The big question is, after a negotiation which has fell considerably short of expectations, is there any value to be had for 1.36 on remain or 3.5 on leave? I would say leave is good value as the polling indicates leave having a slight majority for a negotiation with some changes (but not significant changes) being made to our relationship with the EU.
David Cameron has been in Brussels attempting to secure reforms to Britain's relationship with the European Union. From what you have read or heard, do you think David Cameron has been successful or unsuccessful in his negotiations so far?
TOTAL Lab Con LD SNP UKIP Very successful 1 1 2 6 0 0 Fairly successful 20 17 30 27 14 7 Fairly unsuccessful 28 29 27 32 29 28 Very unsuccessful 24 24 21 10 34 49 Don't know 27 29 20 25 23 16
Those numbers are not good for remain and I expect them to worsen.
Today and tomorrow are the worst days for Remain. Then FUD takes over.
So, a majority of EU nations oppose something in their parliaments, and the sum total of that is that the EU has to wrinkle its brow and have a ponder.
William Hague said back in 2008 that it would be difficult getting 14 parliaments to overrule the EU even if a new directive proposed the murder of the firstborn.
Is that the proposed new method of dealing with the migrant flow?
Are America dictating to the Australians how to organise their immigration laws? is that part of Australia's deal?
Are the Chinese telling the Swiss how many Syrians they have to accept?
Are Chinese courts striking down Swiss court judgements?
Come on dude: all I am doing is pointing out that it is by no means an entirely easy to be a small country on its own. There's a reason why pretty much every major economy has ended up in one trade bloc or another.
The EU goes beyond that, which is why I support (vocally on this site, and for a long time) EFTA/EEA over EU.
Hard to be a small country on your own? Look at the richest nations in the world by GDP per capita
Qatar 137,162 2 Luxembourg 97,639 3 Singapore 83,066 4 Brunei 79,890 5 Kuwait 70,686 6 Norway 67,166 7 United Arab Emirates 66,347 8 San Marino 60,887 9 Switzerland 58,149 — Hong Kong 55,097
Only Luxembourg is in any kind of serious EU-type bloc
You just listed a bunch of oil exporters. Congratulations.
Singapore? Hong Kong? Switzerland? Show me the oil.
The fact is the richest countries are small. But maybe we're not small ENOUGH for you. I dunno. Are we semi-small? Awkwardly small but also a bit big?
You just said a silly thing and there it is.
On the substance I actually agree with you. I think EFTA/EEA is the best choice long term but Cameron will win his vote. The backlash will come thereafter, I think this deal is so obviously shit it will split the Tories, and Cameron will take the blame. He will be a little bit like Blair after Iraq, doing so well, then, duh. His name will be spoken with venom at future Tory conferences.
Some bright spark suggested backing UKIP most seats at the 2020 election, similar to SNP after the Indy ref, I got 1000/1 for a tenner, probably a waste of a tenner but glad I took it.
David Cameron has been in Brussels attempting to secure reforms to Britain's relationship with the European Union. From what you have read or heard, do you think David Cameron has been successful or unsuccessful in his negotiations so far?
TOTAL Lab Con LD SNP UKIP Very successful 1 1 2 6 0 0 Fairly successful 20 17 30 27 14 7 Fairly unsuccessful 28 29 27 32 29 28 Very unsuccessful 24 24 21 10 34 49 Don't know 27 29 20 25 23 16
LD more enthusiastic than Con - the coalition lives on!
David Cameron has been in Brussels attempting to secure reforms to Britain's relationship with the European Union. From what you have read or heard, do you think David Cameron has been successful or unsuccessful in his negotiations so far?
TOTAL Lab Con LD SNP UKIP Very successful 1 1 2 6 0 0 Fairly successful 20 17 30 27 14 7 Fairly unsuccessful 28 29 27 32 29 28 Very unsuccessful 24 24 21 10 34 49 Don't know 27 29 20 25 23 16
Those numbers are not good for remain and I expect them to worsen.
Today and tomorrow are the worst days for Remain. Then FUD takes over.
I think you should explain what that word means to those of us in Scotland.
Can anyone tell me what Rubio is on the nomination on betfair at the moment? I can't access it at work.
