politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The EURef campaign looks set to come down to Cameron versus
Comments
-
"Britain can be Great again" will not be taken as a positive message by those of us who think it is currently very "Great" indeed.Mortimer said:SimonStClare said:
Bad idea as Nature abhors a vacuum – if Leave have no answers, the Remain side will fill it.Mortimer said:Increasingly convinced that leave do not need to set out the details of 'if not EU then what?'.
Economics stifled the Scots leaving the Union. Not questions about the pound etc. But the very real fear that a small nation with few income streams would struggle. The U.K. economy has no such concerns.
Painting a positive vision vs Project Fear would be enough amidst the migration and EU sop background.
But how many will understand the details any.SimonStClare said:
Bad idea as Nature abhors a vacuum – if Leave have no answers, the Remain side will fill it.Mortimer said:Increasingly convinced that leave do not need to set out the details of 'if not EU then what?'.
Economics stifled the Scots leaving the Union. Not questions about the pound etc. But the very real fear that a small nation with few income streams would struggle. The U.K. economy has no such concerns.
Painting a positive vision vs Project Fear would be enough amidst the migration and EU sop background.
Leave because we're stronger than most of Europe put together
Leave because the EU needs us more than we need them.
Leave because Britain can be Great again.
Leave because we don't need the bloated bureaucracy of Brussels
Leave because our democracy and legal system is better than Europes.
The vacuum would be remain's inability to counter those arguments.0 -
I think you make a fair point and one that seems quite unpalatable for some to admit.Richard_Nabavi said:This is a fairly balanced assessment IMO:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-architecture-analysis-idUKKCN0VB1UT
To my mind, the one bit of the renegotiation which is better than expected is the protection of non-Eurozone members. The progress on us being stitched up by intergovernmental agreements is particularly good, and doesn't seem to have been noticed by most commentators.
''The European Union formally abandoned on Tuesday the founding principle that all of its members are heading towards ever closer integration, only at different speeds.''
''A legally binding decision up for approval by EU leaders says references in the bloc's founding treaties to an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe "do not compel all member states to aim for a common destination".''
''Britain is already the most semi-detached of EU members. It has opted out of the euro and the Schengen zone of passport-free travel and only participates in judicial and police cooperation on an "a la carte" basis.''
''EU officials are keen to avoid the terms offered to Britain triggering a "me too" wave of efforts by others, such as Poland ... Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Romania and Bulgaria all bound themselves in their EU accession treaties to join the single currency once they meet the economic criteria. Since the euro zone's debt crisis, most have stalled preparations ... At Britain's behest, the text recognises that "not all member states have the euro as their currency" but it avoids undermining the others' obligation to join. Warsaw's new Eurosceptic government has said it does not intend to adopt the euro during its four-year term.''
The article points out that a benefits curb may not matter anyway since we have a buoyant jobs market.
The plain fact is that - ''The deal includes a procedure allowing a country or group of countries to force a special deliberation and additional efforts to find a solution when it feels disadvantaged.'' Its not a veto which will upset some, but leaving aside whether that was ever possible it seems to include a mechanism of 'force'.
The issue of independence from the Eurozone is the principal one for me and I await to see what the financial press and commentators say. Based on what I see very little difference between where we would be if either In the EU or In the EEA.
The Reuters article seems balanced enough covering ups and downs without grinding any axes.
As has become usual in the comments, the outers are just using any issue they can to remove Cameron and turn the tory party into a mirror image of Corbyn Labour.0 -
Good point.Wanderer said:
"Britain can be Great again" will not be taken as a positive message by those of us who think it is currently very "Great" indeed.Mortimer said:SimonStClare said:
Bad idea as Nature abhors a vacuum – if Leave have no answers, the Remain side will fill it.Mortimer said:Increasingly convinced that leave do not need to set out the details of 'if not EU then what?'.
Economics stifled the Scots leaving the Union. Not questions about the pound etc. But the very real fear that a small nation with few income streams would struggle. The U.K. economy has no such concerns.
