Last quote about G20
All quotes about G20
It is not that we were not united. It was totally undisputed that we are against protectionism. But it is not very clear what (protectionism) means to each (minister).
It is not the best meeting we had, but we avoided backtracking. I hope in Hamburg the wording will be different. We need it. It is the raison d'etre for the G20.
We consider that to be a waste of money.
This is my first G20, so what was in the past communiqué is not necessarily relevant from my standpoint. I understand what the president's desire is and his policies, and I negotiated them from here. I couldn't be happier with the outcome. We believe in free trade, we are in one of the largest markets in the world, we are one of the largest trading partners in the world, trade has been good for us, it has been good for other people. Having said that, we want to re-examine certain agreements.
The risks for the global economy continue to persist of course, some even say they have rather increased. This is why it's all the more important that we are well prepared.
Of course we have different points of view. By the way some colleagues are new (here). But we've had goodwill and we the experience and know how inside the international organisations to move on even in difficult times.
We were all convinced that world trade leads to global growth. It is not that we were not united. It was totally undisputed that we are against protectionism. But it is not very clear what (protectionism) means to each (minister).
This is not a good outcome of the meeting.
I regret that our discussions today were not able to reach a satisfactory conclusion on two priorities that are absolutely essential in today's world.
I told my G20 counterparts that while the global economy was recovering gradually, downside risks existed so it was important to reconfirm a G20 commitment to use all available tools, individually and collectively, to ensure economic stability.
It is not our desire to get into trade wars. It is our desire to deal with where there is imbalance in certain trading relationships, that we have a means to address that. And that's something that is important. If you look at our economic policies again, it makes sense for us to readdress certain things.
At the G20 from the very beginning we have been promoting trade as an element of growth, as an element also that can detonate investment flows, which is very crucial for the growth of tomorrow.
It's about the right wording, it's about the openness of the world trade systems in the final communique.
We agreed that it was important to maintain the G7 and G20 agreements on currency policy. I didn't get any push back (from Mnuchin).
We consider that to be a waste of (Americans') money. I think the president is fairly straightforward. We're not spending money on that.
It's possible that we explicitly exclude the topic of trade in Baden-Baden and say that can only be resolved at the summit of the state and government leaders.
There are differing views on this subject.
This concern is not big.
I don't know the exact wording but nobody has raised the issue of protectionism yet and I don't believe that we have to deal with this a lot. It's about finding the right wording, it's about how we phrase the openness of the world trade system in the final communique.
In an environment where the Fed seems comfortable with a slow pace of rates ... volatility remaining very low, for sure risky assets are going to perform well.
The most important thing is he goes over there and helps dial down the Trump rhetoric. Globally people are quite worried about Trump's trade and immigration policies and [the U.S.] pulling back from the world stage. Clearly Trump's 'America First' policy is going to be a little dented if the dollar is too strong.
The next big thing is the G20 meeting, which could move currencies. I think the U.S. is going to push for a weaker dollar.
The fear baked into global markets is some sort of letdown in Trump's policies not able to get through Congress.
Some of this sector rotation again is built off the idea of the Trump rally continuing to run into these hurdles. You're going to continue to see a lot of churn in the industries that are doing well versus the ones that are underperforming.
Not only the G20 but the IMF and OECD have said protectionism damages global trade and global economic growth, and that it is necessary to maintain free trade and investment. Japan's stance on this will not change. The momentum for inflation to accelerate to 2 percent remains in place but lacks strength. The BOJ will continue to promote powerful monetary easing ... to achieve its price target at the earliest date possible.
Among the most important issues from Germany's point of view, regarding the world's economy, is the issue of resilience. That's our top priority.
Don't worry about good old China. Its growth rate is still among the fastest in the G20, and China contributes more to global GDP growth than any other country by a quantum.
If the Prime Minister of the country that you live in breaks off from the G20 summit in Mexico - he's in a meeting with the 19 most important people in the world and he comes out and makes a press statement about your tax affairs - that is going to need dealing with right now.
