Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE US BLAMED Canada for the disastrous ending to the G7 summit, saying Prime Minister Justin Trudeau “stabbed us in the back,” while American allies held Washington responsible.
Just minutes after a joint G7 communique was published Saturday in summit host city Quebec, President Donald Trump launched a Twitter broadside, taking exception to comments made by Trudeau at a news conference and saying he had instructed US representatives not to endorse the joint communique.
Trump’s team kept up the barrage of criticism on US media yesterday.
Trudeau “really kinda stabbed us in the back,” top US economic advisor Larry Kudlow said on CNN’s “State of the Union”.
“He did a great disservice to the whole G7.”
US trade advisor Peter Navarro, speaking on Fox News Sunday, reinforced that message.
“There’s a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad-faith diplomacy with President Donald J Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door,” he said.
Kudlow sought to tie Trump’s reaction to the upcoming summit with Kim Jong Un, saying the North Korean leader “must not see American weakness”.
Trump – who has a history of hair-trigger responses to slights – landed in Singapore yesterday for tomorrow’s summit meeting with Kim.
From there, he was tweeted further criticism of Canada and US allies.
Repeating his criticism of US trade policies with Canada – he also took aim at Germany – in a multi-tweet rant that went beyond 200 words all told. At one point he wrote, “Justin acts hurt when called out!”
“Why should I, as President of the United States, allow countries to continue to make Massive Trade Surpluses, as they have for decades, while our Farmers, Workers & Taxpayers have such a big and unfair price to pay?” he tweeted.
Before his departure from Canada the previous day, he tweeted:
Based on Justin’s false statements at his news conference, and the fact that Canada is charging massive Tariffs to our US farmers, workers and companies, I have instructed our US Reps not to endorse the Communique as we look at Tariffs on automobiles flooding the US Market!
German Chancellor Angela Merkel late yesterday called Trump’s revocation of support for the G7 joint communique “sobering and a little depressing”, while adding, in a rare one-on-one interview with ARD public television, “but that’s not the end” of the Group of Seven.
‘Insulting’
Trump in his tweet said Trudeau had “acted so meek and mild during our @G7 meetings only to give a news conference after I left saying that… he ‘will not be pushed around.’ Very dishonest & weak”.
Trudeau had told reporters that Trump’s decision to invoke national security to justify US tariffs on steel and aluminum imports was “kind of insulting” to Canadian veterans who had stood by their US allies in conflicts dating back to World War I.
“Canadians are polite and reasonable but we will also not be pushed around,” he said.
Trudeau said he had told Trump “it would be with regret but it would be with absolute clarity and firmness that we move forward with retaliatory measures on 1 July, applying equivalent tariffs to the ones that the Americans have unjustly applied to us”.
After Trump’s angry tweets, Trudeau’s office issued a brief response:
We are focused on everything we accomplished here at the G7 summit. The Prime Minister said nothing he hasn’t said before – both in public, and in private conversations with the president.
Canada’s Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland added that “Canada does not conduct its diplomacy through ad hominem attacks, we don’t think that it’s a useful or productive way to do business and perhaps we refrain particularly from ad hominem attacks when it comes to our relationship with our allies”.
Yesterday, Trudeau ignored the barbs from Trump’s advisors, tweeting a link to the G7 communique and hailing the “historic and important agreement we all reached.”
“That’s what matters,” he wrote.
‘Throwaway remarks’
The outburst against Trudeau, and by association the other G7 members, is only the latest incident in which Trump has clashed with America’s closest allies, even as he has had warm words for autocrats like Kim and Russia’s Vladimir Putin.
French President Emmanuel Macron’s office reacted Sunday by saying that “international cooperation cannot be dictated by fits of anger and throwaway remarks”.
Reneging on the commitments agreed in the communique showed “incoherence and inconsistency”, it said in a statement.
When Trump left Quebec, it was thought that a compromise had been reached, despite the tension and the determination of European leaders Macron and Merkel to push back against the US president’s protectionist policies.
Officials from European delegations quickly leaked copies of the joint statement, and it was published online moments before Trump tweeted.
