Italy PM Matteo Renzi delays resignation until budget is passed

December 6, 2016

Rome, Dec 6: Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi formally resigned Monday after a crushing referendum defeat that has sent shockwaves around Europe — though his departure will be delayed by a final task, passing a budget.

Italy

Renzi handed his resignation to President Sergio Mattarella after Italians resoundingly rejected his constitutional reform proposals in Sunday's referendum, to the delight of the country's populist leaders, fresh after Brexit and Donald Trump's US victory.

The departure of the centre-left premier — who had staked his future on the outcome of the vote — plunges Italy into political uncertainty and casts a shadow over the future of the eurozone's third-largest economy.

In an apparent bid to ease investor fears, the presidency said in a statement that Mattarella had "asked the prime minister to postpone his resignation" until the 2017 budget has been passed, a move expected by the end of the week, according to Italian media.

The government has already won a vote of confidence on the budget in the lower house of parliament.

Renzi, who in 2014 became Italy's youngest-ever premier, was left with no option but to quit after his proposals to streamline parliament were rejected by voters by a decisive 59-41 percent margin.

The 41-year-old former mayor of Florence, who came to power promising radical reform, defended his record.

"1,000 difficult but wonderful days. Thanks to everyone. Viva l'Italia," he wrote on Facebook.

Italian media said he told his cabinet he had agreed to see the budget passed before his departure "out of a sense of responsibility".

Landmark moment?

Initial market reaction to Renzi's departure has been subdued.

The euro briefly sank to a 20-month low as investors fretted that political instability could scupper efforts to resolve debt-ridden Italy's long-running banking crisis, and over the possibility of an election that could see anti-EU parties challenge for power.

Italy's FTSE MIB stock index fell 2.0 percent at the opening but recovered to end the day only fractionally down. Italian bond yields rose slightly, having already edged up prior to Sunday's vote.

Traders were reassured in part by the result of Europe's other crucial vote this weekend, which saw Austria reject a far-right candidate for president.

But some analysts said the referendum could yet come to be seen as a landmark moment.

Holger Schmieding, at the Berenberg private bank, said the risk that Italy could choose to leave the euro, while still remote, had increased.

Capital Economics said: "Italy has taken the first step along a path that could lead it out of the eurozone."

An anti-establishment vote

The vote inevitably became something of a referendum on Renzi's personality and record after his pledge to stand down should he lose, and an opportunity for some to express wider frustrations.

Populists across Europe rejoiced at his downfall, with the founder of Italy's own anti-establishment Five Star movement Beppe Grillo calling for an election "within a week".

Giovanni Orsina, Professor of Politics at Rome's Luiss university, said four out of five voters had cast their vote politically rather than on the merits of the reform.

"The vote has broad similarities with the Brexit and Trump phenomena," he said. "The electorate voted against the establishment, against Brussels. They didn't get into the subtleties."

Poll data showed the No vote was strongest in areas with high unemployment, in the relatively poor south and amongst young voters, pointing to a correlation with levels of discontent.

Britain's eurosceptic Nigel Farage, who spearheaded the "Brexit" campaign, said the vote appeared to have been "more about the euro than constitutional change".

But former Bank of Italy economist Lorenzo Codgno insisted: "The outcome of the referendum is much more complex and nuanced than 'just another wave of protest across the globe'."

Padoan favourite for new PM

Most analysts see immediate elections as unlikely.

The most probable scenario is a caretaker administration dominated by Renzi's Democratic Party taking over before an election that has to take place by March 2018.

Finance Minister Pier Carlo Padoan was installed as the bookmakers favourite to succeed Renzi as prime minister, with Senate speaker Pietro Grasso, a veteran anti-mafia prosecutor, running in second place.

Renzi meanwhile may try to stay on as head of his party, which would leave him well-placed for a potential comeback to frontline politics at the next election. But he faces resistance to that scenario from the many enemies he has made while in office.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
August 1,2020

Mexico City, Aug 1: The number of people, who have died of COVID-19 in Mexico, has risen by 688 to 46,688 within the past 24 hours, Deputy Health Minister Hugo Lopez-Gatell said.

The number of victims in Mexico is now higher than in the United Kingdom, where 46,119 people have died of the disease. The largest number of fatalities - 153,311 - has been recorded in the United States, while Brazil comes second with 92,475 deaths.

Lopez-Gatell also said on late Friday that the number of confirmed coronavirus cases had increased by 8,458 to 424,637 over the past day.

A day earlier, the Latin American nation recorded 7,730 new cases of the coronavirus, with 639 fatalities.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic on March 11. To date, over 17.5 million people have been infected with the coronavirus worldwide, with over 677,000 fatalities, according to Johns Hopkins University.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 3,2020

Jul 3: China under President Xi Jinping has stepped up its "aggressive" foreign policy toward India and "resisted" efforts to clarify the Line of Actual Control that prevented a lasting peace from being realised, according to a report released by a US Congress appointed commission.

The armies of India and China have been locked in a bitter standoff at multiple locations in eastern Ladakh for the last seven weeks, and the tension escalated after 20 Indian soldiers were killed in a violent clash in the Galwan Valley on June 15.

