Trump claims EU is not yet offering a fair trade deal; Reeves pitches UK as ‘oasis of stability’ – business live


Trump: EU not yet offering a fair trade deal

US president Donald Trump has said the European Union was not yet offering a fair deal in trade talks between the United States and the 27-nation bloc.

Seaking to reporters on Air Force One, as he returned early from the G7 summit, Trump explained:

“We’re talking, but I don’t feel that they’re offering a fair deal yet. They’re either going to make a good deal or they’ll just pay whatever we say they have to pay.”

Trump also said there was a chance of a trade deal with Japan, but said Tokyo was being “tough”, Reuters reports.

TRUMP SAYS EU NOT YET OFFERING A FAIR DEAL

— CGTN Europe (@CGTNEurope) June 17, 2025

Trump added that pharmaceutical tariffs were coming very soon and noted that Canada would pay to be part of his “golden dome” project.

Trump has also told reporters on the flight that he wants “a real end” to the nuclear problem with Iran.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has posted that the briefing is a sign that Trump is the “most transparent President in history”:

President Trump gaggled with the media aboard Air Force One at 1AM ET. Most transparent President in history.👇 https://t.co/UkUHSXsKCS

— Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) June 17, 2025

Reminder: The 90-day pause on new tariffs, which Trump announced in April after the markets slumped, ends on 8 July – giving the White House less than a month to strike scores of trade deals.

Europe has been taking a relatively hardball strategy to secure a US trade deal – pitching itself between ‘rollover UK’ (who secured an early deal with the US) and ‘retaliatory China’ (who ended up in a full-blown tit-for-tat tariff war before a peace deal was agreed).

Share

Updated at 

Key events

Water industry review won’t recommend changes to ownership model, despite crisis

Helena Horton

The government will not be recommended to turn water companies into not-for-profit companies under its “root and branch review” of the sector, review author Sir John Cunliffe has said.

At the launch of the Cunliffe review, the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs said that all options – except nationalisation – were on the table, and that a non-profit model such as that used in Wales was being considered.

But Cunliffe has now said the ownership structure is not the problem causing sewage spills, financial mismanagement and water shortages created by a lack of investment, my colleague Helena Horton reports.

He told parliament’s Environment, Food and Rural Affairs committee in Parliament today that the review will not be recommending one ownership structure for the industry.

Cunliffe said:

“If the question is whether we will recommend a wholesale transfer to another [ownership] model, what we won’t do is say we will move the whole sector to a different model. I’m not sure how you get there without spending a very large amount of public money to buy the assets and that’s outside my terms of reference”.

Feargal Sharkey, former Undertones frontman turned water campaigner, said in response:

“I had absolutely no expectations for this commission whatsoever and so far I am yet to be disappointed.

“I fail to comprehend how the interpretation of a root and branch review of the water industry is to completely exclude the issue at the heart of the industry which is ownership of the industry and the financial abuse of the water companies.

“Sir John is refusing to look at this because the government has told him not to.”

When asked by MPs if his report was going to be “tinkering” if it was not recommending an overhaul of how water companies are owned, Cunliffe said: “It’s not tinkering, it’s trying to be evidence based. I don’t think looking at the models, the evidence we have, it’s not a big data set but I don’t think the conclusive evidence is there to make a big change like that.”

He added that the terms of reference set by Defra secretary Steve Reed rule out using public money to nationalise water companies.

Cunliffe said that in the review he will “think about the investors, how they want to take their money out, are they prepared to put more equity in as investment goes up, are they looking for capital gain, are they looking for a stream of dividends over time?” and added he will “look at how do we set rules around that”, adding “it looks maybe weak but I don’t think it is.”

The review will also not make any recommendations on large bonuses and renumeration for water company CEOs:

“I don’t have a problem with there being bonuses for the financial performance provided they are not at the expense of the public good. We are not going to make recommendations on particular renumeration packages for chief executives.

There is a tension here between people taking pay packages they don’t deserve and recruiting and retaining. These are pretty big companies, the penalties for failure are pretty enormous. What we won’t get into is whether this [pay] is excessive.”





Source link

Related Articles

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Stay Connected

0FansLike
0FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Latest Articles