On board Air Force One, an AFP reporter was told that Trump had approved the agreement, only to be told later of the tweets. A senior US administration official said that Trump had been angered by Trudeau’s comments.
Trump is set to meet North Korea’s Kim Jong Un tomorrow in Singapore in a historic summit between the US and North Korea.
With reporting from AP
- © AFP, 2018
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Ironically my rent is more than a mortgage would be…
@⚡ Seánie ⚡: yep. My wife and I tried to buy an apartment we lived in. We were was paying 1800 per month rent. Talked to the bank and the mortgage payments over 35 years worked out at 1145 per month. But because we had child, and were paying back a loan for our wedding and 1 car the bank told us we couldn’t afford to pay the mortgage. Only in Ireland could you told you can’t afford something despite it savings us over 600 per month.
@Roy Dowling: I agree. You can afford to rent and keep your kids alive… Nope you’re a liability to the banks.
@⚡ Seánie ⚡: it’s not going to last much longer.. it never did.. there has to be a down turn.. this time ten years ago the county was full of houses.. cheap houses..
@⚡ Seánie ⚡: it’s about the risk to the bank, and the mortgage lending rules. When renting, the risk in on the landlord. If you have the mortgage, the risk is on you. They pressure test to ensure that you could still afford the mortgage if one of you lost your income etc. If that happened when you are renting, it’s the landlords problem, not the banks
@Elaine Phelan: That only makes sense if they weren’t already living in the apartment paying 600 more to rent it with all the same debt. Mortgage risk currently isn’t factoring in rent paid and how long it’s been paid for. They ask about it but it doesn’t count anything toward ability to pay.
Plus you can’t draw down a Mortgage until you get Mortgage insurance so the actual risk for the banks is very limited.
@Shane Carroll: you missed the point. It’s about risk. Yes you can pay your rent, but if you lose your job it is the landlords problem, and you can move somewhere else or move back with family. Loosening the mortgage rules without increasing supply will just drive higher prices with increasing demand, so you would likely still be priced out, but now the people who did buy will have paid more and have a bigger mortgage for the same houses. Supply is the key issue here.
@Shane Carroll: add in the fact that they would have 7 grand a year spare from not renting and that would more than cover the stress test and all the hidden costs from owning a property.
Tbf to the banks this housing crisis is purely a supply issue mainly due to government policy for the last decade and the banks 3.5 lending regulations is the only thing keeping some sort of a lid on the prices insane and all as they are.
@Elaine Phelan: agreed but anyone can lose their job. If the banks were overly concerned about that they wouldn’t give mortgages to most people on average income or below. We’re in incredibly uncertain times economically and there’s record mortgage approvals. I’ve been approved for a mortgage and I’ve only got a 12 month contract!
@Shane Carroll: with 3.5 times salary only, and reductions based on children etc, most people could survive for a little while if they lost their job. But if they start to give out more than that, and take into account what rent people are paying, it will do nothing but drive prices up
Ireland is a great place for investors!! Wouldn’t be great if the Government did something about it? Someone renting for life is not a solution.. I’m not asking the government to give me a house, I would love to be able to build something without so much paper work and bureaucracy.. don really get what’s the obsession in Ireland with houses that are attached together for premium prices? For 430k people should deserve at least a detached house with a nice piece of land!
The government has faiiled people in their 20/30/40s miserably the last decade.from the banking crash where people couldn’t get a job so had to emigrate to now people can’t buy a house to settle down as not enough building of houses and prices sky rocketing.the government should hang their heads in shame.
@speedy: is there a silver bullet that the government can do to fix it? Giving planning permission too loosely will just mean poorly built housing in over dense developments
@dublindamo: I would suggest a huge public housing increase where the county council are renting nearly at cost with so many houses that they become the default land lord for most people. That drives private rents down and allows people to save for a morgage to buy or build their own homes. Turn rent into a just a transitional phase that is not for profit so people can become rate paying home owners building equity.
@speedy: allow the people who’ve been blacklisted over losing their homes in the crisis to have a mortgage. No deposit because it’s impossible to save when forking out sky high rent. This simple solution would solve the problem at a stroke. Why can’t our government get to grips with this? It’s unfair, inequitable and a crying shame.