It's despicable and arrogant. China is a G20 nation that should be leading the development of world order.
We don't have sufficient informal channels right now, partly because there are no people in the Trump's team liaising specifically with Beijing to conduct high trust conversations. But that can be done once you find the right people. The phone call is not good enough. With Trump, you need to sit down and get to know him and engage in a deeper level of communication. When you have an atmosphere of friendship, everything looks much easier to solve. In an atmosphere of acrimony, every small thing could evolve into a big fight.
We are many months away from the Hamburg summit. Will Trump leave his rather strong and worrying campaign promises over China alone in the meantime? No one knows.
The key is to not get bogged down in rhetoric, but to start working together on getting things done.
I would argue that the first five minutes of the meeting is the most critical part because we are dealing with two alpha males here. They need to understand each other, but more important, like each other.
If we can somehow get the people from the two governments ... into a world in which they are working together to start to get things built, a lot of the agonies will go away, or at least be damped down.
This is the most urgent thing for both countries to work at in the near future. All of a sudden, if something happens, who do we contact? That's the biggest risk in the next few months. So my suggestion is for two top leaders to find some ways to meet as soon as possible because both Trump and Xi are quite unique and strong leaders.
Personal chemistry that will emerge, or not, from this will define the relationship and I cannot over emphasise this point. If they like each other, they can do business together and call each other when things are not right. But if the chemistry is not that good, then the relationship will develop in a totally different trajectory.
[It] largely depends on Trump because we have made it very clear that our leader will attend both G20 and Apec. As long as Trump shows up, we will try our best to arrange bilateral talks for the leaders.
This has been good background on Syria, on how we can resume the talks. That was the aim of today, the road ahead is still long, we all know that, especially those new to the talks, our new American colleague was engaged in the debate, so it bodes well for Geneva.
We have to see what the U.S. administration does and then we have to decide whether to react or not to react. I have often said that I support multilateralism and mutual trade agreements. I believe the world mastered the financial and banking crisis because we reacted together in the G20. It's in the German interest to ideally strengthen the similarities that both sides share from our side, from the cooperation of intelligence agencies to issues of defence.
Japan is guiding policy in line with agreements made by the G7 and G20 countries. There will be no change to that stance.
"Japan is guiding policy in line with agreements made by the G7 and G20 countries. There will be no change to that stance,"
(But) it's hardly possible to talk about any kind of deals (over sanctions). To start with we must fix the date and time of a meeting between the two presidents. Aides are working on this now. We have seen a readiness to solve difficult problems through dialogue, which President Putin has long been calling for and unfortunately in previous years did not find a response (to).
As heads of state and government [of the G20], we said: 'We must resolve the problem facing us together'. And the response to overcome that financial crisis was not a response based on closing oneself off, but a response which called for cooperation, for common rules, for regulation of financial markets.
A decline in correspondent banking relationships can adversely affect growth, financial inclusion, remittances flows as well as the stability and integrity of the global financial system.
With the right information, you can have optimists and pessimists (on climate change) ... back decisions with capital. This is about giving people the right information.
The disclosure recommendations will give financial markets the information they need to manage risks, and seize opportunities, stemming from climate change.
It remains the case that only one third of the top 1,000 U.S. companies produce broadly comparable information on the climate risks they face.
Only then will climate risk become integral to corporate governance and how we all do business.
The EU and U.S. have been the key driving force in putting forward the G20 agenda. We know why exactly we did it - because of the 2009 crisis.
We must solve this problem together, so that we don't have a situation where one country wreaks damage on other countries.
Now we want to go further and look at how we can make our support even more effective because my aim is not simply for the UK to have the lowest corporate tax rate in the G20 but also a tax system that is profoundly pro-innovation.
This is almost of the G20 nations playing quite an active and productive role. It's not just the U.S. ... it's a lot more international than most people think.
