A British veto, but Europe edges towards saving the euro
Dateline Brussels: Strip out the British veto on a new full EU Treaty, and you are left with what appears to have been a pretty successful night of negotiations here. That is, if success is measured in terms of a middle to long- term commitment to secure and enhance the euro and the eurozone itself.
From the vantage point of my 11th floor hotel room window I was able to gaze down on what I estimate to be the seventh floor in the commission building in which the eurocrats toiled away during the night hours – they were clustered in shirt and blouse sleeves at round tables, six or seven to a table. At times somnolent, at other moments animated, as the discussions behind closed doors ebbed and flowed.
At 5am David Cameron did not disguise the progress toward saving the euro. His emphasis on his own veto did not obscure the reality that 17 euro members plus some half a dozen aspirant members have agreed a much tighter fiscal regime, trading significant areas of sovereignty to achieve it. They also agreed an immediate infusion of some €200bn for short-term bailouts.
That UK veto is designed to protect the huge financial service industry centred in the City of London – a sector that accounts for a significant proportion of UK GDP. The very sector that precipitated the 2008 crisis has not however derailed attempts to save the euro. Britain’s withdrawal from the process may indeed render it easier, because without having to battle for a new EU wide treaty (process that could have taken years) a much speedier solution can be triggered.
The sense here is that Britain has finally left the top table, that a two-speed Europe is under way – the UK, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Sweden in Division Two, the rest in Division One – or trying to get into it.
From the British perspective, Europe is likely now to become a far bigger issue. No one knows how damaging isolation may prove. Nor how advantageous.
Politically, euro-sceptics may sense the whiff of victory in their nostrils. My own idiosyncratic sense is that there could be a backlash particularly from new businesses, big businesses and the younger generation who, in a globalise world, may wish to explore the option of belonging to a wider, deeper, more fiscally responsible union, who knows.
But looking at David Cameron this morning, sitting 10ft from him, I wondered how comfortable he felt in his newly defined position.
Related posts:
- Five days to save the euro
- Does Barroso think the UK has a euro future?
- An extraordinary shambles in Brussels
- Au revoir Trident? Bonjour le bomb Francais!
- David Cameron’s radical Euro nuke plan?
There are 74 comments on this post
Can you really see the Greeks, Italians, Spanish peoples rather than the politicians accepting dictat from Berlin and Paris?
Will Rumpy Pumpy have a charisma transplant? Will democracy break out amongst this unelected band of grey men?
Will the speculators leave the Euro alone?
Sorry, Jon, but I think not.
The sooner we ‘lance this boil on the backside of progress’ the better.
Send the MEPs back from whence they came and give the buildings to the homeless. It would probably save Europeans billions!
Let’s see how many EEC countries offer a referendum to their people and then change the question when they do not like the answer; as happened in Ireland.
I say again. That bunch of freeloaders in Brussels have been unable to solve the CAP problem in decades.
Up yours says Delors!
How on earth do they think bankrupt nations will be able to pay penalties imposed because …. well, they couldn’t pay their debts?
Will Brussels invade?
Treaties and rules will be ignored, as has already happened, by the Germans and the French to say nothing of the others when times get hard.
I dare say Cameron is uncomfortable,or he deserves to be so.Whatever he says he has achieved he has once reneged on a promised referendum.If the 17 or more agree a new treaty,it will inevitably affect the UK.Those are the terms he stated were required for a fresh referendum.
If we are not given one,he deserves to be replaced or to lose the next election
Fog in the channel – Europe cut off!
As Sarkozy might say: plus ca change…
As with the economy, the tories are letting their blinkered ideology lead them down a wrong path.
As someone commented yesterday (I think on R4) one of the reasons the City of London has become so important is that it gives the rest of the world access to Europe. Will the city become stronger if we are sidelined? If we don’t agree to the Robin Hood Tax, will Europe simply do business elsewhere? Level playing fields have to be leveled both sides of the halfway line.
Meanwhile, as tory MPs demonstrate they are still fighting WWII, 50% of our export trade is under threat.
Never mind, Dave. You’ll get a hero’s welcome in the Commons on Monday and when it all goes pear shaped you can always blame the lib dems.
Whatever happened to the pro European Nick Clegg, by the way? Is he on holiday?
Sam.i bet you also believe we should be in the Euro!!!!Do you honestly believe that if we left the EU our trade would cease? Not only that but we run a trade deficit with Europe, plus it costs us a fortune to be part of an organisation where unelected and faceless wonders, tell us what we can and can not do.Having destroyed our fisheries,virtually destroyed our farming, now they want control of the only money making sector we have ,the financial sector.
I know teachers are left wing, but i wonder what they actually taught you.Or is it the Guardian ???
Excellent comment, Sam. Thanks.
