Jeremy Clarkson should be sacked!

[madmick50]

Let's not forget that it is far from certain that the treaty changes will sort the problem out. I don't think they can do anything that is going to work because the whole project was badly flawed from it's conception. It will still fail so we are better off having as little to do with it as possible.

[The Red Baron]

As I said TRB. The Labour Party kept us out of the Euro. Yes Blair wanted to join. So what? He was wrong on that as he was wrong on many things. The Labour Party prevented him from taking us into the Euro.

As for today's decision, there will be immense ramifications for decades over this. Anyone who thinks that the rest of the EU is simply going to say, \"OK Britain. We understand that you want it different. Never mind. We'll sort out the mess then it'll be no hard feelings.\" is in cloud cuckoo land. It's going to be us against the rest for decades from now. Even Thatcher wasn't so pig headed as to put us in that situation (she spun it that it was us against the rest - in fact she was a hard but sensible negotiator). See what Malcolm Rifkind (one of Thatcher's \"one of us\") has to say about it. Utterly sensible line on how you conduct negotiations, whereas the rabid right, obsessed by Daily Mail leaders and Yesterday programmes about the War think it's all about us taking on the nefarious bas**rds in Europe on the beaches, on the landing grounds, in the fields and the streets and in the hills.

 

BST praises Thatcher shock. Never thought I'd see the day! Although I seem to recall that when she gained the rebate she was accused of weakening Britain's position.

What you're missing is that Cameron didn't go to renegotiate anything- which is what a large number of his backbenchers wanted him to do. He was put into a position where the French President (and the German Chancellor) tried to do a classic stitch-up. Whether you like it or not, the UK economy remains highly, not to say over-dependent on financial services. Cameron tried to secure an opt-out, the others refused, so he walked away. I take it you'd prefer him to say, tell you what, I'll sign up even though it will hit Britain disproportionately. Would the French be willing in return to scrap the CAP which benefits them massively and disproportionately? Not a chance.

Of course it suits the EU and certain leaders to portray Britain as the bad guy, but maybe they should look closer to home. They were warned that these consequences would arise from the Euro project unless they imposed strict entry conditions (that isn't me saying that, it was Jacques Delors the other day, hardly a Eurosceptic he!) It is wrong to expect Britain to bear the burden of digging them out of a hole.

[The Red Baron]

PS. The idea that Blair was some kind of lone voice, crying in the wilderness against an implacably-opposed Labour Party is one of the most ridiculous things I've heard. Two things prevented us from going in- the first that Blair had pledged a referendum and therefore needed to identify the optimum moment to call it, and second that (because of Brown's standing in the Cabinet and Party) he was forced to grant the Treasury a veto. In the unlikely event that public opinion AND economic circumstances had aligned at a point in time on the issue, we would have gone in, and a large part of the Labour Party would have supported the move. (Including, I dare say, Ed and David Miliband).

[Filo]

it`s not often I agree with the Tories, but I do on this one, and if the French and Germans want to exclude us from the bigger picture, fine, they obviously won`t miss our £103b subsidy to the EU!

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Not to mention the myth that we'd lose too much in trade from it.  We have a trade deficit with EU countries.  No way would this have ever got through in this country it is as such that a referendum would have been required and we all know that the UK population would vote against the transfer of any powers.

Interesting to read some of the foreign press today.  It's a mixed bag.  Some say we've marginalised ourselves from the rest of Europe, the others are saying actually why should we have things imposed on us when we're not a part of the Eurozone?  The whole thing is ridiculous IMO and why any non Eurozone country would sign up to it I do not know, in fact I'm not sure the population of many Eurozone countries will be entirely pleased by the new proposals as it really is starting to move towards a centralised Europe.

[The Red Baron]

Having originally hinted that there wouldn't need to be a new Treaty, it seems there now will be one (although not including Britain.) In several countries any new treaty will need to be put to a referendum and all of them will have to have Parliamentary ratification. This seems a recipe for months of wrangling, not the quick, decisive solutions the Eurozone needs.