I don't think there was a strong feeling shared among (G20 nations) that monetary policy was reaching its limits or that an over-reliance on monetary policy was causing big problems.
The prime minister's enthusiasm, passion and very articulate indication at the G20, for instance, of what the policy mix is going to be is a good step in that direction.
We see that Germany is a champion on climate, and that they may be able to take a stronger role than other G20 countries in ensuring that this happens.
Time is running out. Every dollar wasted on fossil fuel subsidies pushes us closer to climate disaster and makes the transition to clean energy more difficult.
As more governments take the important step of ratifying the Paris Agreement on climate change, they must stop giving handouts to big polluters, which undermine the spirit and the letter of the Paris deal.
We agree with the G20's analysis that the benefits of trade and open markets must be communicated to the wider public more effectively. It's vital that business and governments work together to explain how and why trade matters for all.
President Xi accurately raised the alarm on the need to counter the increase in protectionism around the world.
What the British people voted for on June 23 was to bring some control into the movement of people from the European Union to the UK. A points-based system does not give you that control.
A points-based system does not give you that control.
We should turn the G-20 group into an action team, instead of a talk shop.
Overcapacity is a global problem, but there is a particular Chinese element.
We think it's important that the press have access to the work that we're doing - that they have the ability to answer questions. And we don't leave our values and ideals behind when we take these trips. But none of this detracts from the broader scope of the relationship.
The bilateral discussions that we had yesterday were extremely productive and continue to point to big areas of cooperation.
Just as I believe the Paris agreement will ultimately prove to be a turning point for our planet, I believe that history will judge today's effort as pivotal. Today we are moving the world significantly closer to the goal that we have set.
It "speaks to the shared ambition and resolve of China and the United States in addressing global issues.
The message for the G20 is that Britain is open for business as a bold, confident, outward-looking country and we will be playing a key role on the world stage. My ambition is that Britain will be a global leader in free trade.
We're also setting the stage so that the next U.S. administration comes in with a relationship that is on a strong and productive footing.
China will continue to firmly safeguard its sovereignty and maritime rights in the South China Sea. At the same time, it will persist in peacefully resolving disputes through consultations with parties directly involved.
If we're to move from today's high-carbon, low-efficiency world economy to tomorrow's high-efficiency, low-carbon world economy, quite a lot needs to shift.
In the real world, there is still a long way to go, particularly for the G20, and they need to reflect that in a more serious way.
But I would anticipate that this is an issue that the President will engage in, in the context of discussions at the G20.
It is easy to blame trade for all the ills afflicting a country, but curbing free trade would be stalling an engine that has brought unprecedented welfare gains around the world over many decades.
While many factories have been shut down before the G20 summit, overall manufacturing activities are still elevated, reflecting improving growth momentum.
Climate change, in particular, represents the mother of all risks – to business and to society as a whole. And that risk is magnified by the way in which fossil fuel subsidies distort the energy market. These subsidies are simply unsustainable.
There are very real concerns about globalization and technology, but the answer cannot be to close ourselves off.
Japan is getting entangled in the South and East China Sea issues, cozying up to the Philippines, and urging China to respect the result of the so-called 'arbitration' case.
Nobody earlier expected steel mills to have heydays and make a big profit this year.
Governments must ratify the Paris agreement swiftly and have a responsibility to implement policies that drive better disclosure of climate risk, curb fossil fuel subsidies and put in place strong pricing signals sufficient to catalyse the significant private sector investment in low carbon solutions.
Markets are receiving mixed signals over the uncertainty clouding GST as of now but if it's passed then FII (foreign institutional investor) inflow will increase, which could benefit the market.
If you ask me whether a weakening yuan is a good thing for China, I cannot say so. Whether up or down, a rapid yuan movement is undesirable.
It's right at the top of the agenda here at the G20. It's a new factor affecting the global economic outlook and it has increased the uncertainty which the world economy faces.
It seems to me China's central bank has put a brake on CNY depreciation, at least temporarily.