The important question re the City is whether defending it is in the national interest. And a reminder if any were needed: the banks’ awarded themselves bonuses of £14bn – yes, billion – in during financial year 2010-11.
Cameron’s is surely a political move to appease Tory Eurosceptics – Osborne doesn’t seem entirely happy. As Faisal points out in today’s (10 Dec) blog, it might also be a gamble on the failure of the Euro. That it’s supported by the anti-EU Left as well as Cameron’s right-wingers is interesting. Little Englander mindset?
The real issue for Britain and the world lies elsewhere: the need for a new economic model to replace the ludicrous GDP-growth ideology which unites all the mainstream political parties. Time to ask ourselves what kind of society we want.
Meg , i wonder what left wing or anarchist model you favour for Britain.One thing we can be pleased and sure about, it will never come to these isles.
Like most bloggers i totally oppose any form of bonus over and above the salary for doing ones job.It would be fair to note of the 14 billion paid in bonuses ,7 billion will be returned to the exchequer in tax.One of the reasons that no party has touched the bonuses, regulated against them or prosecuted any banker is that the City produces over 12%of our GDP.Successive governments have become too reliant on them.It would be fair to say it is one law for the rich or those producing riches and another for the rest.That is the real situation that needs sorting to produce a fairer nation.
By your comments ,you would have us support failure, harmful regulation and an unelected bureaucracy.rather than trusting our own ability to get out of the mess created by bankers and left wing governments.
The United Kingdom contains around ninety thousand square miles. David Cameron threw his toys out of his pram to save just one of them. Perhaps he’ll turn his attention to the problems within the other 89,999 at some point?
If Spain and Portugal are in division 1 I think life in the lower league is preferable.
It’s not very difficult to imagine the tier 1 EU countries having a hard 10 years during which the eurosceptics will preen. But after that? If/when tier 1 gets through it? They’ll be global players whilst the Uk will no longer have a say in global events.
It isn’t difficult to imagine yet another British prime minister crying in a French palace after his begging was rejected.
It would be good to read more analysis of the oft-quoted assertion that the City of London is good for Britain. Which bit of Britain? Which Britons? Is this the same City that has cost tax payers many billions in subsidy and bail-out? Jon hints at this but takes it no further. Financial capitalism is in turmoil, let’s not pretend it has much in the way of national interest; it does command British politics (and media) and to a large extent has also corrupted academic research to control the parameters of any debate.
David Cameron’s desire to protect the City Financial Community underlines the power the City now weilds in the UK. Yes they have contributed to GDP and the treasury coffers but at what overall cost. Their continual threat to abandon London if any measures are taken to curb their excesses has left successive governments powerless. Having released the beast by relaxing controls in the 70′s and 80′s they are now unable to control it at all.
We’ve just shot ourselves in the foot. There can be no halfway house for Britain on this – we are either completely in or completely out.
So now we are half in half out to protect, so the story goes, our soverignty. However we are still subject to the rules and regulations and any big decisions made but this time we will be out of the talks and have no say at all on decisions that we will have to abide by.
Are we in or out – it’s time to take this to the people as it always should have been – its tine for the people of the country to decide whats best for the country.
Sweden makes excellent company, as does Norway (who are EEA but not EU). Not being in the Euro was always going lead to differences with those in the Euro.
A stronger European Union is not about ‘losing sovereignty’ to faceless bureaucrats but asserting the interests of citizens over and above market forces. Capitalism needs regulation to allow for those at disadvantage to compete. This can only be done at the European and international level, because money does not stop at the border. http://paswonky.blogspot.com/2011/12/euro-sovereignty-and-capitalism.html
You’re right… there’s now a two-speed Europe, with the UK and Sweden in Division AAA and the rest in Division Junk.
I find it hard to see what else Cameron could do. Seventeen countries have chosen to share a currency and must now must move forward with deeper integration or watch that currency union tear itself apart. Britain, and others have decided that this is not their historic destiny.
The Division 1, Division 2 characterisation implies that somehow Division 1 is the place to be, where countries should aspire to be – that countries should join the Euro just for the sake of maintaining ‘influence’. This seems a dubious premise.
Also, is it really the case that the financial services sector precipitated the Euro-crisis ? For all bad behaviour in the industry, the markets are only the messenger. Isn’t the fundamental problem that Northern and Southern Europe are just on two separate economic tectonic plates and markets just reflect the underlying stresses building up. Whether a Euro 17 treaty and deeper integration can staple those two plates together or if we’re heading for an economic earthquake remains to be seen….
Either way, its up to the Euro-17 to do what they think they need to do – and Britain should stand aside.
Jon,
If there’s one hollow “threat” that makes me laugh uproariously it’s the prospect of the financial City of London closing down and making their gang of tenth rate spivs redundant. With their track record who would want to employ them at anything other than cleaning sewers? What will they do with all that ugly multi-storey Canary Wharf architecture, give it to housing associations?