It may be an attempt to kick the can down the road but if it is I doubt it will work. However, what it really seems to be (as I said earlier) is a scheme to create a Federal USE, using the pretext of \"solving the debt crisis.\"

[BillyStubbsTears]

1) UK contribution to EU: We don't pay 103bn Euros per year to the EU. It is estimated that we will pay Euro103bn to the EU over the period 2007-13. We also get Euro50 billion back directly (the sort of stuff that subsidised the Frenchgate centre, Donny airport and the railport etc) plus large amounts in other funds that our companies can bid for competitively. Our net contribution per person is lower than Germany, Austria, Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden. It is slightly higher than France.

2) The purpose of this is of course to build up markets in the other countries of the EU for the long term. If we build up the markets in Eastern Europe, it will be to the benefit of all of us and our kids. We will all be richer in the long run. It's similar to what America did with the Marshall Plan after the war. You help weaker countries and we all get richer as a result.

3) Balance of trade with the EU is nigh on irrelevant. Say we have a 30bn Euro per year trade deficit with the EU. You think that we will then be richer if we are outside the EU? That is economic illiteracy. Currently, our exports are about 160bn Euros per year to the EU. We import abput 190bn Euros worth of goods and services. If we end up with trade barriers with the EU (and we are now staring at that as a long term possibility), what happens is that both the imports and exports will reduce. Sure, we might end up with a surplus, but what use is that to the many, many companies who rely on the export trade to the EU. If we export 100bn Euros and import 95bn Euros, we won't be better off. We end up with 60bn Euros of lost trade activity for our exporting companies - maybe a million jobs gone up in smoke.

4) TRB. As I said several times. The Labour Party prevented us going into the Euro. Tony Blair would have liked us all to be baptised born-again Catholics, but that was never going to happen either.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

But at the end of the day we all know full well that it's highly unlikely that trade will decrease that dramatically, it just will not.  We trade no problem with China and America and India etc it wouldn't make that much difference, they need us just as much as we need them and they know that trade wise.  Being part of the EU doesn't mean create this it clearly would happen with or without the EU.  I mean do you buy an Audi because it's an EU car or do you buy it because you like the car?

On the UK politics of this look at the response of the UK population.  If Cameron has done nothing he's made himself pick up a few more votes and Milliband's reaction has been pretty pathetic.  Just read that on the websites etc, your average man agrees with Cameron's decision.  Whether it's the right one or not it's clearly the one the UK population desires, surely that's a good thing as what we're seeing is the implementation of a Europe that the people have had no say in whatsoever.

Thing with Milliband is he would have stated the opposite of what Cameron did whatever.  The alternative was to sign up quite clearly it was all or nothing, had he signed up he'd have called him weak and not standing up for the UK and what he said he was going to do.  That's Milliband's position, three days ago he was laughing at him saying he didn't have the fight in Europe, today he came back without budging and Milliband called him weak for doing the opposite.  Question I think a lot of us would want answering is what would Milliband have done?  Yet again we don't know what Labour would have done, they seem to have no answers.

[The Red Baron]

4) TRB. As I said several times. The Labour Party prevented us going into the Euro. Tony Blair would have liked us all to be baptised born-again Catholics, but that was never going to happen either.

I realise this is ancient history in political terms, but your contention that \"The Labour Party\" prevented British membership of the Euro is just not correct:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1942466.stm

There were pro-s and anti-s (some might even say that the party was split over the issue) and eventually the anti-s won the argument. But only because they ultimately had Gordon Brown and the Treasury on their side.

[CusworthRovers]

On a similar note, as anybody ever had pins and needles in their tail? I was at the gym the other day and did 20mins on the bike. When I finished and walked away to the free weights I had a weird sensation in my shorts. It just felt like my foreskin was pulled right back, but when I did a cheeky adjustment, I found the skin was still covering the bell.

It lasted for about a few minutes and I kept having to adjust my genital area (although there was no need), which made me a bit wary of everyone possibly looking at me. I think my tail must have been in a tense, tight position for the 20mins on the bike. Not sure if it was pins and needles or some form of tail cramp. As anybody ever had this happen to them?

In anticipation

[BillyStubbsTears]

BFYP

The point is that, if we were out of the EU, Audis for us, and much more importantly, anything we sell to the EU would be more expensive. So there would be less trade.

True, America and China still trade with the EU. We would still trade with them. But America and China, and now, potentially us in the future, do less trade than they would if they were part of the core bloc.

The EU will hit us, hard for this. They will not stand by and let us have the deal that we want and also all the benefits. The first one that we will get hit for is any discussion on reducing our net contribution to the EU. We WERE in a decent position to argue the case for a reduced net contribution. Our economy is now weaker than France, so we had a very strong case for negotiating for a lower net contribution than France. When we go to negotiate this next year, the EU will politely tell us to fcuk off. They will say that we have lost our negotiating position. The EU will tell us what deal is on offer and they will say that if we're not happy with that, we should consider our position. With all the consequent effects on our trade with them.

Much more to the point, what happens when it comes to negotiating trade deals between the EU, China and America. Do you think the EU will take our position into account? Do you think we'll have an effect on the discussions? Not a chance in a million. We'll be told to shut up and sit down while the big boys decide how the world is going to be organised.

THAT is what we have done today. As I said before, even Thatcher was never pig headedly stupid enough to but us so far on the periphery of Europe. She negotiated hard, then did deals. Cameron has painted himself into a corner and left himself with no option but to veto the overall deal and isolate us.

Stupidity on a historical scale. It's back to our approach in the 50s when we thought we were better than the Europeans. They raced ahead without us and we eventually had to go cap in hand begging to be let into the club and being told what the conditions were going to be. We paid for that short-sighted stupidity then and we will pay for it now for the next generation. We'll console ourselves that we are British, we are different and we are in control of our own destiny. But that destiny will be a poorer and more difficult one than it needed to be.

[BillyStubbsTears]

TRB.

I'm not sure how much clearer it has to be. The Labour Party were in power when the decision over joining the Euro was made. The party in power decided not to join the Euro. Spin it how you want, but that is the core fact of the matter.

Of course some Labour MPs, including the PM, wanted us to join the Euro. But we didn't. End of story.

[madmick50]

I have no doubt that it would have been against the British national interest to accept what was on the table in Brussels from Merkozy. We would have been badly damaged had we accepted. What is now proposed for the 17 eurozone members, and those going along with them, will be deeply damaging to them all. The electorates of these countries, will simply not accept that their taxes and their budgets will be imposed upon them by a government that they did not elect. This will lead to a lack of proper implementation so it won't work (it wouldn't have worked anyway).

We will be affected by the continuing crisis in the eurozone for quite a few years yet. A crisis which is not the result of some great Anglo-Saxon conspiracy as Sarkozy is trying to make out. I dislike this man intensely, especially after he blanked our Dave after he had used the veto. The crisis is the result of the obvious flaws in the structure of the euro which were carefully explained by us vilified eurosceptics right from the start.

The euro has failed to make Europe more prosperous and is likely to provoke more civil disorder and disharmony. John Major should not have agreed to the Maastricht Treaty which created the euro in exchange for our opt-out. He should have used our veto as call me Dave has now done. He was a useless prime minister (nearly as bad as Gordon Brown).

I believe that we should be a self-governing nation and I'm desperately hoping that this is the first step towards withdrawal from the existing Treaty and a new relationship with the rest of Europe. If we never import anything from France again that will do for me. All the roads ahead are rocky but thank God we have taken a step along the right one.

Just because we are the only nation not to accept the deal doesn't mean we are wrong. Why climb aboard the Titanic when it is so obviously going to sink?

[The L J Monk]

There's that photographic memory again

[The Red Baron]

TRB.

I'm not sure how much clearer it has to be. The Labour Party were in power when the decision over joining the Euro was made. The party in power decided not to join the Euro. Spin it how you want, but that is the core fact of the matter.

Of course some Labour MPs, including the PM, wanted us to join the Euro. But we didn't. End of story.

Excuse me- it is not me that is trying to spin anything- you said:

4) In a thread full of particularly stupid comments, that one about Miliband takes the biscuit. While the Tories and UKIP were spending the last decade flapping about Europe, it was the Labour party that actually kept us out of the Euro. Balls said this week that we'll never be members in his lifetime. Daft, daft comment to make TRB.

The Tories and (even more so) UKIP were consistently clear in their position- that we should not join the euro. Yes, there were members of the Tory Party (e.g. Ken Clarke, Heseltine, Ian Taylor, Quentin Davies and several then-MEPs) who said we should join. But the party leadership was pretty clear that joining the Euro was a no-no. Hague practically ran a General Election campaign on it in 2001 (he had precious little other ammo) and Duncan-Smith became leader after Hague mainly because he was opposed to the Single Currency. The real debate was in the Labour Party, and eventually the anti-s won, though only decisively once Brown had effectively applied the Treasury veto by setting a series of \"Tests\" that could never be met.  

Your statement that Labour was in power when we decided not to join the Euro is, of course, correct. However, you seem to be trying to make out that the Labour Party was against the Euro, with the exception of Tony Blair and a few mavericks. I think you're confusing them with the position of the Tories.

[The Red Baron]

BFYP

The point is that, if we were out of the EU, Audis for us, and much more importantly, anything we sell to the EU would be more expensive. So there would be less trade.

True, America and China still trade with the EU. We would still trade with them. But America and China, and now, potentially us in the future, do less trade than they would if they were part of the core bloc.

The EU will hit us, hard for this. They will not stand by and let us have the deal that we want and also all the benefits. The first one that we will get hit for is any discussion on reducing our net contribution to the EU. We WERE in a decent position to argue the case for a reduced net contribution. Our economy is now weaker than France, so we had a very strong case for negotiating for a lower net contribution than France. When we go to negotiate this next year, the EU will politely tell us to fcuk off. They will say that we have lost our negotiating position. The EU will tell us what deal is on offer and they will say that if we're not happy with that, we should consider our position. With all the consequent effects on our trade with them.

Much more to the point, what happens when it comes to negotiating trade deals between the EU, China and America. Do you think the EU will take our position into account? Do you think we'll have an effect on the discussions? Not a chance in a million. We'll be told to shut up and sit down while the big boys decide how the world is going to be organised.

THAT is what we have done today. As I said before, even Thatcher was never pig headedly stupid enough to but us so far on the periphery of Europe. She negotiated hard, then did deals. Cameron has painted himself into a corner and left himself with no option but to veto the overall deal and isolate us.

Stupidity on a historical scale. It's back to our approach in the 50s when we thought we were better than the Europeans. They raced ahead without us and we eventually had to go cap in hand begging to be let into the club and being told what the conditions were going to be. We paid for that short-sighted stupidity then and we will pay for it now for the next generation. We'll console ourselves that we are British, we are different and we are in control of our own destiny. But that destiny will be a poorer and more difficult one than it needed to be.

You seem to assume that the Sarkozy-Merkel model for the future of the EU is going to be a huge success. Leaving aside the fact that when countries other than Britain examine the \"fine print\" of the deal they might begin to question whether it is in their interests, do you really think the answer to the EU's problems is to grant more power to the centre? Or is getting more countries to sign up to the Euro, which seems to be the inescapable logic of their \"deal\" is going to be a solution?

Setting a one-size-fits-all Fiscal policy to go with a monetary one might be logical, but it strikes me as a recipe for low growth and growing friction between the centre and the periphery. And not one thing said at the summit addressed the real issue- the debt crisis that is actually threatening the Eurozone.

I do have a major criticism of Cameron in that he has never articulated a different vision for Europe, which makes it difficult for our natural allies- those countries outside the Eurozone- to rally towards him now. In fact I'm not sure he really has an alternative vision- Ed Miliband scored a rare hit on him at PMQs the other day when he asked which powers Cameron wanted to re-negotiate. But he knew that he couldn't sign up to greater EU central control- and so did Sarkozy.

[Filo]

It just shows that Britain`s power of veto was n`t worth the paper it was written on, Germany and France did n`t like it so they decide to create a new treaty excluding Britain, much the same when the Danish and Irish voted no in the referendums they had, it was a case of vote again until we get a yes vote! France never wanted us in the first place, did n`t De Gaulle, veto our first application to join?

[madmick50]

Good on the Daily Express. I'll be buying it in future. All you leftie socialists that buy the Daily Mirror should give this a read as it blows your case for wanting to stay in Europe out of the water. What was the Daily Mirror headline yesterday after such a momentous EU summit? Louis Walsh has had a hair transplant. If that doesn't say it all about  a rag of a paper I don't know what does. All you that buy it should be ashamed of yourselves.

http://www.express.co.uk/web/europecrusade