Tuesday 26th July 2016
NEWS TICKER: JULY 26TH 2016: Barclays Africa will announce its 2016 interim financial results on Friday 29 July at 07:00. Following the JSE SENS announcement, the results will be published along with the presentation and booklet on www.barclaysafrica.com thereafter. Maria Ramos, Barclays Africa Group Chief Executive, and David Hodnett, Barclays Africa Group Deputy Chief Executive, will host a Press Briefing at 10h45. The briefing will commence with introductory remarks, followed by a Q&A session - CACEIS is now depositary for the first two mutual ship funds under the German KAGB investment act. The two closed-end funds, “MS Marguerita” and “MS Tanja”, will both be managed by “MST AIFM Eins Fonds manager GmbH”, which is the investment management company of “MST Mineralien Schiffahrt Spedition und Transport GmbH.” Matthias M Ruttmann, managing director of MST explains: “We found CACEIS to be a flexible service provider, keen to seek out solutions for new asset types: Our ships will be the first of this asset type to be structured in a German AIF. We have put our trust in CACEIS`s experience in dealing with regulations and launching funds holding new asset types, so will have a solid framework for the launch of the funds.” Holger Sepp, Member of the Management Board at CACEIS in Germany added: “When entering the closed-end funds industry, we clearly committed ourselves to delivering depository service to all major asset types. We are very proud that MST has put its faith in CACEIS`s willingness and ability to service its ship AIFs. During the last couple of months, we have ensured we are fully prepared to handle all relevant requirements for the funds such as the depository function and relevant legal aspects.” -- Carillion, part of a 50:50 joint venture with Dutch Infrastructure Fund, have achieved financial closure on the Irish Schools Bundle 5 Public Private Partnership project that has been procured by the Department of Education & Skills alongside Ireland's National Treasury Management Agency. The joint venture will finance, build and operate five schools and an institute of further education located in counties Meath, Carlow, Wicklow and Wexford. The London-listed company said those construction activities alongside its equity interest will mean the project will generate around £190m of revenue for the business. Separately, EUS-Rokstad, a joint venture between Emera Utility Services and Rokstad Power, a business in which Carillion holds a 60% stake, has won a new contract in North America. The venture has been chosen by NSP Maritime Link Inc, a subsidiary of Emera Inc, as the transmission line contractor for its Maritime Link project that will transmit energy from Newfoundland to Nova Scotia and will connect Newfoundland to the North American grid for the first time in history. The joint venture will complete the high voltage direct current transmission line link under the contract, which is worth a total of £86m to the joint venture -

Latest Video

What kind of economy would the euro zone be without Germany?

Thursday, 28 June 2012 Written by 
What kind of economy would the euro zone be without Germany? There is increasing talk about establishing federalist mechanisms (eurobonds, eurobills) and pooling certain risks and investments between euro-zone countries (European bank guarantees, recapitalisation of banks by the EFSF-ESM, increased investments by the EIB, EFSF-ESM access to ECB funding, purchases of government bonds by the ECB). Germany's criticism of these proposals is that they ultimately place all the costs and all the risks on Germany, due to its economic, fiscal and financial situation and its credibility in financial markets. It is claimed that eventually all the bills will be sent to Germany, since the other euro area countries have no fiscal or financial leeway or any credibility to guarantee deposits and loans. We shall therefore examine the economy of the euro zone excluding Germany and ask the question: Is it in such a bad situation that federalism or the pooling of risks and investments between euro-zone countries would in fact amount to potentially placing the entire burden on Germany? We think that Germany’s fears are justified. http://www.ftseglobalmarkets.com/

There is increasing talk about establishing federalist mechanisms (eurobonds, eurobills) and pooling certain risks and investments between euro-zone countries (European bank guarantees, recapitalisation of banks by the EFSF-ESM, increased investments by the EIB, EFSF-ESM access to ECB funding, purchases of government bonds by the ECB). Germany's criticism of these proposals is that they ultimately place all the costs and all the risks on Germany, due to its economic, fiscal and financial situation and its credibility in financial markets. It is claimed that eventually all the bills will be sent to Germany, since the other euro area countries have no fiscal or financial leeway or any credibility to guarantee deposits and loans.