1.83/1.85
Which implies a 54% chance. Bonkers.
There might be a chance to reback him and square off properly after New Hampshire. "The comeback Trump" !
Backing him after New Hampshire may make sense. I'll be watching his numbers in Nevada and SC closely though.
Might be talking through my wallet, but I've never seen such ramping of a third place finish on TV. CBSN was positively drooling over him, no idea if CNN/Fox were any different.
Bernie was desperately unlucky. On a 3-3 coin toss tie he would have "beaten" Hilary, which would have been a bigger story than "tieing".
Rubio might be the biggest beneficiary of Hillary's luck. Had Sanders won - and he had a 65% of winning three or more of the six coin tosses - then that would have been the dominant news story and Rubio's decent third would have been way down.
If staying in does win with the majority of the Tory party help,then this is good news for future UKIP with the right leader.
How can future Tories who voted to accept this vomit of deal criticize EU mass immigration or future EU deals when these people have made the Tory party a pro EU party with labour,snp and lib Dems.
This party diluted the anti EU vote with the pretend outrage of the EU and it's policies on this country,should be easy for a anti EU party to remind the people of Cameron's love in with his party.
Saying that,if Theresa may leads the out campaign could help her leadership credentials and keep the anti EU party at bay.
The live YouGov can be ignored. The idea that only 27% of the public don't know today what's been negotiated is pure fantasy. All it tells us is how atypical YouGov's sample is.
Can anyone tell me what Rubio is on the nomination on betfair at the moment? I can't access it at work.
1.83/1.85
Which implies a 54% chance. Bonkers.
There might be a chance to reback him and square off properly after New Hampshire. "The comeback Trump" !
Backing him after New Hampshire may make sense. I'll be watching his numbers in Nevada and SC closely though.
Might be talking through my wallet, but I've never seen such ramping of a third place finish on TV. CBSN was positively drooling over him, no idea if CNN/Fox were any different.
Bernie was desperately unlucky. On a 3-3 coin toss tie he would have "beaten" Hilary, which would have been a bigger story than "tieing".
Rubio might be the biggest beneficiary of Hillary's luck. Had Sanders won - and he had a 65% of winning three or more of the six coin tosses - then that would have been the dominant news story and Rubio's decent third would have been way down.
Sanders can certainly make the point that every single vote counts. His performance amongst the 18-34 age group is quite phenomonal I reckon too.
Simply pointing out that the founding principle of 'ever closer union' is in itself a crock of merde with as little substance as much of what Cameron has negotiated ought to be worth something to you!
Its utterly and completely worthless. Its like saying that by changing the name of an act of parliament the law will actually be any different. Critically we are still completely subject to the ECJ which is mandated to interpret decisions in a way that promotes ever closer union. We are also still subject to acquis communautaire, as the EU continues to develop laws (federalist in intent or otherwise) we will continue to be bound by them. Its a sham, if we are in the EU, we are part of ever closer union.
Thanks for the reply, this is the real nitty gritty of whether EU commands nation states or nation states command the EU.
So reading around, acquis communitaire seems to be the chapters - the areas in which national governments via Treaties have granted the EU competence to develop law - generally updated around accessions. ECJ interprets the EU laws so made.
All this lawmaking stems initially from Treaties agreed unanimously, and with whatever opt-outs are signed in to get agreement, from national governments. So still in all of this, the theory is that the UK government (and nation states in general) have the whip hand in what the EU is tasked with running and, in a good many cases, which bits you sign up for.
By signing up to things your nation, willingly and knowingly, agrees to be subject to EU law in that area, and set aside national law. Again, you as a nation have to agree to that, you as a nation are in charge of what you give up. Wishing to duck that responsibility and saying it was the EU wot done it doesn't really wash. The UK bears full responsibility for how the EU relates to the UK.
I recall that ECJ cases have caused dismay, seeming to go beyond their competence and thus subvert this relationship. Has the promotion of ever closer union tipped the balance in cases or has it simply been the old chestnut of the ECJ trying to honestly interpret badly drafted legislation (which can equally be a problem in domestic law)? Actually, if the former is the case, the clarification of what ever closer union can and cannot mean becomes a more significant concession to Cameron than merely a re-statement of meaning - by writing down what 'ever closer union' can and cannot mean in a legal sense, will the ECJ not have to take account of those words if legal representatives of the UK cite them as part of a case?
Can anyone tell me what Rubio is on the nomination on betfair at the moment? I can't access it at work.
1.83/1.85
Which implies a 54% chance. Bonkers.
There might be a chance to reback him and square off properly after New Hampshire. "The comeback Trump" !
Backing him after New Hampshire may make sense. I'll be watching his numbers in Nevada and SC closely though.
Might be talking through my wallet, but I've never seen such ramping of a third place finish on TV. CBSN was positively drooling over him, no idea if CNN/Fox were any different.
Bernie was desperately unlucky. On a 3-3 coin toss tie he would have "beaten" Hilary, which would have been a bigger story than "tieing".
Rubio might be the biggest beneficiary of Hillary's luck. Had Sanders won - and he had a 65% of winning three or more of the six coin tosses - then that would have been the dominant news story and Rubio's decent third would have been way down.
This common interpretation is apparently incorrect - the delegates awarded by coin tosses were county delegates, not "statewide delegate equivalents" which is what the headline 701-697 result represents.
Are America dictating to the Australians how to organise their immigration laws? is that part of Australia's deal?
Are the Chinese telling the Swiss how many Syrians they have to accept?
Are Chinese courts striking down Swiss court judgements?
Come on dude: all I am doing is pointing out that it is by no means an entirely easy to be a small country on its own. There's a reason why pretty much every major economy has ended up in one trade bloc or another.
The EU goes beyond that, which is why I support (vocally on this site, and for a long time) EFTA/EEA over EU.
Hard to be a small country on your own? Look at the richest nations in the world by GDP per capita
Qatar 137,162 2 Luxembourg 97,639 3 Singapore 83,066 4 Brunei 79,890 5 Kuwait 70,686 6 Norway 67,166 7 United Arab Emirates 66,347 8 San Marino 60,887 9 Switzerland 58,149 — Hong Kong 55,097
Only Luxembourg is in any kind of serious EU-type bloc
Or perhaps you consider that unfair, so let's look at OECD liveability:, the top ten best places to live
1 Norway 2 iceland 3 Switzerland 4. Australia 5. USA 6. Canada 7 Sweden 8. Netherlands 9 NZ 10 Denmark
The first EU country is Sweden at 7. No major, core EU country makes the list
Not sure Sweden will be at seven for much longer.
Norway has taken almost as many Syrians as the Swede's
FFS he couldn't EVEN got the child benefit export issue fixed
Migrants not banned from sending child benefit back home, instead there will be “an option to index such benefits to the standard of living in the Member State where the child resides”
The live YouGov can be ignored. The idea that only 27% of the public don't know today what's been negotiated is pure fantasy. All it tells us is how atypical YouGov's sample is.
Well even if people don't know, they don't say that they don't know :-)
I wouldn't ignore it, I'd just treat it with kid gloves. The idea that the median voter might think that Cameron has been "fairly unsuccessful" seems to pass the smell test.
On days like this, those few of us as pro-EU blues like to keep our heads down. We also look at some of the irate tweets from leading headbangers and wonder how we manage to all fit in...
Can anyone tell me what Rubio is on the nomination on betfair at the moment? I can't access it at work.
1.83/1.85
Which implies a 54% chance. Bonkers.
There might be a chance to reback him and square off properly after New Hampshire. "The comeback Trump" !
Backing him after New Hampshire may make sense. I'll be watching his numbers in Nevada and SC closely though.
Might be talking through my wallet, but I've never seen such ramping of a third place finish on TV. CBSN was positively drooling over him, no idea if CNN/Fox were any different.
Bernie was desperately unlucky. On a 3-3 coin toss tie he would have "beaten" Hilary, which would have been a bigger story than "tieing".
Rubio might be the biggest beneficiary of Hillary's luck. Had Sanders won - and he had a 65% of winning three or more of the six coin tosses - then that would have been the dominant news story and Rubio's decent third would have been way down.