Painting a positive vision vs Project Fear would be enough amidst the migration and EU sop background.
But how many will understand the details any.SimonStClare said:
Bad idea as Nature abhors a vacuum – if Leave have no answers, the Remain side will fill it.Mortimer said:Increasingly convinced that leave do not need to set out the details of 'if not EU then what?'.
Economics stifled the Scots leaving the Union. Not questions about the pound etc. But the very real fear that a small nation with few income streams would struggle. The U.K. economy has no such concerns.
Painting a positive vision vs Project Fear would be enough amidst the migration and EU sop background.
Leave because we're stronger than most of Europe put together
Leave because the EU needs us more than we need them.
Leave because Britain can be Great again.
Leave because we don't need the bloated bureaucracy of Brussels
Leave because our democracy and legal system is better than Europes.
The vacuum would be remain's inability to counter those arguments.
'Greater' might work.0 -
It's surely not THAT extraordinary for several reasons.SouthamObserver said:It's like I'm looking through the window into a private party in which the guests are kicking the living daylights out of each other. Are the Tories really going to tear themselves to pieces over this? It's extraordinary.
It's a massively important issue to those involved so people are speaking their minds. Why keep quiet now of all moments, if in any way at all you are a politician with any conviction (it seems we must exclude some greasy pole climbers, most notably Teresa May, from this description...)
The Labour party is weak and possibly unelectable, so the risks of appearing divided are lessened
It's over 4 years to an election, so again appearing divided is less of an issue than if we were in Feb 2015
Also I think you are exaggerating a tad to be honest...0 -
Influence ? INFLUENCE ? What fecking influence ?Richard_Nabavi said:I could live with it, in the sense that the economic damage would be minimal, but I don't think the minor advantages are worth the loss of influence and the cost of the transition.
We just told them we wanted some changes or we would leave, and got told to piss off. What do you think they are going to say to us after we vote to remain ? British influence is fantasy land, we had some in the old days, but in the current days of QMV, close to zero.
For example British MEPs opposed 127 budget motions before the EU parliament in the last term, 124 of those still passed. Of the 92 motions of budget control we opposed before the EU parliament, 90 still passed.0 -
Ok, the single market and also in services seem important to you, fair enough.Richard_Nabavi said:
We'd obviously need an agreement giving us full access to the Single Market. For goods, I can't see that being any problem. For services, more of a problem. Could it be done without agreeing to full freedom of movement? Dunno - that is one of the crucial points.Casino_Royale said:Ok. This is a genuine open question (putting aside the ribbing for a second) what would you be looking for in a deal under (3) to make you at least consider it?
I mean, in terms of structure... Economic deals with the EU, trade, migration controls and politics?
We'd obviously have to look very carefully at the position of the City in such a deal. There are potential advantages in leaving the EU, but there are risks as well. The devil would be in the detail. I rather suspect that our EU friends would play hardball on this one in any negotiations.
Given we already have that inside the EU (albeit services market is not complete) what would be the "pull" factor that'd entice you to consider Leave and option (3) ?
I'm struggling to see it to be honest - would it be a fair representation of you to say that if we got really good access to the single market but some big concessions on free migration? And how do you think Leave could present this as the option prior to the vote given the EU could easily scare into Remain by saying they'd never accept it?
Finally, do you agree the City hasn't got much protection in the latest deal?0 -
You just highlighted the very points I’ve been arguing should be the main thrust of the Leave campaign and all of which have been eroded since we joined 40 years ago.Plato_Says said:Those would be my core messages.
I'd add, we will once again control our borders and our judiciary.Mortimer said:SimonStClare said:
Bad idea as Nature abhors a vacuum – if Leave have no answers, the Remain side will fill it.Mortimer said:Increasingly convinced that leave do not need to set out the details of 'if not EU then what?'.
Economics stifled the Scots leaving the Union. Not questions about the pound etc. But the very real fear that a small nation with few income streams would struggle. The U.K. economy has no such concerns.
