42
German finance minister calls for firmer China stance amid pressure on steel industry over Chinese overcapacity, sate subsidies, other trade barriers (eurometal.net)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/world@quokk.au
4 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://scribe.disroot.org/post/10966800

...

German Finance Minister and Vice Chancellor Lars Klingbeil said Germany could no longer rely solely on traditional free-trade principles while China strengthened its competitive position.

“They’re not playing by the rules,” Klingbeil ... said. “Overcapacity, state subsidies, joint venture obligations – all these things.”

“We simply have to do more in this regard,” he added.

His comments come amid growing concerns over Europe’s industrial competitiveness. European policymakers have increasingly argued that stronger trade-defense measures and industrial support mechanisms may be necessary to counter competitive pressures from China.

...

Archived

all 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

China is a sovereign nation and have an advanced form of government that seeks to protect the environment and their people's health, by careful planing and protecting their citizens' housing, food, and education. They are under no obligation to play by rules that destroy the habitat, mental or physical health of their citizens, or their economy in favor of rules that favor the wholesale destruction of all for western greed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Apparently the Chinese workers have a different view:

    Chinese workers are circulating instructions [on Chinese social media] for reporting excessive working hours to European authorities, using the EU’s forthcoming forced-labour rules as leverage in a domestic labour system where complaints often produce limited results ...

    Official figures indicate that Chinese employees work more than 48 hours a week on average, compared with a legal standard of 44. Enforcement is uneven, particularly where factories face tight export deadlines or workers depend on overtime to reach an acceptable income ...

    The report is particularly interesting as it quotes Lu Ming, a member of China’s top political advisory body, who warned earlier this year that "weak Chinese labour protection could provoke foreign trade barriers."

    So a high-ranked Chinese Communist Party official warns about "weak" Chinese labour protection laws and the threat that this could be a barrier for Chinese exports (on which the country's economy desperately depends due to weak domestic consumption).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    I'm trying to read the article, but that archive site keeps reloading before I can get through the first full sentence. This is happening on two different browsers, and your direct quote is truncated. Can you please archive it elsewhere so I can read the article in full?

    Edit: ah, here we go:

    Excessive overtime is evidence, not a verdict

    The emerging Chinese discussion requires a careful legal distinction. Working longer than the national limit may breach labour law without necessarily amounting to forced labour under the EU regulation.

    Will the EU apply the same standards to US abuses, if US workers file complaints?

    The European measure uses the International Labour Organization definition: work or service exacted under the menace of a penalty and not offered voluntarily. Excessive overtime can be an indicator when workers are coerced, threatened, indebted, deprived of documents or unable to leave. Hours alone do not settle the case.

    Official figures indicate that Chinese employees work more than 48 hours a week on average, compared with a legal standard of 44. Enforcement is uneven, particularly where factories face tight export deadlines or workers depend on overtime to reach an acceptable income.

    Some Chinese companies have announced mandatory clock-off times, partly in response to public criticism of the “996” culture of working from 9am to 9pm, six days a week. The persistence of online complaints suggests that formal policies and factory practice can diverge.

    Ah, so very much like in the EU, and United States, who also have lax and selective enforcement of legal protections. I'd also be interested in EU law regarding workers' compensation. Can you please post a link?

    Lu Ming, a member of China’s top political advisory body, warned earlier this year that weak labour protection could provoke foreign trade barriers if other countries concluded that export competitiveness was built on excessive work and poor living conditions.

    A politician doing their job, very telling.

    A new risk for European importers The regulation does not create a blanket presumption against Chinese goods. EU and national authorities must use factual, verifiable information and follow a risk-based process. The burden of establishing a violation rests with the lead authority, not with an individual worker posting a video.

    I'm very interested how the EU will investigate* and if* evidence will be made public. The test of the article raises salient points and is worth reading, without selective biases.

    *corrected autocorrect

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    “They’re not playing by the rules,” Klingbeil … said. “Overcapacity, state subsidies, joint venture obligations – all these things.”

    Fucking imperialists pigs. Instead of investing into infrastructure and education they want to CHANGE the rules and demand China interfer in their economy so as not to overtake the western hegemony.

    Things have change, but these us lapdogs and neoliberal idiots still think it's 1991. They'll drag all of Europe into more and more war and economic crisis.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •