France’s President Emmanuel Macron has mainly caused strife on the international stage lately, or at least not less. Controversial statements on Taiwan, insistence on nuclear power plants for climate protection and, for months, a hard line on the Platform Work Directive. Today, with the start of the two-day “Summit for a New Global Financial Pact” in Paris, Macron could once again succeed in putting himself in a positive light.
At the summit, a little-known part of the Paris climate agreement is to get more attention: financing and the financial system. Macron wants to unite the various debates on this under one roof at the two-day meeting. For example, he will discuss partnerships for green growth and the further development of multilateral development banks. Private investors are also to be better integrated.
At least in view of the list of participants, Macron can already claim partial success in his mission to “unite instead of divide”: Numerous major players on the world stage have announced their attendance. From German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Lula da Silva and China’s Premier Li Qiang to UN Secretary-General António Guterres, World Bank chief Kristalina Georgiewa and Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. If, in the end, a passable “operational” roadmap with practical measures emerges, then a lot more would be achieved.
With his “Summit for a New Global Finance Pact” starting today, French President Emmanuel Macron wants to give international climate finance new momentum, a new framework and new donors. The two-day meeting in Paris aims to bring together the diverse debates on climate finance under one roof. It is intended to make private investors more accountable for the capital needs of the global turnaround.
And it is intended to draw general attention to the hitherto often neglected third goal of the Paris Agreement from Article 2 I c: Namely, in addition to limiting temperature and adapting to climate change, to “make financial flows compatible with a pathway towards low emissions of greenhouse gases and climate-resilient development”.
The organizers hope for a “joint diagnosis” of the challenges and a “new political vision” that will lead to “tangible, actionable” results, according to the Élysée Palace. The plan is not a word-for-word negotiated joint declaration, but an “operational” roadmap with practical measures.
Macron announced his summit at the G20 summit in November 2022 after supporting the “Bridgetown Initiative” of Mia Mottley, Prime Minister of Barbados. Mottley will be a prominent guest in Paris. Her agenda calls for a global financial system based on the needs of the most vulnerable countries: It should mobilize a total of 100 billion Dollars in finance, particularly from the private sector, and reduce the cost of capital in developing countries to address the impacts of climate change. This is in addition to the 100 billion Dollars that developed countries promised to the Global South starting 2020, and which they have so far failed to deliver in full.
Shortly before the start of the summit in Paris, heads of state and government supported the call for a climate-proof reform of the financial system and called for a “new global consensus” on this issue, including US President Joe Biden, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Brazil’s President Lula da Silva, South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa or the head of the EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen.
In any case, the G20 has called for reform of the Bretton Woods financial architecture, which it says is no longer functional in the face of 21st century challenges. “The climate issue clashes with the agenda of reforming the Bretton Woods institutions“, analyzes Philippe Zaouati, CEO of Mirova, an asset management company specializing in sustainable investments.
The French investor believes that the entire system needs to be “rethought” and “adapted” to the new climatic realities. And that requires greater involvement of the private financial sector. “Official development assistance is good, but it’s not everything”, Zaouati points out. “Currently, pension funds, for example, are still far too reluctant to invest in southern countries. Yet there is a great need for investment there in particular.”
From Paris’ point of view, the debates to date have one problem: They are taking place through numerous channels that do not necessarily agree with each other and are considered “distant”. At the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, at UN climate negotiations, at G7 and G20. “These international forums are currently subject to disjointed action on climate finance. This summit aims to create a common framework“, said Laurence Tubiana, chair of the European Climate Foundation and architect of the Paris Agreement. She calls for the Paris Agreement’s financial target.
Paris aims to make the two days at Palais Brongniart the hub of these different negotiating spaces. Macron wants to succeed despite tensions between China and the US, the war in Ukraine and the deep anger of the countries of the South. The geopolitical context is “very complicated”, notes Bertrand Badré, director of the Blue Orange Capital responsible investment fund and former director general for finance at the World Bank. “There is less and less desire to agree.” But, “if we don’t manage to accommodate the developing countries on the issue of financing, they won’t sit at the negotiating table and start extracting coal, oil and gas”, he fears.