Painting a positive vision vs Project Fear would be enough amidst the migration and EU sop background.
But how many will understand the details any.SimonStClare said:
Bad idea as Nature abhors a vacuum – if Leave have no answers, the Remain side will fill it.Mortimer said:Increasingly convinced that leave do not need to set out the details of 'if not EU then what?'.
Economics stifled the Scots leaving the Union. Not questions about the pound etc. But the very real fear that a small nation with few income streams would struggle. The U.K. economy has no such concerns.
Painting a positive vision vs Project Fear would be enough amidst the migration and EU sop background.
Leave because we're stronger than most of Europe put together
Leave because the EU needs us more than we need them.
Leave because Britain can be Great again.
Leave because we don't need the bloated bureaucracy of Brussels
Leave because our democracy and legal system is better than Europes.
The vacuum would be remain's inability to counter those arguments.
Edit, my apologies Mr Mortimer, I appear to have replied to Ms Plato's comment instead of yours.0 -
The best stuff I've seen are Twitter posters using major high quality brand logos as endorsements. And that relies entirely on their credibility, not Leave.
Leave EU is smothered in Ukip stuff. Kippers are preaching to the converted here and need to stop it.
Selling a concept is tough, and it's never won on facts or acronyms by those very familiar with minutiae.Mortimer said:
Perhaps we should volunteer our services as PR team for Leave.Plato_Says said:Those would be my core messages.
I'd add, we will once again control our borders and our judiciary.Mortimer said:SimonStClare said:
Bad idea as Nature abhors a vacuum – if Leave have no answers, the Remain side will fill it.Mortimer said:Increasingly convinced that leave do not need to set out the details of 'if not EU then what?'.
Economics stifled the Scots leaving the Union. Not questions about the pound etc. But the very real fear that a small nation with few income streams would struggle. The U.K. economy has no such concerns.
Painting a positive vision vs Project Fear would be enough amidst the migration and EU sop background.
But how many will understand the details any.SimonStClare said:
Bad idea as Nature abhors a vacuum – if Leave have no answers, the Remain side will fill it.Mortimer said:Increasingly convinced that leave do not need to set out the details of 'if not EU then what?'.
Economics stifled the Scots leaving the Union. Not questions about the pound etc. But the very real fear that a small nation with few income streams would struggle. The U.K. economy has no such concerns.
Painting a positive vision vs Project Fear would be enough amidst the migration and EU sop background.
Leave because we're stronger than most of Europe put together
Leave because the EU needs us more than we need them.
Leave because Britain can be Great again.
Leave because we don't need the bloated bureaucracy of Brussels
Leave because our democracy and legal system is better than Europes.
The vacuum would be remain's inability to counter those arguments.
We must be able to do a better job.0 -
My parents are solidly Leave (74 and 70, respectively) and have been for years.Sean_F said:Wanderer said:
Good tip, thanks.peter_from_putney said:It's quite striking how many Tory posters here have indicated their intention to vote for LEAVE. If this were to be replicated throughout the land then you'd have to think that Leave is in with a shout.
Incidentally, an alternative to taking Paddy Powers 5/2 odds against such an outcome, some might be more tempted by Hills' 12/1 against Cameron ceasing to be Tory Party leader during the course of 2016, all the more so with the referendum now due to take place in June, rather than in the autumn. It's difficult to believe he could survive being defeated in a referendum in which he has been so personally involved and it seems even more certain that he wouldn't wish to continue to lead the party in such circumstances.
DYOR.
The movement towards Leave on here is striking. I'm not sure what to read into it though. Posters here are not a bellwether, probably?
My father, who will vote Remain, lamented that all the Conservatives of his generation (he's 75), apart from him, plan to vote Leave. This is only anecdotal evidence, of course. But, they're all well-heeled people who live in Hertfordshire and North London, one of whom comes from France, and another from Czechoslovakia, at least some of whom might be expected to vote Remain.Wanderer said:
Good tip, thanks.peter_from_putney said:It's quite striking how many Tory posters here have indicated their intention to vote for LEAVE. If this were to be replicated throughout the land then you'd have to think that Leave is in with a shout.