“Under General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Xi Jinping, Beijing has stepped up its aggressive foreign policy toward New Delhi. Since 2013, China has engaged in five major altercations with India along the Line of Actual Control (LAC),” said a brief issued by US-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

"Beijing and New Delhi have signed a series of agreements and committed to confidence-building measures to stabilise their border, but China has resisted efforts to clarify the LAC, preventing a lasting peace from being realised,” said the report and was prepared at the request of the Commission to support its deliberations.

Authored by Will Green, a Policy Analyst on the Security and Foreign Affairs Team at the Commission, the report says that the Chinese government is particularly fearful of India’s growing relationship with the United States and its allies and partners.

“The latest border clash is part of a broader pattern in which Beijing seeks to warn New Delhi against aligning with Washington,” it said.

After Xi assumed power in 2012, there was a significant increase in clashes, despite the fact that he met Prime Minister Narendra Modi several times and Beijing and New Delhi have agreed to a series of confidence-building mechanisms designed to mitigate tensions.

Prior to 2013, the last major border clash was in 1987. The 1950s and 1960s were a particularly tense period, culminating in 1962 with a war that left thousands of soldiers dead on both sides, according to the records of China's People's Liberation Army, the report said.

“The 2020 skirmish is in line with Beijing’s increasingly assertive foreign policy. The clash came as Beijing was aggressively pressing its other expansive sovereignty claims in the Indo-Pacific region, such as over Taiwan and in the South and East China seas,” it said.

China is engaged in hotly contested territorial disputes in both the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Beijing has built up and militarised many of the islands and reefs it controls in the region. Both areas are stated to be rich in minerals, oil and other natural resources and are vital to global trade.

China claims almost all of the South China Sea. Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan have counter claims over the area.

Several weeks before the clash in the Galwan Valley, Chinese Defence Minister Wei Fenghe called on Beijing to “use fighting to promote stability” as the country’s external security environment worsened, a potential indication of China’s intent to proactively initiate military tensions with its neighbours to project an image of strength, the report said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 30,2020

Washington, May 30: The United States will end its relationship with the World Health Organization over the body’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday, accusing the U.N. agency of becoming a puppet of China.

The move to quit the Geneva-based body, which the United States formally joined in 1948, comes amid growing tensions between Washington and Beijing over the coronavirus outbreak. The virus first emerged in China’s Wuhan city late last year.

Speaking in the White House Rose Garden, Trump said Chinese officials “ignored their reporting obligations” to the WHO about the virus - that has killed hundreds of thousands of people globally - and pressured the agency to “mislead the world.”

“China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying which is approximately $450 million a year,” he said.

Trump’s decision follows a pledge last week by Chinese President Xi Jinping to give $2 billion to the WHO over the next two years to help combat the coronavirus. The amount almost matches the WHO’s entire annual program budget for last year.

Trump last month halted funding for the 194-member organization, then in a May 18 letter gave the WHO 30 days to commit to reforms.

“Because they have failed to make the requested and greatly needed reforms, we will be today terminating our relationship with the World Health Organization and redirecting those funds to other worldwide and deserving urgent global public health needs,” Trump said on Friday.

It was not immediately clear when his decision would come into effect. A 1948 joint resolution of Congress on U.S. membership of the WHO said the country “reserves its right to withdraw from the organization on a one-year notice.”

The World Health Organization did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Trump’s announcement. It has previously denied Trump’s assertions that it promoted Chinese “disinformation” about the virus.

“It’s important to remember that the WHO is a platform for cooperation among countries,” said Donna McKay, executive director of Physicians for Human Rights. “Walking away from this critical institution in the midst of an historic pandemic will hurt people both in the United States and around the world.”

‘ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL’

The United States currently owes the WHO more than $200 million in assessed contributions, according to the WHO website. Washington also gives several hundred million dollars annually in voluntary funding tied to specific WHO programs such as polio eradication, HIV, hepatitis and tuberculosis.

Amesh A. Adalja, a senior scholar at Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, said that in practice Trump’s decision was unlikely to change the operations of the WHO.

“From a symbolic or moral standpoint it’s the wrong type of action to be taking in the middle of a pandemic and seems to deflect responsibility for what we in the U.S. failed to do and blame the WHO,” said Adalja.

When Trump halted funding to the WHO last month, two Western diplomats said the U.S. suspension was more harmful politically to the WHO than to the agency’s current programs, which are funded for now.

The WHO is an independent international body that works with the United Nations. U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said last month that the WHO is “absolutely critical to the world’s efforts to win the war against COVID-19.”

When asked about Trump’s decision, a U.N. spokesman said: “We have consistently called for all states to support WHO.”

Trump has long scorned multilateralism as he focuses on an “America First” agenda. Since taking office, he has quit the U.N. Human Rights Council, the U.N. cultural agency, a global accord to tackle climate change and the Iran nuclear deal. He has also cut funding for the U.N. population fund and the U.N. agency that aids Palestinian refugees.

“The WHO is the world’s early warning system for infectious diseases,” said U.S. Representative Nita Lowey, a Democrat who chairs the House Committee on Appropriations. “Now, during a global pandemic that has cost over 100,000 American lives, is not the time to put the country further at risk.”

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.