Around 50 heads of state and government have announced their attendance. In addition to the charismatic Mia Mottley from Barbados, the President of Brazil, Lula da Silva, has already confirmed his participation. China is also expected to be represented at a high level by its Premier Li Qiang. UN Secretary-General António Guterres will be there, as will the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, the German Chancellor, Olaf Scholz, and the Presidents of Ghana, Nana Akufo-Addo, Senegal, Macky Sall, and Kenya, William Ruto. The US is expected to be represented by climate envoy John Kerry, and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.
Major international organizations, major foundations, the private sector, academia and civil society will also be present. Among them: the new president of the World Bank, Ajay Banga, who has been in office since June 1 and for whom this summit will be the first major international meeting. Also speaking at the summit will be IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva and Mafalda Duarte, who is preparing to take over as head of the Green Climate Fund. Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank and former IMF chief, will also be present. So will Mark Carney, former governor of the Bank of England, who launched the Gfanz (Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero) initiative.
Six roundtable discussions are planned on the following topics:
You have just taken up your position as EUCCC president. What do you see as the most pressing issue at this early stage of your tenure?
At the moment, the whole discussion about ‘de-risking’ is our main cause. There is a lot of talk about ‘de-Risking’ in Europe, and there is a lot of talk about ‘de-Risking” in China. And we think that there is still a lot of work to do to give content to this concept, in terms of its quality or its terms. So we need to begin taking a closer look at what this idea means in Europe – and also thinking about what it means in the Chinese context. Actually, China has been de-risking for the past decade. They just call it something else: ‘Made in China 2025’, ‘Dual Circulation’ or even ’14th Five Year Plan’. So I think it will be important to try finding a common language and to break down and deconstruct the concept.
How then can the de-risking of the EU work?
We need to thoroughly analyze what is perceived as a risk and as a vulnerability when we look at trade and production flows, in order to to get to a much better understanding of what ‘de-risking’ means to the actual business. That is a priority. But it will need a little bit of thinking and cannot be accomplished overnight. Words matter a lot, and this is an agenda-setting concept, same as the 2019 EU concept of China as a partner, competitor and strategic rival. So we need to be really clear about the concept and its implications.
China is still an important trading partner for most countries in Europe, particularly Germany, so diversifying away from it will be complicated. What do you expect?
I think a lot of things are not really going to change. As for manufacturing, China has been continuing to increase its share of global export. What we see right now is that there is a continued high focus on supporting the supply side in export manufacturing, through policies like easier access to credit. So I think we will continue to see China being quite strong on the export production side, which is somewhat supported by the weakening of the renminbi, at least in the short term.
That doesn’t sound bad for the Chinese economy at first.
On the other hand though, the weak Yuan is not doing a lot of good to Chinese households, because it makes imported stuff more expensive. This shows that government support is now flowing more to the supply side rather than to the demand side. We don’t see many measures that support consumption growth these days. But that’s what we would like to see.
What would help to boost consumption?
China’s people need to feel that the real estate sector is stabilizing. 70 percent of household wealth is tied up in real estate, and as long as people feel uncertain about where real estate is going, they will be conservative in their spending habits.
How do you see China’s current economic situation in general, post-Covid?
It is still early days to evaluate the reopening. We saw things were going relatively well in the first quarter, followed by some softening in the second quarter. So, yes, we are a bit concerned, we do see weaknesses in some sectors, especially in big-ticket manufactured goods, while services performed better. We may have a clearer picture in three months from now.
How much does this uncertainty about growth hit European companies?
My observation is that GDP figures are becoming less and less important and you need to look much more closely at sectors. When China was growing 12 percent a year, everyone could grow in China. I think now that growth is softening, you need to be looking a bit more carefully to pick the winners, because growth is not universal anymore. But in some sectors, there are still significant opportunities in China.
Which sectors?
We have made the point previously in one of our papers that China will mean different things in different industries. There are certain industries where China is going to account for more than half of global demand going forward. And you have others that are simply so complicated that you might ask yourself, is China really for me? So if you are doing specialty chemicals, then China is the place to be. But if you make digital platforms or digital content, then China could be a bit more difficult.
Companies are complaining about the various security laws that make their life increasingly difficult. At the same time, Europe is working on laws forcing enterprises to assess and control their value chains abroad. What does all this mean for long-established or new value chains in China? And how can companies navigate in this complicated environment – SMEs in particular?