Incidentally, an alternative to taking Paddy Powers 5/2 odds against such an outcome, some might be more tempted by Hills' 12/1 against Cameron ceasing to be Tory Party leader during the course of 2016, all the more so with the referendum now due to take place in June, rather than in the autumn. It's difficult to believe he could survive being defeated in a referendum in which he has been so personally involved and it seems even more certain that he wouldn't wish to continue to lead the party in such circumstances.
DYOR.
The movement towards Leave on here is striking. I'm not sure what to read into it though. Posters here are not a bellwether, probably?
They would also never vote UKIP and are loyal Conservatives.
They always vote.
0 -
Not aimed at me, but I'd be surprised if even 15% of the population was enthusiastic about EU membership. More are certainly very opposed. The bit in the middle is what counts, though. We are having this referendum because Dave was scared of UKIP and wanted to keep the Tory right quiet before the GE. There was no clamour for it.Mortimer said:
Nick - do you think the EU is popular, I mean flag waving popular, with more than 15% of the population?NickPalmer said:
I think if we left it'd be awkward and we might find we weren't nearly as free of Europe as we expected, but life would go on. I rather agree with you that staying in and continuing to grumble and snipe from the sidelines may be the worst option, and I suspect quite a few EU leaders feel the same.It is possible - I won't put it more strongly than that - that a big Remain vote will spur British governments to get stuck in more effectively, though no conceivable UK government is going to join Schengen or the Euro any time soon.philiph said:
My preferences are:
1 Leave (but only just)
2 Join in fully - Euro and Schengen
3 Continue in the halfway house we presently dislike and complain about.
0 -
Well, the EU is actually pretty good on Thatcherite principles of no state aid, no discrimination in favour of national companies, and the promotion of competition in services. The EU Postal Directive is an example. The UK won much of the argument in this area (thanks partly to Lord Mandelson, it has to be admitted). If we were to leave, I can see it regressing more towards a Club Med worldview; if we were 'shackled to the corpse' of the EEA, that would not be a good thing for us.Indigo said:Influence ? INFLUENCE ? What fecking influence ?
We just told them we wanted some changes or we would leave, and got told to piss off. What do you think they are going to say to us after we vote to remain ? British influence is fantasy land, we had some in the old days, but in the current days of QMV, close to zero.
For example British MEPs opposed 127 budget motions before the EU parliament in the last term, 124 of those still passed. Of the 92 motions of budget control we opposed before the EU parliament, 90 still passed.0 -
The influence shtick has been exposed here to an extraordinary degree.
If you're told to accept virtually nothing concession wise, what leverage do you have after threatening to leave and asking your citizens?
There's no bluffing here and we still got bugger all.Indigo said:
Influence ? INFLUENCE ? What fecking influence ?Richard_Nabavi said:I could live with it, in the sense that the economic damage would be minimal, but I don't think the minor advantages are worth the loss of influence and the cost of the transition.
We just told them we wanted some changes or we would leave, and got told to piss off. What do you think they are going to say to us after we vote to remain ? British influence is fantasy land, we had some in the old days, but in the current days of QMV, close to zero.
For example British MEPs opposed 127 budget motions before the EU parliament in the last term, 124 of those still passed. Of the 92 motions of budget control we opposed before the EU parliament, 90 still passed.0 -
Many people were tempted by UKIP but voted Conservative at the GE in order to keep out Miliband.. it was a Tory tactic, much talkerd about.. the idea that they are not receptive to Farage, or even more ridiculously consider him "toxic" cannot be reconciled with that factPlato_Says said:
The best stuff I've seen are Twitter posters using major high quality brand logos as endorsements. And that relies entirely on their credibility, not Leave.
Leave EU is smothered in Ukip stuff. Kippers are preaching to the converted here and need to stop it.