You can guarantee, though, you will hear squeals of self pity from its mates in the Daily Mail and the Murdoch rags – after they’ve waved their ridiculous xenophobic flags. Then inevitably there will be further attacks on the quarter of our population who live in poverty, but that was coming anyway……as current attacks on the Welfare State demonstrate.
No, this is one citizen who will celebrate unhesitatingly when Corrupt London gets its comeuppance. Just imagine that useless bunch of leeches and scroungers having to get on their bikes and find work elsewhere in the country, only to find they are unemployable. Could be lots of fun.
Meanwhile, Britain gets even nearer to existence as an abject client state of the USA. How tragic.
I think you will find that the more educated younger generation are more internationalist than the closed club that the EU is becoming. Our traditional ties with America, the ‘white’ commonwealth of Canada, Australia and NZ, are as strong as ever and might strengthen more and now with China, Brazil, Chile, South Africa, India growing in importance we can see world trade will be better for us all. Problem is that too many young people are so badly educated to be able to take advantage as our language skills hold us back.
As a small business owner employing 10 I am fine with the British veto -
I’m looking forward to seeing the opinion polls after this decision. I suspect it will be popular, and I also think it is right, and I think the City isn’t even relevant.
A two speed Europe is not a problem for Britain. Not being part of superstructures does not in any way hinder trade, does not make the market less free and does not affect national security.
As a PS, I’d be very interested to see what the SNP has to say.
Just pondering the implications for UK Labour party. Their whole economic position ie. fiscal stimulus through additional borrowing on top of an existing structural deficit, is actually being made illegal by the Euro 17.
US Republicans would give their eye teeth for this!
I live on mainland Europe and am embarrassed to be British today. Cameron has put “British interests” (which include protection of the UK banking sector that was largely responsible for this crisis) ahead of mutual European interest. Britain is squarely on the outside of Europe now, with less influence and ultimately less to gain than being in. British interests have been undermined today.
Utter rubbish. You have made your bed now you lie(sic) in it.
This plan about a plan is doomed. Who is going to enforce the rules?
You are also wrong in that Britain is not yet outside Europe. But let the people speak and we will be.
BMW, Mercedes, Citroen, Renault and so on will punish UK by what? Not exporting to us. You’re having a laugh!
Please explain the added value of membership and how UK has benefited by paying for the freeloaders of Brussels?
great.Lets get OUT
I live in the UK and I’m embarrassed to be German for a very long time, since Germany pays off half of Europe for an equal life that these countries never think about to live.
Has the German government ever ask the Germans to agree to that entire idea? No!
On the other side has any country in Europe ask why Germany’s economy went well in the recent years? No, because the answer would be that Germany pays a salary below the East-Europeans average and this makes export cheap.
PS: when my Spanish friend ask me if we also would have a bank holiday on Tuesday and because there is a bank holiday on Tuesday, they get the Monday off, too, I answer, sorry the North has to work that they South can celebrate their 15 and more bank holidays a year.
well done mr cameron, all you have to do now is get us out of the euro all together as it does not benfit any of us, there are many more countries in the world we can trade with we don,t need the germans trying to tell us what we can do all this with them boil down to one thing they could nt beat us in world war 2 now they are trying to beat us into bankrutry. i say get out all together.
Britain’s relationship with the EU is a “mess” and the government is being led by Eurosceptic Tory MPs.
We are still in the EU, and we are protected by treaties, but we are in a mess. The trouble is that the world is in a mess, and for this crisis to be happening is very serious.
The government has allowed us to get into this mess. Have we been coherently governed over the last few months? Is this coalition able to represent British interests? Or are we being driven by about 80 to 90 Conservatives who want us to get out of the EU?”
If the 80 or 90 eurosceptic tories had any real influence over the govt we would have had our in/out referendum. It is the City in the driving seat here.
All those crowing on these blogs about what a great thing Cameron has done should remember that all he has done is isolate the UK within europe merely to protect a very very small section of UK society. He has not removed us from the EU and will do his utmost to prevent us having our say on it. Do not forget the govt whip over the Referendum debate that never was – despite the well over 100k signatures calling for it. Wasn’t such a ‘hero’ then was he.
Cameron was not being strong standing up to Merkozy – he was being weak kow-towing to the bankers, who are exactly the ones who we should be standing up to and imposing some regulations on. Since we own so much of some of those banks (well except the one the fools have just got shot of at a loss to us taxpayers) we still have an opportunity call their bluff. But it is completely clear now that they pull the strings and Dave n George just do a little dance.
Sue some excellent points,spoiled by your economic argument. If the Tory Eurosceptics had any influence we would indeed have our referendum.They actually could have a lot of influence if they formed a new Tory Party.They would be far stronger than the Liberals.