The problem for Rubio now is his decent third becomes a poor third now if repeated in New Hampshire. If Trump wins there he can say he is the 'comeback kid' while if Cruz gets second he becomes his main challenger. Momentum and media narrative is all
Its funny how the housing market co-opts people to support ever higher prices. For example, someone who owns a small flat should dislike high prices, because they can only afford to live in a flat and can't afford the price of a larger property. However humans always overvalue what they have relative to what they could have, so the small property owner thinks higher property prices helps them. Really, the only people it works for are those renting out their or planning to downsize. Those planning to move up the chain should oppose current trajectory. But they don't.
Can anyone tell me what Rubio is on the nomination on betfair at the moment? I can't access it at work.
1.83/1.85
Which implies a 54% chance. Bonkers.
There might be a chance to reback him and square off properly after New Hampshire. "The comeback Trump" !
Backing him after New Hampshire may make sense. I'll be watching his numbers in Nevada and SC closely though.
Might be talking through my wallet, but I've never seen such ramping of a third place finish on TV. CBSN was positively drooling over him, no idea if CNN/Fox were any different.
Bernie was desperately unlucky. On a 3-3 coin toss tie he would have "beaten" Hilary, which would have been a bigger story than "tieing".
Rubio might be the biggest beneficiary of Hillary's luck. Had Sanders won - and he had a 65% of winning three or more of the six coin tosses - then that would have been the dominant news story and Rubio's decent third would have been way down.
This common interpretation is apparently incorrect - the delegates awarded by coin tosses were county delegates, not "statewide delegate equivalents" which is what the headline 701-697 result represents.
Have to admit when Dave said he was going to renegotiate with Europe, I thought he meant a couple of years worth of talks getting meaningful reform on the CAP, CFP, supremacy of EU courts, human rights legislation... not neccesarily getting everything we asked for but making alliances say with the Germans against the French on farming and perhaps a bit of a quid pro quo for the (senible in my view) suggestion of some sort of EU border force.
The problem for Rubio now is his decent third becomes a poor third now if repeated in New Hampshire. If Trump wins there he can say he is the 'comeback kid' while if Cruz gets second he becomes his main challenger. Momentum and media narrative is all
Yes, backing Rubio at the current odds is very vulnerable to a poorish performance in NH. OK, he's now got momentum and is likely to get more establishment backing, but in the polls to date let's not forget that he is one of the bunch clustered around 10%, and is actually behind Kasich and Cruz, and about level with Bush.
On days like this, those few of us as pro-EU blues like to keep our heads down. We also look at some of the irate tweets from leading headbangers and wonder how we manage to all fit in...
But if it was a good deal, supporters would of been on here crowing. That nobody is arguing its a good deal says it all.
All this lawmaking stems initially from Treaties agreed unanimously, and with whatever opt-outs are signed in to get agreement, from national governments. So still in all of this, the theory is that the UK government (and nation states in general) have the whip hand in what the EU is tasked with running and, in a good many cases, which bits you sign up for.
This isn't true, and puts the remainder of your questions in perspective. The ECJ has since it's inception been good a grabbing power that wasn't given to it by any treaty or accord. Most famously consider the Van Gend en Loos case in which the ECJ arrived at the principle of "direct effect" giving community law supremacy over national law, and in the Costa case it decided that member states had definitively transferred sovereign rights to the Community and Union law could not be overridden by domestic law. These were decisions of the court, not provisions of treaties, and fundamentally changed the way the EU works and behaves. A number of national constitutional courts, notably from Germany and Belgium have criticised the ECJ as leading to a "government by the judges"
FFS he couldn't EVEN got the child benefit export issue fixed
Migrants not banned from sending child benefit back home, instead there will be “an option to index such benefits to the standard of living in the Member State where the child resides”
Totally worthless.
Good news for our Overcrowded schools then,proberly bring kids here with that law.
On days like this, those few of us as pro-EU blues like to keep our heads down. We also look at some of the irate tweets from leading headbangers and wonder how we manage to all fit in...
If had a valet (I guess TSE is the closest) I would rather take his advice than that of the serried ranks of the pb conference. Sound man that Arthur Balfour.
Have to admit when Dave said he was going to renegotiate with Europe, I thought he meant a couple of years worth of talks getting meaningful reform on the CAP, CFP, supremacy of EU courts, human rights legislation... not neccesarily getting everything we asked for but making alliances say with the Germans against the French on farming and perhaps a bit of a quid pro quo for the (senible in my view) suggestion of some sort of EU border force.
More like ten minutes over a coffee and croissant, laughing as he said 'I can get this past mugs like David H and Richard N, useful idiots like them will spread the word for me'
Have to admit when Dave said he was going to renegotiate with Europe, I thought he meant a couple of years worth of talks getting meaningful reform on the CAP, CFP, supremacy of EU courts, human rights legislation... not neccesarily getting everything we asked for but making alliances say with the Germans against the French on farming and perhaps a bit of a quid pro quo for the (senible in my view) suggestion of some sort of EU border force.
He was smart to drop all that stuff to focus on non-Euro country protections. But sadly he can't get that either. It's all damning indictment of British influence and EU willingness to reform.
FFS he couldn't EVEN got the child benefit export issue fixed
Migrants not banned from sending child benefit back home, instead there will be “an option to index such benefits to the standard of living in the Member State where the child resides”
Totally worthless.
I don't understand this. If our benefits system is based on residency, how can benefits be paid in respect of non-resident children? Seems an easy thing to fix
So.. Cameron started to sell his "deal" today, but the members of the government supporting out cannot start to campaign until after the council meeting on Feb 19th. Glad he isn't planning to rig this vote. Disgraceful.
@tnewtondunn: Breaking: Theresa May says draft EU agreement is the "basis for a deal". A big intervention, clearest sign yet she will campaign for Remain.
Have to admit when Dave said he was going to renegotiate with Europe, I thought he meant a couple of years worth of talks getting meaningful reform on the CAP, CFP, supremacy of EU courts, human rights legislation... not neccesarily getting everything we asked for but making alliances say with the Germans against the French on farming and perhaps a bit of a quid pro quo for the (senible in my view) suggestion of some sort of EU border force.
More like ten minutes over a coffee and croissant, laughing as he said 'I can get this past mugs like David H and Richard N, they will spread the word for me'
It was a big opportunity, the Eu should take seriously that one of it's major countires might leave. We are no Greece, and act as an important counterweight to southern, latin and French influence along with the Germans. So either Dave was really going to stick his neck on the line and push for something substantial... or do as he has done.
FFS he couldn't EVEN got the child benefit export issue fixed
Migrants not banned from sending child benefit back home, instead there will be “an option to index such benefits to the standard of living in the Member State where the child resides”
Totally worthless.
I don't understand this. If our benefits system is based on residency, how can benefits be paid in respect of non-resident children? Seems an easy thing to fix
Because it's based on residency of the parent receiving the benefit not the children. So a Romanian Dad working in Birmingham can send home child benefit to the rest of his family living in Romania.
@tnewtondunn: Breaking: Theresa May says draft EU agreement is the "basis for a deal". A big intervention, clearest sign yet she will campaign for Remain.
Don't comment much and haven't for yonks but......as a generally pro Dave sort of chap who thinks he has been a pretty good PM in pretty tricky circumstances I can only say that this "deal" is simply astonishing in its patheticness.
More than that I find it a national humiliation...our PM clocking up the airmiles across Europe basically to be told to to eff off...really really poor
@tnewtondunn: Breaking: Theresa May says draft EU agreement is the "basis for a deal". A big intervention, clearest sign yet she will campaign for Remain.
@tnewtondunn: Breaking: Theresa May says draft EU agreement is the "basis for a deal". A big intervention, clearest sign yet she will campaign for Remain.
The problem for Rubio now is his decent third becomes a poor third now if repeated in New Hampshire. If Trump wins there he can say he is the 'comeback kid' while if Cruz gets second he becomes his main challenger. Momentum and media narrative is all
Yes, backing Rubio at the current odds is very vulnerable to a poorish performance in NH. OK, he's now got momentum and is likely to get more establishment backing, but in the polls to date let's not forget that he is one of the bunch clustered around 10%, and is actually behind Kasich and Cruz, and about level with Bush.
@tnewtondunn: Breaking: Theresa May says draft EU agreement is the "basis for a deal". A big intervention, clearest sign yet she will campaign for Remain.
Sean is right, big opportunity for Boris
Though his father and brother have come out for Remain
Have to admit when Dave said he was going to renegotiate with Europe, I thought he meant a couple of years worth of talks getting meaningful reform on the CAP, CFP, supremacy of EU courts, human rights legislation... not neccesarily getting everything we asked for but making alliances say with the Germans against the French on farming and perhaps a bit of a quid pro quo for the (senible in my view) suggestion of some sort of EU border force.
Yes, but then two thing happened. The migrant crisis loomed means he suddenly got concerned that a summer of bad headlines would scupper his much desired "in" vote, its also pretty certain that his initial meetings led him to believe that not much was going to be on offer and coming back with nothing after two years would be even less well received than coming back with nothing after three months. Conspicuously this referendum is for Dave's Legacy first, the Conservative Party second, and the future of the UK a very poor third, if it crossed his mind at all.
@tnewtondunn: Breaking: Theresa May says draft EU agreement is the "basis for a deal". A big intervention, clearest sign yet she will campaign for Remain.
Can anyone tell me what Rubio is on the nomination on betfair at the moment? I can't access it at work.
1.83/1.85
Which implies a 54% chance. Bonkers.
There might be a chance to reback him and square off properly after New Hampshire. "The comeback Trump" !
Backing him after New Hampshire may make sense. I'll be watching his numbers in Nevada and SC closely though.
Might be talking through my wallet, but I've never seen such ramping of a third place finish on TV. CBSN was positively drooling over him, no idea if CNN/Fox were any different.
Bernie was desperately unlucky. On a 3-3 coin toss tie he would have "beaten" Hilary, which would have been a bigger story than "tieing".
Rubio might be the biggest beneficiary of Hillary's luck. Had Sanders won - and he had a 65% of winning three or more of the six coin tosses - then that would have been the dominant news story and Rubio's decent third would have been way down.
This common interpretation is apparently incorrect - the delegates awarded by coin tosses were county delegates, not "statewide delegate equivalents" which is what the headline 701-697 result represents.
Have to admit when Dave said he was going to renegotiate with Europe, I thought he meant a couple of years worth of talks getting meaningful reform on the CAP, CFP, supremacy of EU courts, human rights legislation... not neccesarily getting everything we asked for but making alliances say with the Germans against the French on farming and perhaps a bit of a quid pro quo for the (senible in my view) suggestion of some sort of EU border force.
Oh, come on.
Supremacy of EU courts was never on the table: it's an essential aspect of the EU and to opt out of the ECJ is tantamount to opting out of the EU. If you don't want ECJ decisions to be binding, just be honest and say you're for Leave on grounds of sovereignty.
Human Rights legislation is a red herring. It's a consequence of membership of the Council of Europe, not the EU - and is directly applicable in UK because of a UK law. Yes, the EU is also subject to Human Rights law so there is an element of a back door but nearly every hoo-ha relating to Europe and human rights is to do with the ECHR.
Cameron never mentioned either the CAP or CFP during his Bloomberg speech so they too seem to be on your made-up wishlist.
If you want to have a go at him for objectives not delivered, go back to the original 2013 speech and compare the deal against that - it's not as if you won't have a case. But to set up a straw man undermines your own argument.
Are America dictating to the Australians how to organise their immigration laws? is that part of Australia's deal?
Are the Chinese telling the Swiss how many Syrians they have to accept?
Are Chinese courts striking down Swiss court judgements?
Come on dude: all I am doing is pointing out that it is by no means an entirely easy to be a small country on its own. There's a reason why pretty much every major economy has ended up in one trade bloc or another.
The EU goes beyond that, which is why I support (vocally on this site, and for a long time) EFTA/EEA over EU.
Hard to be a small country on your own? Look at the richest nations in the world by GDP per capita
Qatar 137,162 2 Luxembourg 97,639 3 Singapore 83,066 4 Brunei 79,890 5 Kuwait 70,686 6 Norway 67,166 7 United Arab Emirates 66,347 8 San Marino 60,887 9 Switzerland 58,149 — Hong Kong 55,097
Only Luxembourg is in any kind of serious EU-type bloc
You just listed a bunch of oil exporters. Congratulations.