With a busy calendar today, that might see some more small downside for equities.
There might be sort of a reminder to the Japanese officials: 'Hey, remember not to massage your currency too overtly.
The Chinese renminbi is moving a little bit over time but I don't think it's really something that...bugs G20 policymakers at the moment.
Carbon pricing is the cleanest way to regulate to stabilize emissions.
Japan should deploy a flexible fiscal policy in the near term that provides a supportive fiscal impulse, while accelerating the implementation of structural reforms, including labour market reforms and opening the service sector to increased competition.
Tax evasion and tax avoidance hurt government budgets, reduce the equity of our tax systems and hinder global growth.
In addition, we are about to propose a regulation that would require the beneficial owners of single-member limited liability companies to identify themselves to the Internal Revenue Service, thus closing a loophole that some have been able to exploit.
Well, they better change things, because they only go to show that the initial work that was started back in 2010/2011, under the French presidency of the G20 for that matter, is not mission accomplished – far from it – and a lot more work needs to be done and it needs to be constantly upgraded and continued because there is no limit to imagination by some.
The initial work that started back in, I think it was 2010-2011, under French presidency of G20 for that matter, is not mission accomplished. Far from it. And a lot more work needs to be done. It needs to be constantly upgraded, continued, because there is no limit for imagination of some.
It would be a bit strange for the BOJ to start intervening. You're just a month after the G20 where (Japan) pledged not to use competitive devaluation to their advantage and to let market forces determine the currency.
In regard to capacity cuts, China's measure is the strongest and most practical, and we will fulfill our promises.
Hanging back means lost opportunities.
To seek harmony and coexistence has been in the genes of the Chinese nation throughout history and it represents the very essence of eastern civilisation. The logic that a strong country is bound to seek hegemony no longer applies and the willful use of force will lead nowhere.
Expectations for any substantive commitments out of G20 were sufficiently low such that we shouldn't expect any significant market response early this week.
Because there is uncertainty, as to what the terms would be under which the UK would be out of the European Union, it's difficult to assess exactly the consequences of it. But most likely it will be less fluid, and not more fluid. We are bound to conclude without having yet done the study, and we will try to do as fair and thorough a study as we can, that it will be a negative if it was to succeed.
It would not be reasonable to expect a crisis response in an environment that is not a crisis.
We are always in support of the European integration process, (and are) willing to see the EU play a bigger role internationally. (We) also hope Britain and the EU can appropriately handle the relevant issue.
Talking about further stimulus just distracts from the real tasks at hand.
Policymakers do not need to invent yet another trick, but they need to deliver steadily on the commitments they have made. There has to be action on all fronts.
We're stuck in a range, waiting for direction and some are looking to the G20 meeting this weekend for some sort of sign.
We're getting closer to the G20 meeting but the market doesn't look to be expecting much out of it.
China's current account balance situation is good, and there is no basis for continued renminbi depreciation.
We're concerned that if you have sustained financial turmoil, increasing risk aversion, further falls in risk assets, further turbulence, particularly in China, that could be enough to tip the global economy over the edge into recession territory.
The G20 I think, is going to have to focus on spillovers, on spillbacks and on the combination of various policies in play at the moment.
We think growth could be 6.7-6.8 percent this year. The risk of a hard landing is not big. The risk of a hard landing may come from improper government policies. If policies are right, the risk of a hard landing is very small.
China's status as the world's largest holder of foreign exchange reserves has not changed, the large-scale trade surplus has not changed and the steady progress in the yuan internationalisation has not changed.
After the Lunar New Year, the cabinet and government ministries have all sent out positive signals. For the economy, there is still lots of room for the government to step up investment. 2016 is the first year of the 13th five-year plan (2016-2020) and the government will ensure growth of at least 6.5 percent this year.
We expect the economy to continue to slow and corporate balance sheets to worsen. However, we see the risk of an immediate systematic financial crisis as very small, due to high domestic saving and ample banking liquidity, extensive government ownership of banks and many debtors, and capital controls.