Are we isolated,or are we maintaining control of the City, which like it or not produces over 12% of our GDP.Would you hand that to the Euro states (Germany in particular) to waste on bailing out Greece and Italy whilst impoverishing ourselves?
The bankers are a different argument.They certainly need controlling and regulating.I have voiced my opinion frequently on them.I believe several should be locked up .I also do not believe they have learnt their lesson.We will see when eventually the Euro falls and how strong or weak they are.
It is no use criticisng the Tories over the banks.Labour did nothing either,but the Left conveniently forget that
Adrian some excellent reinforcement of my points, spoiled by your economic argument. If you watched the (excellent) Panorama last night you’ll have seen that financial services lags slightly behind manufacturing in terms of GDP. I can’t recall exactly but something like 8 or 9% to manufacturing’s 11%. But do we see bailouts of manufacturing co’s that are run into the ground by bad management or downright fraud? No of course not. Do we see rules that handicap our producers vetoed in Europe by Cameron? No of course not. Even when there is an indirect opportunity to support British manufacturing the govt turns its back as in the case of Bombadier.
This Tory led govt brazenly protects the city spivs that fund their party and move in the same circles. Manufacturing is made up largely of the lower middle and working classes who lean more toward the Labour vote. So despite the fact that it could (with just a little support) help to lead us away from the abyss, Cameron only pays lip service to helping manufacturing.
Actually we must reduce our reliance on the banking sector if we want a healthy economy and don’t want to go under completely trying to prop it up when the euro collapses.
There’s always one rotten apple in the barrel threatening to infect the rest.
‘Protecting Britain’s Interest’. Now there’s a quote of the century. Protecting who’s interest? Please elaborate and define what that actually is. You say the financial sector that accounts for 10% of the GDP (Gross Domestic Product)but fail to give specifics. Ah! the penny drops. Protecting them blotted fat-cat Millionaires in the ‘City’ you mean? Well, as a British person I should have realised. And there was we ‘British’ citizens thinking ‘we’re all in this together’ and it’s in all our interests that the unelected PM should ‘fight’ those ‘Euro Dictators’.
So, when us Brits travel to EU countries, we should walk tall knowing that Germans, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and all the other ‘family of Europe’ will welcome our presence? We, the British citizens will be subject to the consequences of our uneleted PM and his anti EU media. Scum who serve themselves in ‘looking after interests of the multi Millionaire cronies in the City along with corporate vermin.
UK Gov: You don’t speak for us all. We are proud Europeans, not British puppets.
EU can probably see why the UK citizens suffer misery now.
Its a pity sue i could support much of what you say except about Bombadier.It was precisely because we a member of the EU that the work went abroad.All to do with dictats signed by a Labour government.Just as the ludicrous human rights act run from abroad.
As for manufacturing being run by the lower middle and working class, i believe many would take issue with your class divide, but the left always was a class conscious sector,intent on accentuating the divide.Its why they can not get their heads round “in it together”.To the left it is always us/them.
Labour only got into power by dropping that ideology and i hate to say it , the charisma(albeit false) of Blair.
I certainly agree that we aught to reduce our dependence on the banking sector,but difficult whilst trade is depressed
Perhaps,in light of todays news, you should fact check what the govt has had you believe on Bombadier. All other EU countries apparently take into account the wider social and economic effects when awarding this type of contract – the UK doesn’t. Great this standing alone lark isn’t it?
The Tories are quite happy to change other contracts at the drop of the hat to suit their deficit reduction ‘plan’ but not happy to even use the rules correctly to help British manufacturing.
You take issue with class Adrian merely to attempt another swipe at any view which you fear may not match your own anti-socialist one. Class undeniably still exists whether you like it or not. The boundaries may have blurred a bit and one’s ‘class’ may be defined more by money than birth unlike 100 years ago but as a term which describes categories of people it is perfectly valid regardless of the users political views. Most people understand what is meant. Btw, I actually said ‘largely made up of’ not ‘run by’ so somewhat different meaning but don’t let the facts get in your way Adrian.
Absolutely correct, Sue. The EU rules allow for wider social and economic considerations to be taken into account. A country doesn´t need to bend the rules. It only has to apply the existing ones. If it chooses to, that is.
The govt and only the govt is responsible for the over 1,400 redundancies at Bombardier.
Jon
It is time to have a referendum on EU membership.
Fear of the consequences pervades the whole uk political establishment from Labour to pro european Liberals and Conservatives. In 1975 the establishment ganged up to convince the electorate that the EEC (as it was then) was the panacea for Britain. The honourable exceptions were MP’s like Enoch Powell, Barbara Castle, Michael Foot, Tony Benn who saw it differently. We should assert ourselves as a proud independent nation, part of the world, part of world trade, with an independent currency. But watch the establishment fight back. Cameron is playing a game. He will in due course change his position. This is a sop to current realpolitik. But they will all gang up again to deprive the British people of a genuine choice, unless we demand a referendum on continued membership of this anti-democratic gravy train.
