Blog powered by Typepad

« In a palace of tits, he is one of the biggest! | Main | Come on, 'Merkozy', don't stop, give Dave a good kicking! »

Friday, 09 December 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I agree - there's the whole world to trade with.

Also agree! The slow lane is the best option if you are travelling along the highway to destruction. Let's hope we are brave enough to look for a lay-by and then the slip road off, as soon as possible.

The bad news, of course, is that Cameron has attempted to help the City by removing us from a cartel run by those who want its business, and if the cartel thrives they will screw us, and if they fail, it will be because of the Euro melt-down, and most of our trading will be wiped out.

As you say, let's look elsewhere as soon as we can.

As the old Irish saying goes, "I wouldn't start from here in the first place", but here is where we are.

Well, gentlemen, total agreement, no opt-outs here, then!

These articles at The Economist are worth reading:

"In my version of the English language, when one member of a club uses his veto, he blocks something from happening. Mr Cameron did not stop France, Germany and the other 15 members of the euro zone from going ahead with what they are proposing. He asked for safeguards for financial services and—as had been well trailed in advance—France and Germany said no. That's not wielding a veto, that's called losing."

(with link to Anthony Browne's article)

"After much studied vagueness on his part about Britain's objectives, Mr Cameron's demand came down to a protocol that would ensure Britain would be given a veto on financial-services regulation (see PDF copy here). The British government has become convinced that the European Commission, usually a bastion of liberalism in Europe, has been issuing regulations hostile to the City of London under the influence of its French single-market commissioner, Michel Barnier. And yet strangely, given the accusation that Brussels was taking aim at the heart of the British economy, almost all of the new rules issued so far have been passed with British approval (albeit after much bitter backroom fighting). Tactically, too, it seemed odd to make a stand in defence of the financiers that politicians, both in Britain and across the rest of European, prefer to denounce."

Personally, I understand that being out of the euro is such a blessing now and that leaving a train that nobody knows where is going is a big temptation. But it looks that british aspirations today are being Europe's Singapore. And even that can prove quite difficult.

The question is, has Britain left the EU or have the 27 "Euro-Plus" countries left the EU?

The treaty being worked on by them is a non-EU, inter-governmental treaty. Therefore it can't be administered by the European Commission or enforced by the European Court. Lawyers are saying it's an abuse of power as is, let alone if it touches an EU institution.

By sitting there in an EU building with staff and sandwiches paid for by EU funds this afternoon and discussing the treaty further the Euro-Plus mob have broken the law. Dave and his lawyers could make it impossible to implement in any meaningful way.

And we all know what the markets will make of that.

Then Merkozy will have to come grovelling back to the EU to provide the infrastructure to deliver the treaty - whereupon Dave will hit them with his veto unless they concede to his demands (which he will hopefully have the good sense to increase).

Strange to find ourselves IN the EU on our own.


Unfortunately those buggers bend the law any way that suits them. What I hope is that the 'Euros' take the opportunity to turn the screw on us even further at which point Dave can go to the country to ask for their support in fighting 'Merkozy' off. That way he dumps Clegg and the il-Lib-non-Dems who will be slaughtered at the polls and gains a further five years to get the economy back on track. Alright, well, a man can dream, can't he?

Ortega, sorry, I forgot to respond to your comment. Alas, I view the Economist with deep suspicion, although it's possible it has changed. As for Britain becoming an off-shore European Singapore - that is exactly and precisely what I would like to see. Yes, it would be difficult, but everything is difficult, you just have to pick the difficulties that are least obnoxious - and a German-run Europe is intensely obnoxious - to say nothing of also being dangerous!

The comments to this entry are closed.