Luxembourg, Singapore, Switzerland and Hong Kong are oil exporters? Who knew?
Comments
And poor numbers for "remain" I think.
Bit of a blow for David H's hopes that Cameron can sell this cr*p to a stupid/naive/uninterested public, certainly.
How can future Tories who voted to accept this vomit of deal criticize EU mass immigration or future EU deals when these people have made the Tory party a pro EU party with labour,snp and lib Dems.
This party diluted the anti EU vote with the pretend outrage of the EU and it's policies on this country,should be easy for a anti EU party to remind the people of Cameron's love in with his party.
Saying that,if Theresa may leads the out campaign could help her leadership credentials and keep the anti EU party at bay.
;-)
However, I suspect the poll is skewed a bit by name-checking Cameron (puts off Labour / SNP / UKIP supporters).
All the same, they're not great numbers for him.
So reading around, acquis communitaire seems to be the chapters - the areas in which national governments via Treaties have granted the EU competence to develop law - generally updated around accessions. ECJ interprets the EU laws so made.
All this lawmaking stems initially from Treaties agreed unanimously, and with whatever opt-outs are signed in to get agreement, from national governments. So still in all of this, the theory is that the UK government (and nation states in general) have the whip hand in what the EU is tasked with running and, in a good many cases, which bits you sign up for.
By signing up to things your nation, willingly and knowingly, agrees to be subject to EU law in that area, and set aside national law. Again, you as a nation have to agree to that, you as a nation are in charge of what you give up. Wishing to duck that responsibility and saying it was the EU wot done it doesn't really wash. The UK bears full responsibility for how the EU relates to the UK.
I recall that ECJ cases have caused dismay, seeming to go beyond their competence and thus subvert this relationship. Has the promotion of ever closer union tipped the balance in cases or has it simply been the old chestnut of the ECJ trying to honestly interpret badly drafted legislation (which can equally be a problem in domestic law)? Actually, if the former is the case, the clarification of what ever closer union can and cannot mean becomes a more significant concession to Cameron than merely a re-statement of meaning - by writing down what 'ever closer union' can and cannot mean in a legal sense, will the ECJ not have to take account of those words if legal representatives of the UK cite them as part of a case?
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/02/02/sometimes-iowa-democrats-award-caucus-delegates-coin-flip/79680342/
I wouldn't ignore it, I'd just treat it with kid gloves. The idea that the median voter might think that Cameron has been "fairly unsuccessful" seems to pass the smell test.
Imagine that. What's the odds?
Well if Cameron cannot reform the EU in these strong circumstances, then that implies that the EU is un-reformable.
That alone should be the warning flag for those who think it is in our interests to remain.
http://www.bleedingheartland.com/2016/01/27/how-the-iowa-caucuses-work-part-1-the-basics/
Its all bitterly disappointing.
Good news for our
Overcrowded schools then,proberly bring kids here with that law.
I don't understand this. If our benefits system is based on residency, how can benefits be paid in respect of non-resident children? Seems an easy thing to fix
Because it's based on residency of the parent receiving the benefit not the children. So a Romanian Dad working in Birmingham can send home child benefit to the rest of his family living in Romania.
More than that I find it a national humiliation...our PM clocking up the airmiles across Europe basically to be told to to eff off...really really poor
new thread
Still damn close though and Sanders could easily have won.
Supremacy of EU courts was never on the table: it's an essential aspect of the EU and to opt out of the ECJ is tantamount to opting out of the EU. If you don't want ECJ decisions to be binding, just be honest and say you're for Leave on grounds of sovereignty.
Human Rights legislation is a red herring. It's a consequence of membership of the Council of Europe, not the EU - and is directly applicable in UK because of a UK law. Yes, the EU is also subject to Human Rights law so there is an element of a back door but nearly every hoo-ha relating to Europe and human rights is to do with the ECHR.
Cameron never mentioned either the CAP or CFP during his Bloomberg speech so they too seem to be on your made-up wishlist.
If you want to have a go at him for objectives not delivered, go back to the original 2013 speech and compare the deal against that - it's not as if you won't have a case. But to set up a straw man undermines your own argument.