I take it all back. Cameron is a genius. He’s just solved our unemployment at a stroke because it will take hundreds of thousands of people to listen at all those keyholes to make sure the 17 are not holding meetings we don’t approve of in EU buildings.
Give that man a camembert sandwich.
The European argument is laughable, the British PM should sign up to this treaty because although its bad for Britain its good for the rest of Europe. Please. Our PM’s job is to protect the interests of Britain, not mainland Europe. That is what he was elected to do. If that means being the odd man out then so be it. If it means losing ‘influence’ over the Europe I’m fine with it, the only people we should be looking to ‘influence’ are ourselves, and others only through example.
But let’s look in the mirror, why would Britain want closer ties with a group of nations so eager to see damage done to the British economy to advance their own?
Why would we indeed. But sadly we are stuck with a govt with close ties to a small clique of people and organisations that have done massive damage to the British economy and continue to operate in a way that will inevitably lead to more damage. The laughable bit is that the British PM wouldn’t agree the plan not because he is concerned about the interests of Britain as a whole but because he wants to protect that small clique. What he has done will actually work against British interests – when the next bank crisis comes perhaps people will see the PM in a different light. Especially if europe have got their act together by then and are more insulated from the damage it will inflict.
Do you think that measures the EU are drawing up should have been thought about in the first place? I personally am in favour of a single Euro. With globalisation all countries are quite tightly coupled as it is. I am not sure that British interests have best been served. The City is a fickle place with little loyalty to anyone (remember black monday). I’m not sure what the impact on manufacturing or other industry would be.
Just watched the report. Staggered to see Bach’s Air on the G String, with all the connotations it has, played by Ch4 as a sympathetic background – carrying as it does failure connotations from the 80s Hamlet Cigar ads.
Dirty psychological trick, not impressed. Bad enough that the EU did it, extending it was disgusting – a low blow that really took you down in my estimation.
And not one mention in the entire programme of the cost of the changes – 57bn, of which 40 would have been borne by Britain.
If that’s isolation, most Britons will prefer it, that’s why Clegg backed it.
Sarkozy cannot regulate us out – all that will happen is the money goes to New York. who will welcome it with open arms.
I have to say, John, C4 news tonight was the most biased news programme I have ever seen. David Cameron has played a blinder and all we got from you and your editors was pro EU and lies.
It will be very interesting to see how this plays out with european voters – they will not apreciate an EUSSR type arrangement when they realise that the TV propaganda was all about giving Germany & France dictating their national budgets. The great majority of British voters support Cameron anyway.
Keep Cam and carry on!
What a disaster! Does Cameron understand what he’s just done? Now the UK has lost any ability to influence European financial affairs, and worse still, he’s going to be forced by his own back-benchers to retreat even further from the EU, perhaps to leave it altogether, against our best interests and indeed his own declared beliefs.
Perhaps he’ll wake up tomorrow and it will dawn on him what a blunder he’s made. Dave, when you do, get on the phone to Sarko and make it up – quickly!
Cameron has shown once again where his loyalties lie – firmly with his city chums. When he talks about ‘not in the interests of Britain’ he clearly thinks Britain does not exist outside of the square mile. Which I guess if you live in his world it doesnt.
Having denied the British people the chance to decide whether they wish to remain in Europe he now puts us in worst of both worlds scenario – we are still in, with all the associated costs and downsides, but will be unable to benefit from regulation of the financial industry and free ourselves from its grip on our economy because he hasn’t the guts to go through with that. What a complete loser this man is.
He and Osborne have been trying to lecture Europe for months about how they need to act decisively to end the Euro crisis. Now they have acted he has thrown his toys out of the pram and done his best to sabotage that action.
Agreed, Philip E and Antsulli.
David Cameron says that it is right to walk away from negotiations when you cannot safeguard your country’s interests even if it may harm attempts to save the Euro.
Yet when unions representing public sector workers take the same attitude over pension negotiations, he accuses them of failing to take the national picture into consideration and harming the economy.
Yet another case of do what I say not what I do?
Good point Sam.
Cameron is a man with no principles but plenty of faces.
Wow Sam , what a ridiculous statement.You have the strange twisted left wing view of economics, that does not work in the real world.
You believe it would be right to let Europe(Germany) control ,our taxes ,plus place an extra tax on the City,that produces 12% of our GDP.A tax that will be poured into Euro coffers to support spendthrift economies like Greece and Italy,at the expense of our frugality.
You somehow manage to equate that to the Public Sector trying to hang on to unsustainable Pensions and Pension terms in a time of austerity.Pensions not obtainable within the Private Sector, yet paid by them with the taxes on their production.