We shall therefore examine the economy of the euro zone excluding Germany and ask the question: Is it in such a bad situation that federalism or the pooling of risks and investments between euro-zone countries would in fact amount to potentially placing the entire burden on Germany?

We think that Germany’s fears are justified.

Federalism: pooling between euro-zone countries

The resolution of the euro-zone crisis will inevitably involve establishing certain forms of federalism (eurobonds, eurobills) and the pooling of certain investments and risks (a European bank guarantee system, the recapitalisation of the banks (e.g. Spanish banks) by the EFSF-ESM, an increase in structural funds or investments by the EIB, ESM access to ECB funding).



The pooling of risks between euro-zone countries already exists: the Target 2 accounts are a pooling of bank risks among euro-zone central banks, and purchases of government bonds by the ECB pool sovereign risk.

This trend to federalism and pooling is inevitable: in a monetary union without federalism, countries with external surpluses and countries with external deficits cannot coexist permanently due to the resulting accumulation of external debt.

A number of financing needs are too substantial to be borne by a single country, e.g. for Spain the need for recapitalisation of its banks. And a number of risks (e.g. the risk of a bank run) are also too great not to be pooled.

Is this move towards federalism and pooling a trap for Germany?

The view in Germany is clearly that this move towards federalism and pooling is a trap for Germany. It is claimed that Germany will have to cover most of the costs because it has public finances in good health, growth that is now stronger, higher living standards than the countries in distress, and excess savings.

Germany also has strong credibility in financial markets, as shown by its interest rate level, and it is the only country to be able to credibly insure risks and guarantee loans.

The Germans' concern is therefore understandable: if there is federalism and a pooling of investments and risks, will Germany "receive all the bills"?

To determine whether this is a real risk, let’s examine the situation of the euro zone without Germany: is it such a worrying region, will it have to be propped up permanently by Germany?

The economic and financial situation of the euro zone without Germany: Is it serious?

Without going into greater detail for each country, we shall examine:

·                   its competitiveness, the foreign trade situation; the weight of industry;

·                   its situation regarding its technological level, skills, productivity and investment; its potential growth;

·                   the situation of its businesses and households;

·                   its public finances.

1. Foreign trade, competitiveness, weight of industry

The euro zone without Germany has:

·                   a structural external deficit;

·                   a shortfall in competitiveness;

·                   a small industrial base;

·                   a large external debt.

2. Technological level, skills, investment, productivity and potential growth, capacity for job creation

The technological level of the euro zone without Germany is fairly low, as is the population's level of education; this zone invests little, has low productivity gains, and since 2008 it has destroyed jobs massively.

3. Situation of businesses and households

Corporate profitability in the euro zone excluding Germany is low, but private (corporate and household) debt is lower than in Germany; however, household solvency has deteriorated (in Germany, household defaults are low and stable; in France, Spain and Italy, they are high and rising).

4. Public finance situation

The public finances of the euro zone excluding Germany are in a very poor state compared with Germany. Indeed Germany’s debt to GDP ratio is expected to fall, while in the euro zone excluding Germany it should rise rapidly toward 100%; Germany has a 1% primary surplus, while the euro zone excluding Germany has a 2% primary deficit.

Conclusion: Are the German fears justified?

If the euro zone were to become a federal monetary union, with solidarity between countries and pooling of certain investments (recapitalisation of banks, for example) and risks, surely the rest of the euro zone excluding Germany could only be:

·                   benefiting from transfers from Germany;

·                   benefiting from Germany's credibility in the markets;

·                   benefiting from Germany's guarantee;

Or could it share this burden with Germany? We suspect that the burden on Germany would be very heavy.

Related News

Related Articles

Related Blogs

Current Issue

TWITTER FEED