial to meet the State Aid commerciality threshold"
In other words , The EU says, "No can do , UK"
https://mobile.twitter.com/SimonClarkeM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... 1516826626
It proves my "simplistic" point to be accurate and correct and concurs with what Dr Ruth Bender, Associate Professor of Corporate Financial Strategy, said when she was interviewed on Radio 5 Live Breakfast show on 31st March.
"Do EU rules prevent state aid to save British Steel?
Would it be against EU regulations to provide funding to British Steel in a time of need?
"Unfortunately, yes. The fact that all the economic factors go against the UK steel industry is not relevant, nor is the potentially devastating impact on the wider local economy were it to close. The EU has already ruled on this: in January 2016 the competition commissioner ruled that the Belgian government had illegally provided €211m to steel companies in one of its depressed regions, and ordered that the money be repaid. She also announced an investigation into €2bn of similar aid given by the Italian government to support its steel industry."
Taken from the labour supporting website labour heartlands!
Your side aggi!!
The Tories/ government, as I said, and you called "outright lies " were prevented from saving thousands of jobs due to eu rules.
They haven't the chinese company has
If you , as a little Europeaner, want to make out that the tories have saved the steel workers jobs and defied EU state aid law , then fill your , psychologically wedded to the " le grande project " boots!
Every news bulletin yesterday, on tv , radio station , national newspaper has reported , it's a Chinese company that has stepped in a bought the steel business. Not the Tory Government. Just like they reported the EU was fine when labour bailed out the banks.
But you keep coming back and looking ridiculous!
Its brightening up, what would otherwise be a pretty mundane Tuesday!