Selling a concept is tough, and it's never won on facts or acronyms by those very familiar with minutiae.Mortimer said:
Perhaps we should volunteer our services as PR team for Leave.Plato_Says said:Those would be my core messages.
I'd add, we will once again control our borders and our judiciary.Mortimer said:SimonStClare said:
Bad idea as Nature abhors a vacuum – if Leave have no answers, the Remain side will fill it.Mortimer said:Increasingly convinced that leave do not need to set out the details of 'if not EU then what?'.
Economics stifled the Scots leaving the Union. Not questions about the pound etc. But the very real fear that a small nation with few income streams would struggle. The U.K. economy has no such concerns.
Painting a positive vision vs Project Fear would be enough amidst the migration and EU sop background.
But how many will understand the details any.SimonStClare said:
Bad idea as Nature abhors a vacuum – if Leave have no answers, the Remain side will fill it.Mortimer said:Increasingly convinced that leave do not need to set out the details of 'if not EU then what?'.
Economics stifled the Scots leaving the Union. Not questions about the pound etc. But the very real fear that a small nation with few income streams would struggle. The U.K. economy has no such concerns.
Painting a positive vision vs Project Fear would be enough amidst the migration and EU sop background.
Leave because we're stronger than most of Europe put together
Leave because the EU needs us more than we need them.
Leave because Britain can be Great again.
Leave because we don't need the bloated bureaucracy of Brussels
Leave because our democracy and legal system is better than Europes.
The vacuum would be remain's inability to counter those arguments.
We must be able to do a better job.0 -
Miss Plato, are you suggesting that the veto on the colour of the zips on the gimp suit signifies anything other than negotiating nirvana?
There's no satisfying some people.0 -
2016 has been shocking for celebrity deaths.Scott_P said:Lord Lucan is dead. Long live Lord Lucan
0 -
Cameron's a creature formed of pure PR with no room left for principle or even much ego. That means he doesn't mind being laughed at if it's a step towards getting what he wants. It's all about the long term impact of the message, not the immediate response directed at the messenger. Given that a) we knew he wouldn't get what he insisted was possible and b) he would claim success regardless of how meagre the pickings then it's quite possible he expected this outcome and figured that it was just some necessary short-term pain to get through.SeanT said:
It is notable how badly Cameron managed expectations on the - stop laughing - "deal". They surely wanted and anticipated a better reaction than this outright derision. Cameron is being laughed at. Not good.
This lends more credence to my theory that there was a last minute French spanner in the works. The deal was meant to be better.0 -
My parents would never vote UKIP, either. My mother has long disliked the EU, but favoured staying in because of concerns they would retaliate against it if we left, but now she just takes the view "sod it, let's go."Casino_Royale said:
My parents are solidly Leave (74 and 70, respectively) and have been for years.Sean_F said:Wanderer said:
Good tip, thanks.peter_from_putney said:It's quite striking how many Tory posters here have indicated their intention to vote for LEAVE. If this were to be replicated throughout the land then you'd have to think that Leave is in with a shout.
Incidentally, an alternative to taking Paddy Powers 5/2 odds against such an outcome, some might be more tempted by Hills' 12/1 against Cameron ceasing to be Tory Party leader during the course of 2016, all the more so with the referendum now due to take place in June, rather than in the autumn. It's difficult to believe he could survive being defeated in a referendum in which he has been so personally involved and it seems even more certain that he wouldn't wish to continue to lead the party in such circumstances.
DYOR.
The movement towards Leave on here is striking. I'm not sure what to read into it though. Posters here are not a bellwether, probably?
My father, who will vote Remain, lamented that all the Conservatives of his generation (he's 75), apart from him, plan to vote Leave. This is only anecdotal evidence, of course. But, they're all well-heeled people who live in Hertfordshire and North London, one of whom comes from France, and another from Czechoslovakia, at least some of whom might be expected to vote Remain.Wanderer said:
Good tip, thanks.peter_from_putney said:It's quite striking how many Tory posters here have indicated their intention to vote for LEAVE. If this were to be replicated throughout the land then you'd have to think that Leave is in with a shout.