The people I know who are renting or living at home, have lovely cars, know all the restaurants and have a well used passport and nice clothes every week!
I am looking to buy a house in Cork. I have been watching both the rental market and the buyers market on Daft for a while now. I’m amazed the amount of times I see a house for rent, then for sale and then for rent again at way more than the 4%. I’m self employed and over 40, have a 60+% deposit and can’t get a mortgage. It kills me every month to pay out 1800 in rent when I know my mortgage would only be about 900 pm.
Small landlords are leaving the market as soon as possible. Just ask any estate agent or look at the photos of empty properties for sale on Daft with no forward chain. Only a tiny proportion of properties are being bought by small landlords. Being a small landlord in Ireland now is nothing only hassle, high taxes, impossibility of evicting non paying vandalising tenants, being on call 24 hours a day, keeping up to date with new laws etc. The big funds will take over the market, pay little or no tax and only takes the top tier tenants.
Headline here is very misleading. Most people would pay less for a mortgage than they are in rent. The red tape and bull that people have to go through when applying or a mortgage is what makes it impossible. Not that they can’t afford it.
@Jess Foley: it’s not about whether you can afford it today. It’s about risk the bank. If you are renting, it’s the landlords problem. If you have a mortgage, it’s the banks problem. The mortgage rules Re actually the only thing keeping house prices where they are. If they open them up without increasing supply, all that will happen is that prices will rise even more, and people will end up with bigger mortgages for the same houses
I am blue in the face saying this. NOTHING will improve until you vote out all the landlords who are TD’s. Do a bit of research and you’ll find that affordable housing is NOT in their best interests. In any other country in the world it would be seen as a conflict of interest. We cannot solve a housing problem until we have politicians who are willing to solve it! So the longer you vote for FG and FF – the longer you will be paying crazy rent!
My rent is more than what I would pay for the same property in mortgage payments. It’s crazy.
We’re we not told be the landlords association that small or non professional landlords were fleeing the market in there 1000s because of bad experience . That’s clearly untrue if you go with the figures provide in the article .
@Airwave81: that is backed up in the article. In fact the subheading says “The RTB survey founds that the profile of landlords is changing, with large landlords looking to expand their portfolios.”
@Airwave81: another paragraph from the article: “The survey found that 26% of small landlords, owners of one or two properties, are planning to sell a rental property within the next five years. However, large landlords (with over 100 tenancies) say they are planning to continue to invest and expand their portfolios.”
36% is not accurate at all, its more like 50% or even more.
Cheapest studios ate like 1100€ in Dublin
I don’t think this survey reflects the true extent of the problem of high rents. It would be much more revealing if they had used a set of income bands for respondents and had them provide the actual monthly figure they paid for rent and used that to crunch the data.
Because asking them to guesstimate a percentage, introduces respondent error and because by apparently lumping them all together, the higher paid respondents data reduces the percentage overall.
Because in reality for the lower paid, the percentage of income going on rent would be much higher across the entire country, but especially in Dublin and other cities.
As a junior public servant I spend 44.7% of my income on rent in rural Ireland. Only one income as I support an unwell partner. The concept of saving enough for a deposit to get a morgage that would half my monthly housing expenses is a pipe dream for me.
@Edmund Murphy: Thankfully my letting agents are very good to me because the rent I pay still eow market rate in my area.
DeFi is where its at now, forget the banks
So many comments about mortgages being lower than rent. It is not about whether you can afford it today. It’s about risk for the bank. If you are renting, it’s the landlords problem. If you have a mortgage, it’s the banks problem. The mortgage rules are actually the only thing keeping house prices where they are. If they open them up without increasing supply, all that will happen is that prices will rise even more, and people will end up with bigger mortgages for the same houses. Supply is the key issue, not giving out larger mortgages
The 3.5 times your gross is keeping people locked out of the mortgage market despite being able to afford rents that are higher than mortgage repayments
@Darren Carroll: but loosening the rules won’t solve anything. All it would to is drive up demand and prices. The issue is there is not enough supply
Time to leave again for young people
have your say