If you are not a very large company, and it comes to a point where you have to establish and run two separate value chains – one for the West, and one for China – the cost might become prohibitively high. I would rather invest in one value chain that works very well, in a market that I know – rather than beginning to establish two, and run the second one in a market I am not too well acquainted with.
Does this have concrete consequences for European companies?
It is beginning to impact investment decisions. If I cannot predict with some amount of certainty, what the world is going to look like five years from now, and whether China will be the right place for me at that point, I will not invest. I actually don’t know of a single SME that has established itself in China since the beginning of Covid. It’s not all related to politics. But I think a lot of our companies were shaken during Covid, when they realized how vulnerable their supply chains were and how dependent they had become on a single location.
What can companies do about this?
People are sitting over their calculators trying to figure out what investments they need to make – and how those investments match the expected profits they could make in the Chinese market. And the more the costs of separating the value chain rise, the higher the threshold at which it becomes interesting for companies to set up shop here.
How does that play out in China?
This poses a risk and shrinks the variety in size and types of companies that have a longer-term interest in coming to China. I think these are exactly the kind of conversations we need to have with the Chinese government: Regulations and restrictions have consequences in real life, and consequences in invested Euros and US Dollars. So Beijing has some work to do in order to demonstrate to the international business community that China is an efficient and predictable place where companies can come and put down roots.
Is it true that local governments continue to be eager to attract foreign companies – all the while the central government is putting more attention on security and stability these days, with less focus on business?
Yes, there is a lot of interest in most provinces and municipalities in attracting foreign investment – especially under the present circumstances of a softening economy. I think anything that boosts economic activity is welcome. I certainly recognize that myself when I am traveling around. There is a high appetite for engaging with the foreign business community – and we of course appreciate that.
Beijing sends a not-so-open message.
Frankly, many of us got a bit concerned after the CCP Congress in October where there was so much focus on security and self-reliance which seemed to push in the other direction. But then we had the NPC in March, where talk was a lot more about unwavering support for reform and opening up, which was nice to hear.
What do you think the direction will be in the future?
At this point, we don’t really know which side is for real. It is wonderful that local governments want to talk to us. We like the attention. But will it translate to results on the ground? I think that remains to be seen.
Jens Eskelund has lived in China for 25 years and is the chief representative of the Danish Maersk Group. He has already served two terms as Vice President of the EU Chamber – from 2019 to 2021 and from October 2022 to May 2023 – and has also been actively involved in the Chamber’s working groups since its inception. He has also been a board member and chairman of the Danish Chamber of Commerce in China.
Rainer Steffens sees his colleagues and himself as “a special kind of lobbyist.” He was already head of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) representation to the EU in Brussels from 2011 to 2018. Since November 2022, he has now stood up for the interests and concerns of the federal state for the second time. However, due to the openly accessible information on finances and employees, he sees a clear difference in his work compared to classic lobbying, says Steffens. As a native of Lower Saxony, he nevertheless has a family connection to NRW through his wife from the Rhineland and his father-in-law. He is pleased to be able to represent the state, which has a population of around 18 million, not least because it has “the greatest economic power of any region in Europe.”
The most important topic in the 62-year-old’s work is currently the transformation of industrial society against the backdrop of the Green Deal and Fit for 55. According to Rainer Steffens, the plans correspond very well with the activities of the EU Commission and Ursula von der Leyen. The events surrounding Lützerath have also occupied the head of NRW’s representation. He understands the criticism of the coal compromise. “It’s not the best that could have been achieved, but it’s what was politically possible for us.”
As a law student, he had demonstrated against nuclear power and also devoted himself to environmental issues later in his career. After working in the Lower Saxony Ministry for Federal and European Affairs, Rainer Steffens held several positions in the Federal Ministry for the Environment until 2005 and was later the first head of the Environment Division in Germany’s Permanent Representation.
Between the previous and current terms as head of the representation, he worked as a coordinator at the Committee of the Regions in Brussels. “In my view, this is the most underestimated body in Brussels,” says the 62-year-old. It is made up of about 350 representatives of European cities and regions, who have very good informal contacts with the institutions.
Rainer Steffens developed his enthusiasm for Europe and the corresponding orientation at the beginning of his career. As part of his law studies in Hanover and Berlin, he completed an elective period at the European Parliament in Luxembourg in the mid-1980s. At that time, the intercultural exchange with other students was the main trigger for his enthusiasm for Europe, says the 62-year-old.
Among many other tasks, the regional office regularly hosts events. Above all, they are known for their carnival parties. “That’s part of the cultural export, of course, and we’re proud that once a year we host the biggest carnival party west of Aachen, where we can welcome up to 800 guests.” Rainer Steffens likes the colorful hustle and bustle, but full dedication is not in his DNA. What he thrives on, he says, is cycling. He currently has seven bicycles in his basement, on which he rides twelve kilometers to and from work every day, whenever possible.
He also occasionally combines his passion with his job: He has already organized a week-long bike tour through the Ruhr region and the Rhineland to Aachen with colleagues from the NRW state representation. It is important to him to not only be active on the “Brussels stage,” but also “to be able to have an impact on the state of NRW.” Stops on the tour included EU-funded projects, schools and craft businesses that feel particularly connected to Europe, as well as talks with politicians from the cities. He already has plans to repeat the tour next year. By Kim Fischer
Qatargate, the corruption scandal surrounding the EU Parliament, is still good for surprises seven months after the raids. Surprise number one: On Monday, MEP Andrea Cozzolino (formerly S&D), whose extradition Belgian investigators have been demanding for months, surprisingly turned himself in at Zaventem airport. The Neapolitan is accused of having accepted bribes from Morocco and Qatar. The now factionless MP vehemently denies this. Cozzolino had been questioned on Tuesday by the Belgian investigating judge Michel Claise. Claise has a reputation like thunder in Belgium.
Now, surprise number two: Claise had to relinquish the investigation due to bias. The judge’s son, Nicolas, founded a company in 2018 with Ugo, the son of the Socialist MEP Marie Arena. The name of Marie Arena, another Belgian socialist with Italian roots, kept popping up in the scandal. She headed the Human Rights Committee, where dubious stories were going on. Marie Arena had an affair with the main suspect, Antonio Panzeri, through whose NGOs the bribe payments were probably made.
What is also interesting is what the two guys did to earn their money: Nicolas and Ugo sold hemp flowers. Quite legally, of course. Presumably, the stuff is only to be used for cosmetic purposes. Although the THC content is so low, you feel a little dizzy as an observer. mgr
France’s President Emmanuel Macron has mainly caused strife on the international stage lately, or at least not less. Controversial statements on Taiwan, insistence on nuclear power plants for climate protection and, for months, a hard line on the Platform Work Directive. Today, with the start of the two-day “Summit for a New Global Financial Pact” in Paris, Macron could once again succeed in putting himself in a positive light.
At the summit, a little-known part of the Paris climate agreement is to get more attention: financing and the financial system. Macron wants to unite the various debates on this under one roof at the two-day meeting. For example, he will discuss partnerships for green growth and the further development of multilateral development banks. Private investors are also to be better integrated.
At least in view of the list of participants, Macron can already claim partial success in his mission to “unite instead of divide”: Numerous major players on the world stage have announced their attendance. From German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Lula da Silva and China’s Premier Li Qiang to UN Secretary-General António Guterres, World Bank chief Kristalina Georgiewa and Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. If, in the end, a passable “operational” roadmap with practical measures emerges, then a lot more would be achieved.
With his “Summit for a New Global Finance Pact” starting today, French President Emmanuel Macron wants to give international climate finance new momentum, a new framework and new donors. The two-day meeting in Paris aims to bring together the diverse debates on climate finance under one roof. It is intended to make private investors more accountable for the capital needs of the global turnaround.
And it is intended to draw general attention to the hitherto often neglected third goal of the Paris Agreement from Article 2 I c: Namely, in addition to limiting temperature and adapting to climate change, to “make financial flows compatible with a pathway towards low emissions of greenhouse gases and climate-resilient development”.
The organizers hope for a “joint diagnosis” of the challenges and a “new political vision” that will lead to “tangible, actionable” results, according to the Élysée Palace. The plan is not a word-for-word negotiated joint declaration, but an “operational” roadmap with practical measures.
Macron announced his summit at the G20 summit in November 2022 after supporting the “Bridgetown Initiative” of Mia Mottley, Prime Minister of Barbados. Mottley will be a prominent guest in Paris. Her agenda calls for a global financial system based on the needs of the most vulnerable countries: It should mobilize a total of 100 billion Dollars in finance, particularly from the private sector, and reduce the cost of capital in developing countries to address the impacts of climate change. This is in addition to the 100 billion Dollars that developed countries promised to the Global South starting 2020, and which they have so far failed to deliver in full.