Incidentally, an alternative to taking Paddy Powers 5/2 odds against such an outcome, some might be more tempted by Hills' 12/1 against Cameron ceasing to be Tory Party leader during the course of 2016, all the more so with the referendum now due to take place in June, rather than in the autumn. It's difficult to believe he could survive being defeated in a referendum in which he has been so personally involved and it seems even more certain that he wouldn't wish to continue to lead the party in such circumstances.
DYOR.
The movement towards Leave on here is striking. I'm not sure what to read into it though. Posters here are not a bellwether, probably?
They would also never vote UKIP and are loyal Conservatives.
They always vote.0 -
He is but you will still vote Remain, won't you?SeanT said:
It is notable how badly Cameron managed expectations on the - stop laughing - "deal". They surely wanted and anticipated a better reaction than this outright derision. Cameron is being laughed at. Not good.Jonathan said:
You know the tories are in trouble when they fall back to blaming blair'n'brown. It's like the old "fatcha" complaint on the left.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's not about the deal. No-one in their right mind was expecting Cameron, with a weak negotiating position and no vetos thanks to Blair and Brown, to be able single-handedly to restructure the EU. I'm surprised that he didn't get more on Benefits, but otherwise the deal is much as expected, a little better on Eurozone protection.Casino_Royale said:
So what's your problem then? Just don't want to be wrong? Obstinate? Devil's advocate? Fatalist? Or just pure loyalty to Cameron? Hate Leavers as a whole?Richard_Nabavi said:
Poppycock. My business is 95%+ with the US, and mostly invoiced in US dollars. We'd actually benefit hugely from the fall in sterling on Brexit.Casino_Royale said:
Richard's business is very dependent on the single market and the EU.
I think he fears it would be disruptive if we Leave and wants certainty and clarity on what would merit the disruption for him before he'd ever consider it.
You know this deal is crap. To your credit, you admitted as much on the Red Card yesterday.
But, as I keep saying, it's not the problems of the EU that I need convincing about, it's the proposed solution of leaving, which doesn't seem to actually work.
Cameron raised expectations on the eurosceptic right deliberately to shut them up during the general election. He was very successful.
This lends more credence to my theory that there was a last minute French spanner in the works. The deal was meant to be better.0 -
I think we have an option on ball gags too, but only using QMV.Morris_Dancer said:
Miss Plato, are you suggesting that the veto on the colour of the zips on the gimp suit signifies anything other than negotiating nirvana?
There's no satisfying some people.0 -
I didn't realise there was a pair of islands that looked exactly like Britain and Ireland off of Grimsby - you'd think they'd make more of that.Pauly said:Another off-topic:
UK to reclaim its title as a world power with... the worlds largest offshore wind farm!
"Greenest government ever"!
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/worlds-largest-offshore-wind-farm-to-be-built-in-the-uk0 -
Maybe a French spanner. But also don't underestimate the lengths to which Cameron would go to win an election. He is pretty ruthless.SeanT said:
It is notable how badly Cameron managed expectations on the - stop laughing - "deal". They surely wanted and anticipated a better reaction than this outright derision. Cameron is being laughed at. Not good.Jonathan said:
You know the tories are in trouble when they fall back to blaming blair'n'brown. It's like the old "fatcha" complaint on the left.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's not about the deal. No-one in their right mind was expecting Cameron, with a weak negotiating position and no vetos thanks to Blair and Brown, to be able single-handedly to restructure the EU. I'm surprised that he didn't get more on Benefits, but otherwise the deal is much as expected, a little better on Eurozone protection.Casino_Royale said:
So what's your problem then? Just don't want to be wrong? Obstinate? Devil's advocate? Fatalist? Or just pure loyalty to Cameron? Hate Leavers as a whole?Richard_Nabavi said:
Poppycock. My business is 95%+ with the US, and mostly invoiced in US dollars. We'd actually benefit hugely from the fall in sterling on Brexit.Casino_Royale said:
Richard's business is very dependent on the single market and the EU.