Clearly, the market sees that the intensive intervention from PBoC (People's Bank of China) is not sustainable, and therefore the central bank will have to let the currency go at some point.
The target is to enhance international economic cooperation, sending a strong political signal featuring unity, cooperation, openness and inclusiveness.
ISIL is the face of evil. There have been a few who suggested that we should put large numbers of US troops on the ground. And it is not just my view, but the view of my closest military and civilian advisers that that would be a mistake.
Channels of finance for terrorist activity must be cut off. I've given examples based on information we have on IS financing by individuals from various countries. This financing, as we found out, comes from 40 countries, including some in the G20.
The discussion we had today I think was very helpful in helping to continue to coordinate the work we were doing together to help to fortify the borders between Syria and Turkey that allow Daesh to operate, and we will redouble our efforts working with other members of the coalition to bring about a peaceful transition in Syria.
Only if we full cooperate on exchange of information about suspicious transactions will be able to stop this threat effectively.
Above all, we owe that to the victims and their loved ones. But it is also necessary for our own security and something that we owe to the many innocent refugees who are fleeing war and terrorism.
As a Turkish association, there are three main areas of importance for us at the G20. They are sustainability, inclusiveness and inclusion. By inclusiveness we mean dealing with the problems and issues of the entire world and not just focusing on those of G20 countries.
There have been terrorist attacks in Turkey recently. World leaders will be protected because there are very strict security measures. This limits contact with the leaders. As a civil society institution we will be bringing the leaders messages. We'll be telling them not to stay away from the people. We can be communicated with in the same way one communicates with an NGO. We know what the people on the streets think and feel because we work with them. So use us to communicate with society.
Many promises have been made in the past but so far less than 400 million dollars (370 million euros) has been provided, as far as I know. I don't think there will be much aid. More importantly, financial support should be sustainable. Let's say they gave 3 billion euros today, and not tomorrow. What would happen? A lot of the refugees would stay in Turkey for years to come. A wider plan should be developed in education, in healthcare and for their integration into the Turkish social structure.
All the participants there one way or another are interested in Syria. For EU members, the US and Russia, the common problem is the situation in Syria. The summit will be held in a location close to Syria as well. I think that, most probably, there will be a side summit on Syria.
The focus now shifts to Turkey, which this weekend hosts the G20 Summit, a forum normally dedicated to economic policy. There, the EU hopes to convince the world's biggest economies that Europe's migration crisis is theirs as well.
The prime minister strongly believes G7 should lead the global economy with sustainable growth. The economy will be the most important item on the agenda, so we need to consider what policies are necessary.
What the G20 is talking about is arbitrary intervention, which is different from responding to a one-sided move. The prime minister's comments were based on the G20 understanding that long-term manipulation of currencies is undesirable.
Countries must now put in place the legislative and regulatory frameworks for these tools to be used.
Evidence is mixed, and the baseline for comparison should not be the unsustainable excess liquidity that existed prior to the crisis.
As a consequence, the financing capacity to the real economy is being rebuilt and significant retrenchment from international activity has been avoided.
There is no Basel IV. What we are doing is ironing out issues that have been identified over time in the application of Basel III.
It is clear the benefits far exceed the costs of introducing this standard.
Many banks have told us they will let existing liabilities run off and replace them in the course of normal refinancing.
Central banks, although remaining vigilant on financial stability, are progressively losing effectiveness, and may fail to effectively curb market volatility in the medium term as they did after the Great Financial Crisis.
The pace of reform has slowed down in a majority of the advanced economies in the past two years is not very encouraging.There is this danger that we can move into long-term low growth or pretty flat growth. The imperious need, the urgent need, is to focus on the implementation of the G20 national growth strategies.
We cannot rebuild a country without a fair tax system. We must fight against tax fraud and tax optimisation. We are waging a battle both in Europe and at an international level within the G20. But it is obviously something absolutely necessary for Greece, as well.