Shortly before the start of the summit in Paris, heads of state and government supported the call for a climate-proof reform of the financial system and called for a “new global consensus” on this issue, including US President Joe Biden, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Brazil’s President Lula da Silva, South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa or the head of the EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen.
In any case, the G20 has called for reform of the Bretton Woods financial architecture, which it says is no longer functional in the face of 21st century challenges. “The climate issue clashes with the agenda of reforming the Bretton Woods institutions“, analyzes Philippe Zaouati, CEO of Mirova, an asset management company specializing in sustainable investments.
The French investor believes that the entire system needs to be “rethought” and “adapted” to the new climatic realities. And that requires greater involvement of the private financial sector. “Official development assistance is good, but it’s not everything”, Zaouati points out. “Currently, pension funds, for example, are still far too reluctant to invest in southern countries. Yet there is a great need for investment there in particular.”
From Paris’ point of view, the debates to date have one problem: They are taking place through numerous channels that do not necessarily agree with each other and are considered “distant”. At the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, at UN climate negotiations, at G7 and G20. “These international forums are currently subject to disjointed action on climate finance. This summit aims to create a common framework“, said Laurence Tubiana, chair of the European Climate Foundation and architect of the Paris Agreement. She calls for the Paris Agreement’s financial target.
Paris aims to make the two days at Palais Brongniart the hub of these different negotiating spaces. Macron wants to succeed despite tensions between China and the US, the war in Ukraine and the deep anger of the countries of the South. The geopolitical context is “very complicated”, notes Bertrand Badré, director of the Blue Orange Capital responsible investment fund and former director general for finance at the World Bank. “There is less and less desire to agree.” But, “if we don’t manage to accommodate the developing countries on the issue of financing, they won’t sit at the negotiating table and start extracting coal, oil and gas”, he fears.
Around 50 heads of state and government have announced their attendance. In addition to the charismatic Mia Mottley from Barbados, the President of Brazil, Lula da Silva, has already confirmed his participation. China is also expected to be represented at a high level by its Premier Li Qiang. UN Secretary-General António Guterres will be there, as will the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, the German Chancellor, Olaf Scholz, and the Presidents of Ghana, Nana Akufo-Addo, Senegal, Macky Sall, and Kenya, William Ruto. The US is expected to be represented by climate envoy John Kerry, and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.
Major international organizations, major foundations, the private sector, academia and civil society will also be present. Among them: the new president of the World Bank, Ajay Banga, who has been in office since June 1 and for whom this summit will be the first major international meeting. Also speaking at the summit will be IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva and Mafalda Duarte, who is preparing to take over as head of the Green Climate Fund. Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank and former IMF chief, will also be present. So will Mark Carney, former governor of the Bank of England, who launched the Gfanz (Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero) initiative.
Six roundtable discussions are planned on the following topics:
You have just taken up your position as EUCCC president. What do you see as the most pressing issue at this early stage of your tenure?
At the moment, the whole discussion about ‘de-risking’ is our main cause. There is a lot of talk about ‘de-Risking’ in Europe, and there is a lot of talk about ‘de-Risking” in China. And we think that there is still a lot of work to do to give content to this concept, in terms of its quality or its terms. So we need to begin taking a closer look at what this idea means in Europe – and also thinking about what it means in the Chinese context. Actually, China has been de-risking for the past decade. They just call it something else: ‘Made in China 2025’, ‘Dual Circulation’ or even ’14th Five Year Plan’. So I think it will be important to try finding a common language and to break down and deconstruct the concept.
How then can the de-risking of the EU work?
We need to thoroughly analyze what is perceived as a risk and as a vulnerability when we look at trade and production flows, in order to to get to a much better understanding of what ‘de-risking’ means to the actual business. That is a priority. But it will need a little bit of thinking and cannot be accomplished overnight. Words matter a lot, and this is an agenda-setting concept, same as the 2019 EU concept of China as a partner, competitor and strategic rival. So we need to be really clear about the concept and its implications.
China is still an important trading partner for most countries in Europe, particularly Germany, so diversifying away from it will be complicated. What do you expect?