It would be interesting were both situations put to the British people in a referendum.Like the Guardian you read i suspect you would be in a considerable minority.
Hmm. so what would your solution be Sam? Why not just agree to everything the EU dreams up? and the unions too i guess? or just hope that the bond market will continue to lend 20p in the pound to us indefinitely to keep our lifestyles going? whatever anyone might think of Cameron on other issues we should at least try to stick to the issue -Euroland countries are headed down a path to some form of a United States of Europe without any voters being consulted. thats their choice. Theres no guarantee this path with solve their debts though -which are just as bad as ours incidentally. (including the German banks). Sure, the UK has its faults , but at least we have a fighting chance of solving them.
Here here Adrian. Cameron rejected the proposals, not to stymie saving the Euro, but because the proposed Financial Transactions Tax which which was due to raise €57bn meant €40bn coming from the UK economy – 75% of transactions take place in London.
Now, if that tax was being paid to the British Exchequer, there’d be a case to answer. But, no, the French and Germans proposed that out money be paid directly to Brussels – effectively we were asked to bail out the PIGs and the exposure in the French and German banking system thereof by the back door, to reward corrupt societies like Greece with a bail out of UK cash. It was wrong, a naked, dirty money grab by an unelected and corrupt body. A democratic backlash is building across Europe – even the French Socialist party will reject this.
In anyone is going to benefit from a tax on British banks and the British financial sector, it should be the British people.
there must be help in this new treaty for the people as we all know anything thats of any benefit to the people will not be tolarated by the tories eg. water,gas, oil, railways,electric,and now the NHS,the next one to be flogged off to the mafia i mean the city
I don’t understand how anyone can forsee into the future to phrophecy the pros and cons of complete euro fiscal unity. I know the thought of streamlining anything, particularly where money is concerned scares me to death. Our present difiiculties arise from repetition of the same bad manoeuvres over and over again , so why go further into line to risk a rip through fiscal calamity?
Nick Clegg, similar to DC, wants the UK to lead the way in Europe, but the argument of how to exactly achieve that standing, differs.
I am not sure that being central in Europe and exerting skills which are prima fascia leadership skills, is the correct way for the UK to continue as in a tight structured setting it becomes less clear to comprehend alternatives which can be better viewed from the periphery and whilst Europe is so vulnerable ,jumping in with both feet would be disastrous.
The pivotal question must be ..do we dip one toe into the water or one foot?
what I find interesting from the general commentary is how opininated we have all become! -or is it only opinated people who write into blogs these days to avoid trying face to face debate? (oops what does that make me…lets ignore that..)
Considering the Euroland politicians havent actually agreed the details of the Euro-bailout package yet, and wont for some months yet , why do so many have a definite view as to whether this new future of our will either be definitely be negative or positive for Britain? Technology has had a more profound inpact on us in the last 20 years than any political directives. Ebay and Amazon put more high street shops out of business than any EU directive. Change is the basis of all human existance. No one knows whether any of his will actually matter yet. Its not inconceivable that the EU could ultimately disband.
But guess what? As long as we in Britain can make products & services that are globally competitve then people will buy them ( even the French will buy from us if we provide them with a product or service that’s better than he can get locally) If we cant do that then whether we are in/out of whichever club wont save us. Or matter.
I live on an island where the locals believe there is a big ocean on the East and a bridge on the West. They have also been told by their rulers that having rich thieves in their midst is good for the island, because it is well known that thieves amass great fortunes and lead expensive lives, and that this will bring prosperity to all. So, they have surrendered to them a bit of space in their own heart, to make sure they feel at home there, in their own, private, golden village.
The thieves have bought the rulers with gifts of gold, to make sure no police of any kind disturbs their thieving. The rulers’ belief in the need for thieves is so strong that they shower them with presents and invite others, especially those persecuted in their own lands, to come and settle in that golden village. The thieves parade their immense wealth among the locals and from time to time throw some coins in the island’s coffers to keep the legend alive, while hiding their mountains of gold in secret caves, away from prying eyes.
(1/2… cont)
(cont… 2/2)
The thieves also love gambling, but not with their own gold, so the rulers open to them the island’s coffers. The thieves raid them all, and demand more. Scared of losing the promised prosperity and their own gifts of gold, the rulers decree that all must be sacrificed — savings, pensions, jobs, the education of the young, the care of the elders, and the healthcare of the island — to keep the thieves happy.
But as misery spreads across the land, rumors come from not afar proposing to restrain the thieves. The rulers demand their own big village of thieves be spared and, when they are refused, try to push the island away from its neighbours, even if the locals, poorer and poorer by the day, never really believed the prosperity legend and will need friends and neighbours to stave off famine.
Brilliant – that story should be adapted to replace the Christmas panto this year! Cameron and Osborne would make excellent ugly sisters… each scrabbling desperately to please the ‘Prince’ Goodwin up in his glass tower.