I think he fears it would be disruptive if we Leave and wants certainty and clarity on what would merit the disruption for him before he'd ever consider it.
You know this deal is crap. To your credit, you admitted as much on the Red Card yesterday.
But, as I keep saying, it's not the problems of the EU that I need convincing about, it's the proposed solution of leaving, which doesn't seem to actually work.
Cameron raised expectations on the eurosceptic right deliberately to shut them up during the general election. He was very successful.
This lends more credence to my theory that there was a last minute French spanner in the works. The deal was meant to be better.
This time last year the election was far from in the bag. It was rational to raise expectations beyond what he might deliver.
With Corbyn he no longer needs the Eurosceptic right in the tent. They can be quite easily dumped. This is what is happening. Brutal, but hardly a surprise.
0 -
It wouldn't need much of a pull factor. In an ideal world I'd like to be free of the political union stuff, the CAP, CFP, together with doing something about the excessive levels of migration. If that could all be done without economic damage I'd be happy. So, yes, your representation is fair.Casino_Royale said:Ok, the single market and also in services seem important to you, fair enough.
Given we already have that inside the EU (albeit services market is not complete) what would be the "pull" factor that'd entice you to consider Leave and option (3) ?
I'm struggling to see it to be honest - would it be a fair representation of you to say that if we got really good access to the single market but some big concessions on free migration? And how do you think Leave could present this as the option prior to the vote given the EU could easily scare into Remain by saying they'd never accept it?
Finally, do you agree the City hasn't got much protection in the latest deal?
Could Leave propose this? No, I don't think so, not now. Too late, it would require too much background work.
On the last point, I think the City has got some protection in the deal. It's not as good as we could have got before throwing away our vetos, but it's something.0 -
Office straw poll:
Colleague voting out because it'll (possibly) mean no more intrastat returns.
4 - 0 to leave.0 -
Dave knows that if he is only fighting UKIP and the Tory right he is going to win. Anyone who did not anticipate that things would play out how they have is a bit of a fool, frankly.Polruan said:
Cameron's a creature formed of pure PR with no room left for principle or even much ego. That means he doesn't mind being laughed at if it's a step towards getting what he wants. It's all about the long term impact of the message, not the immediate response directed at the messenger. Given that a) we knew he wouldn't get what he insisted was possible and b) he would claim success regardless of how meagre the pickings then it's quite possible he expected this outcome and figured that it was just some necessary short-term pain to get through.SeanT said:
It is notable how badly Cameron managed expectations on the - stop laughing - "deal". They surely wanted and anticipated a better reaction than this outright derision. Cameron is being laughed at. Not good.
This lends more credence to my theory that there was a last minute French spanner in the works. The deal was meant to be better.
0 -
LOL! He or she obviously isn't old enough to remember pre-EU forms.Pulpstar said:Colleague voting out because it'll (possibly) mean no more intrastat returns..
0 -
Thanks Richard, that's helpful.Richard_Nabavi said:
It wouldn't need much of a pull factor. In an ideal world I'd like to be free of the political union stuff, the CAP, CFP, together with doing something about the excessive levels of migration. If that could all be done without economic damage I'd be happy. So, yes, your representation is fair.Casino_Royale said:Ok, the single market and also in services seem important to you, fair enough.
Given we already have that inside the EU (albeit services market is not complete) what would be the "pull" factor that'd entice you to consider Leave and option (3) ?
I'm struggling to see it to be honest - would it be a fair representation of you to say that if we got really good access to the single market but some big concessions on free migration? And how do you think Leave could present this as the option prior to the vote given the EU could easily scare into Remain by saying they'd never accept it?
Finally, do you agree the City hasn't got much protection in the latest deal?
Could Leave propose this? No, I don't think so, not now. Too late, it would require too much background work.