I think a lot of things are not really going to change. As for manufacturing, China has been continuing to increase its share of global export. What we see right now is that there is a continued high focus on supporting the supply side in export manufacturing, through policies like easier access to credit. So I think we will continue to see China being quite strong on the export production side, which is somewhat supported by the weakening of the renminbi, at least in the short term.
That doesn’t sound bad for the Chinese economy at first.
On the other hand though, the weak Yuan is not doing a lot of good to Chinese households, because it makes imported stuff more expensive. This shows that government support is now flowing more to the supply side rather than to the demand side. We don’t see many measures that support consumption growth these days. But that’s what we would like to see.
What would help to boost consumption?
China’s people need to feel that the real estate sector is stabilizing. 70 percent of household wealth is tied up in real estate, and as long as people feel uncertain about where real estate is going, they will be conservative in their spending habits.
How do you see China’s current economic situation in general, post-Covid?
It is still early days to evaluate the reopening. We saw things were going relatively well in the first quarter, followed by some softening in the second quarter. So, yes, we are a bit concerned, we do see weaknesses in some sectors, especially in big-ticket manufactured goods, while services performed better. We may have a clearer picture in three months from now.
How much does this uncertainty about growth hit European companies?
My observation is that GDP figures are becoming less and less important and you need to look much more closely at sectors. When China was growing 12 percent a year, everyone could grow in China. I think now that growth is softening, you need to be looking a bit more carefully to pick the winners, because growth is not universal anymore. But in some sectors, there are still significant opportunities in China.
Which sectors?
We have made the point previously in one of our papers that China will mean different things in different industries. There are certain industries where China is going to account for more than half of global demand going forward. And you have others that are simply so complicated that you might ask yourself, is China really for me? So if you are doing specialty chemicals, then China is the place to be. But if you make digital platforms or digital content, then China could be a bit more difficult.
Companies are complaining about the various security laws that make their life increasingly difficult. At the same time, Europe is working on laws forcing enterprises to assess and control their value chains abroad. What does all this mean for long-established or new value chains in China? And how can companies navigate in this complicated environment – SMEs in particular?
If you are not a very large company, and it comes to a point where you have to establish and run two separate value chains – one for the West, and one for China – the cost might become prohibitively high. I would rather invest in one value chain that works very well, in a market that I know – rather than beginning to establish two, and run the second one in a market I am not too well acquainted with.
Does this have concrete consequences for European companies?
It is beginning to impact investment decisions. If I cannot predict with some amount of certainty, what the world is going to look like five years from now, and whether China will be the right place for me at that point, I will not invest. I actually don’t know of a single SME that has established itself in China since the beginning of Covid. It’s not all related to politics. But I think a lot of our companies were shaken during Covid, when they realized how vulnerable their supply chains were and how dependent they had become on a single location.
What can companies do about this?
People are sitting over their calculators trying to figure out what investments they need to make – and how those investments match the expected profits they could make in the Chinese market. And the more the costs of separating the value chain rise, the higher the threshold at which it becomes interesting for companies to set up shop here.
How does that play out in China?
This poses a risk and shrinks the variety in size and types of companies that have a longer-term interest in coming to China. I think these are exactly the kind of conversations we need to have with the Chinese government: Regulations and restrictions have consequences in real life, and consequences in invested Euros and US Dollars. So Beijing has some work to do in order to demonstrate to the international business community that China is an efficient and predictable place where companies can come and put down roots.
Is it true that local governments continue to be eager to attract foreign companies – all the while the central government is putting more attention on security and stability these days, with less focus on business?
Yes, there is a lot of interest in most provinces and municipalities in attracting foreign investment – especially under the present circumstances of a softening economy. I think anything that boosts economic activity is welcome. I certainly recognize that myself when I am traveling around. There is a high appetite for engaging with the foreign business community – and we of course appreciate that.
Beijing sends a not-so-open message.
Frankly, many of us got a bit concerned after the CCP Congress in October where there was so much focus on security and self-reliance which seemed to push in the other direction. But then we had the NPC in March, where talk was a lot more about unwavering support for reform and opening up, which was nice to hear.
What do you think the direction will be in the future?
At this point, we don’t really know which side is for real. It is wonderful that local governments want to talk to us. We like the attention. But will it translate to results on the ground? I think that remains to be seen.