Did anybody hear Peston say that the City is SIX TIMES bigger that Wall St in comparative terms in the respective economies of UK and USA?
Doesn´t anybody find that SCARY, that the UK has increased its Casino dependency to that level? Shouldn´t we see the REDUCTION of the City and the INCREASE of industry and education, as our top (and urgent) economic priority?
Marverde, that is the obvious answer,but how do you increase industry by an equal amount, in a relatively high wage economy. Goods produced have to be saleable in a global market place.It is difficult to compete against the low wage, emerging economies of what was once considered the Third World.
Education is a different matter.It is a nonproductive part of the economy in terms of GDP but an increase in excellence is vital in a global world.The problem is the dumbing down of standards means less able teachers too.
JM69
12 December 2011
at 21.10
My opinion is that Merkel sees an opportunity – without having to fire a single shot – to achieve what Hitler tried in 1939 – Domination of Europe. The world knows that since Napoleon France always drifts with the wind.
This theory is boosted by the behind closed doors meetings only resilient journalists have been able to expose.
To achieve this Merkel must kick highly respected Britain into touch to have a clear opening to apply the German authoritarian culture to the struggling 20 EU member states then reigning in the other member states will be much easier.
It would be saddening to let this happen
Once again – I’m losing count exactly how many times – Cameron is being inconsistent.
He and Osborne insist that regulation of the financial sector will only be possible if all the major players around the world agree.
Yet he is opposed to the new EU plan because it will impose conditions on Britain he doesn’t want. International agreement falls at the first hurdle, hobbled by the man who advocated it.
Presumably when he made the first statement, he had no intention of seeing any such regulation and was merely saying things to keep the lib dems onside.
Perhaps the Speaker could get Dave a new coat of arms (a mere £42k including portrait) with the slogan:
Read my lips – I’m not telling you the whole truth. But I am fooling many of the people most of the time (sorry, even with a grammar school education, I can’t do that in Latin).
Cameron’s inconsistency well-spotted, Sam. Will Tweet this blog/comments to No. 10 now.
But which face would they paint on the portrait Sam?
Another policy (I’m being polite) of the government that seems somewhat inconsistent, or at least ill thought through:
We were told the private sector would replace the jobs lost in the public. Last month 60k+ lost in public, 5k created in private.
So clearly not working, even when graduates are forced to stack shelves at Poundsaver on no wages for ‘retail experience’. This will not only put off people bothering to pay high fees for a university education, it also denies someone a paid job stacking shelves at Poundsaver. But obviously good for Poundsaver – perhaps they contribute to tory funds
Worst of all, it seems to be the young who are most affected by unemployment.
So is this the best time to be insisting that those of us on the back-nine of life work even longer before we get our pension, thus also blocking jobs that younger people might be filling?
It would appear that Eton doesn’t teach people to think about the logical consequences of decisions, which when you consider the fees they charge is rather remiss.
Sam ,since when did EU plans achieve the status of world wide international status.Only i suspect in a minority Guardianistic world.
I am still awaiting the Guardians apology ,and their spokesman “Tom Watson” for their either deliberate lies or gross misleading article over the wiping of the “milly 2d2owler” phone messages.
Do you believe that NI and many of its employers have a legal case for the loss of a newspaper and jobs??
Is it only the left wing press who have to apologise to you Adrian? What about the other papers – or indeed NI for allowing/encouraging its employees to break the law in the first place.
As for the voicemails no-one yet knows the full story but it looks like an auto delete was triggered because NI had listened to them (it deletes ‘old’ messages). So indirectly they were responsible for deletion.
The Guardian didn’t close NoW, Murdoch did to try and get his son off the hook.
In contrast to the lies on oath by Murdoch, it was the Guardian who reported that there initial report had been wrong in saying that NoW had deleted messages.
Their initial report was based on information properly sourced and at the time was not questioned by the police nor, significantly, the News of the World.
Their outstanding investigation revealed the whole corrupt practice of phone hacking and is one of the reasons we have to be proud of a free press.
In contrast, as George Mombiot pointed out yesterday, the Daily Mail in one paper railed against the St Paul’s protesters and wanted them moved on, and in another criticised the police for threatening to move on protesters against a gipsy site.
Too many of our newspapers slant the news to suit their owners and the 1% and sadly, too many of our people believe them, which is why governments can get away with cutting benefits while leaving Fred Goodwin with his bloated pension.
You should read the Guardian for a week and see how much fine journalism you are missing.
You might like to read this, Adrian, to address what for some time has sounded increasingly like tin-pot ideology (as someone who likes to question things, why do you hang on in there?)
http://is.gd/ecTJy2
with more damning details of NotW’s hacking of Milly Dowler’s phone. Beware “News International exonerated” humbug.
Adrian
Here is a quote from the Mombiot blog which also appeared in the Guardian. As you think the Guardian is a propaganda sheet, tell me what of this is inaccurate:
‘Though benefit fraud deprives the Exchequer of £1.1bn a year while tax avoidance and evasion deprive it of between £40bn and £120bn, the tabloids relentlessly pursue the petty crooks, while leaving the capos alone.
Yesterday the rightwing papers applauded government plans to cut benefits for people in social housing who have more rooms than they need. The “growing scandal of under-occupancy”, the Mail observed, contributes to the housing crisis, depriving larger families of the homes they need. The Express told us that “it is only right that decisions such as this must be taken.” But what about the private sector, where there’s a much higher rate of under-occupation, especially among the wealthy? When this column suggested that these underused homes should be taxed, the corporate press went beserk. Only the poorest should carry the cost of resolving our housing crisis.’
Saltaire like the paper you read ,change the subject to avoid the issue.It was not the Guardian who reported their initial article was wrong.It was the Police at the Leverson enquiry.
As to the NI querying it,only the Police had the information,and undoubtably NI had been wrong to employ a PI who hacked phones.To which they held up their hands.
One must ask, where the Guardian got their information.It could only have come from a Police Officer, so i am sure they would have kept quiet.
That doesn’t make it right nor dispute the fact that it cost the public a newspaper and several 1000′s their jobs.
As to housing, is it right that a couple should live in “Social Housing,”paid for by the state,of several rooms when families can not get such a house?The answer has to be NO.
Private housing is a different matter.You may feel it is a scandal that the rich or better off can buy a house and keep it empty, but it is their money.Would it be wrong if they bought two or three cars and only used one?Looking forward to your class comments.
Ps :i have found twitter
” the answer has to be no”! Unless that is, the couple concerned have the wherewithal to buy the house at a discount. Odd that, don’t you think?
This government has sunk to a new low with their money saving threat to reduce housing benefit on people with a spare bedroom.
This from politicians who have a second home paid for by tax payers.
In the case of David Cameron that consisted of interest on his home counties mansion, all the profit of which is with him. Not to mention 10 Downing St and Chequers – no under used rooms there then?
Then there are the members of the House of Lords, paid £300 a day just for turning up.
Not to mention the Speaker with his £42k portrait and coat of arms.
And what about that other state supported establishment figure, the Queen. No unused rooms among all those palaces and castles.
These politicians sicken me. They are so quick to find ways to cut the living standards of people who compared to themselves have very little but leave the well-heeled to continue their lives of luxury.
There was another prime example of the arrogance of politicians on R4 World at One today (THUR).
Former metropolitan police chief Ian Blair questioned the way the police were being made to make financial cuts, saying that it was foolish to presume they would not affect front line policing.
Police minister Nick Herbert, who has never been in the police force, not as far as I can see done any job that is relevant to running a police force, instantly dismissed everything Blair said.
As my grandmother used to say, even a stopped clock is right twice a day but it seems our politicians (of all parties) are so scared of reasoned debate that they have to rubbish anything that doesn’t agree with their party line.
It cannot possibly lead to a sensible way to run the country.
One of my other favourite sayings is ‘show me a man who has never made a mistake and I’ll show you someone who has never made anything.’
It would seem we are governed by a load of people who have never made anything.
Sam as usual left wing reasoning,with no sense of reality.
I was in the Police force and it is top heavy with officers no longer doing real policing. There is tremendous scope for cutting police budgets without cutting front line policing.There are also far too much red tape introduced by Labour in their Equality, ethnicity and diversity zeal.Produced by left wing politicians , most of whom have never worked in the real world.
I would prefer the Country led by Tories , many who have run businesses in a competitive environment.
No doubt you would prefer it led by the left wing union dinosaurs,who live like lords themselves whilst using the workers as cannon fodder.
On Monday, when govt and acolytes were trying to defend Cameron’s heroic European adventure, it intrigued me to hear how many times different voices stressed that “the financial services employed people throughout the country, not just London”.
Till I read somewhere that the govt includes “betting shops” in “financial services”.
I could add a comment but, why bother…
Marverde, the financial services include the banks who provide over 12% of our GDP, insurance,building societies,credit agencies,or anything that affects our lives financially.
Would you prefer it to be controlled by and taxed on behalf of France and Germany, and wasted on behalf of the failing Euro
the daily mail made two mistakes when writing about fits of gallic pique against the victors of waterloo and thereby feeding the false perception of britain’s standing in the world. first, even wellington conceded that it was the prussians under bluecher who turned and won the battle of waterloo. second, the loser at the battle of bruxelles – which everyone else saw as meeting of serious politicians about shared interests and problems – was,in so far as there was a victor all the adult politicians representing 26 independent but co-operating peoples.