Jens Eskelund has lived in China for 25 years and is the chief representative of the Danish Maersk Group. He has already served two terms as Vice President of the EU Chamber – from 2019 to 2021 and from October 2022 to May 2023 – and has also been actively involved in the Chamber’s working groups since its inception. He has also been a board member and chairman of the Danish Chamber of Commerce in China.
Rainer Steffens sees his colleagues and himself as “a special kind of lobbyist.” He was already head of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) representation to the EU in Brussels from 2011 to 2018. Since November 2022, he has now stood up for the interests and concerns of the federal state for the second time. However, due to the openly accessible information on finances and employees, he sees a clear difference in his work compared to classic lobbying, says Steffens. As a native of Lower Saxony, he nevertheless has a family connection to NRW through his wife from the Rhineland and his father-in-law. He is pleased to be able to represent the state, which has a population of around 18 million, not least because it has “the greatest economic power of any region in Europe.”
The most important topic in the 62-year-old’s work is currently the transformation of industrial society against the backdrop of the Green Deal and Fit for 55. According to Rainer Steffens, the plans correspond very well with the activities of the EU Commission and Ursula von der Leyen. The events surrounding Lützerath have also occupied the head of NRW’s representation. He understands the criticism of the coal compromise. “It’s not the best that could have been achieved, but it’s what was politically possible for us.”
As a law student, he had demonstrated against nuclear power and also devoted himself to environmental issues later in his career. After working in the Lower Saxony Ministry for Federal and European Affairs, Rainer Steffens held several positions in the Federal Ministry for the Environment until 2005 and was later the first head of the Environment Division in Germany’s Permanent Representation.
Between the previous and current terms as head of the representation, he worked as a coordinator at the Committee of the Regions in Brussels. “In my view, this is the most underestimated body in Brussels,” says the 62-year-old. It is made up of about 350 representatives of European cities and regions, who have very good informal contacts with the institutions.
Rainer Steffens developed his enthusiasm for Europe and the corresponding orientation at the beginning of his career. As part of his law studies in Hanover and Berlin, he completed an elective period at the European Parliament in Luxembourg in the mid-1980s. At that time, the intercultural exchange with other students was the main trigger for his enthusiasm for Europe, says the 62-year-old.
Among many other tasks, the regional office regularly hosts events. Above all, they are known for their carnival parties. “That’s part of the cultural export, of course, and we’re proud that once a year we host the biggest carnival party west of Aachen, where we can welcome up to 800 guests.” Rainer Steffens likes the colorful hustle and bustle, but full dedication is not in his DNA. What he thrives on, he says, is cycling. He currently has seven bicycles in his basement, on which he rides twelve kilometers to and from work every day, whenever possible.
He also occasionally combines his passion with his job: He has already organized a week-long bike tour through the Ruhr region and the Rhineland to Aachen with colleagues from the NRW state representation. It is important to him to not only be active on the “Brussels stage,” but also “to be able to have an impact on the state of NRW.” Stops on the tour included EU-funded projects, schools and craft businesses that feel particularly connected to Europe, as well as talks with politicians from the cities. He already has plans to repeat the tour next year. By Kim Fischer
Qatargate, the corruption scandal surrounding the EU Parliament, is still good for surprises seven months after the raids. Surprise number one: On Monday, MEP Andrea Cozzolino (formerly S&D), whose extradition Belgian investigators have been demanding for months, surprisingly turned himself in at Zaventem airport. The Neapolitan is accused of having accepted bribes from Morocco and Qatar. The now factionless MP vehemently denies this. Cozzolino had been questioned on Tuesday by the Belgian investigating judge Michel Claise. Claise has a reputation like thunder in Belgium.
Now, surprise number two: Claise had to relinquish the investigation due to bias. The judge’s son, Nicolas, founded a company in 2018 with Ugo, the son of the Socialist MEP Marie Arena. The name of Marie Arena, another Belgian socialist with Italian roots, kept popping up in the scandal. She headed the Human Rights Committee, where dubious stories were going on. Marie Arena had an affair with the main suspect, Antonio Panzeri, through whose NGOs the bribe payments were probably made.
What is also interesting is what the two guys did to earn their money: Nicolas and Ugo sold hemp flowers. Quite legally, of course. Presumably, the stuff is only to be used for cosmetic purposes. Although the THC content is so low, you feel a little dizzy as an observer. mgr