On the last point, I think the City has got some protection in the deal. It's not as good as we could have got before throwing away our vetos, but it's something.
I've never heard this from you in these terms - it's interesting to hear your views.
The thing is, I almost entirely agree with you, but think we must vote Leave to get it. I do think you're a little bit too fatalist about the UK, the EU and its chances but don't know how to go about changing your mind given what you've said.
Funny how two people who agree can reach entirely different conclusions on the course of action to take.0 -
The MP for Yeovil is a Tory.
May 2015 still takes some getting used to.0 -
'I think the City has got some protection in the deal'
Can you please explain to us what these protections are?0 -
Theresa May must be done for next leader now?? Not getting the oxygen of leading a campaign, a deal which won't cut immigration and unable to blame the EU as she backs membership...0
-
I think he was banking on a 2nd coalition and an even more stacked-deck EU referendum using Clegg as an excuse.SeanT said:
Also, Cameron never expected to win a majority. He never thought he'd have to deliver a referendumSouthamObserver said:
Not aimed at me, but I'd be surprised if even 15% of the population was enthusiastic about EU membership. More are certainly very opposed. The bit in the middle is what counts, though. We are having this referendum because Dave was scared of UKIP and wanted to keep the Tory right quiet before the GE. There was no clamour for it.Mortimer said:
Nick - do you think the EU is popular, I mean flag waving popular, with more than 15% of the population?NickPalmer said:
I think if we left it'd be awkward and we might find we weren't nearly as free of Europe as we expected, but life would go on. I rather agree with you that staying in and continuing to grumble and snipe from the sidelines may be the worst option, and I suspect quite a few EU leaders feel the same.It is possible - I won't put it more strongly than that - that a big Remain vote will spur British governments to get stuck in more effectively, though no conceivable UK government is going to join Schengen or the Euro any time soon.philiph said:
My preferences are:
1 Leave (but only just)
2 Join in fully - Euro and Schengen
3 Continue in the halfway house we presently dislike and complain about.
Incidentally, there should be a PB neologism for that sad and rare moment when an otherwise respected PB-er adopts a position so craven, hypocritical and incoherent they are permanently devalued as commenters.
It clearly happened to NPXMP when he chose to support Corbyn. I submit it is happening to Richard Nabavi now.
It would avoided a lot of internal party trouble as he could have blamed the crappy bits on the LDs.0 -
"Sod it, let's go."Sean_F said:
My parents would never vote UKIP, either. My mother has long disliked the EU, but favoured staying in because of concerns they would retaliate against it if we left, but now she just takes the view "sod it, let's go."
Best LEAVE slogan yet.0 -
Has Corbyn sat on his glasses?
They're wonky.
Like his jacket...
:-)0 -
Why isn't Corbyn asking about the EU.
All six questions should have been about the EU and discomfiting Dave.
#JezIsCrap0 -
May has left herself just enough weasel word room to change her mind in 2 weeks time.NorfolkTilIDie said:Theresa May must be done for next leader now?? Not getting the oxygen of leading a campaign, a deal which won't cut immigration and unable to blame the EU as she backs membership...
0 -
George Osborne @George_Osborne 19m19 minutes ago
Great prize on offer in referendum: settling our membership of a reformed and more competitive EU #EUReform
I make no further comment...0 -
This cuts both ways. The Kipper waverers voting Conservative in 2015 because they either wanted a referendum, or didn't want Ed, will look at the implausibility of a Corbyn victory and decide they don't really need to be loyal to Dave any more and will start to hawk their vote around in other parties. If Labour unexpected come to their senses, the Tories might find those people comfortable with their new friends and disinclined to come back.Jonathan said:With Corbyn he no longer needs the Eurosceptic right in the tent. They can be quite easily dumped. This is what is happening. Brutal, but hardly a surprise.
0 -
GOWNBPMrottenborough said:George Osborne @George_Osborne 19m19 minutes ago
Great prize on offer in referendum: settling our membership of a reformed and more competitive EU #EUReform
I make no further comment...0 -
To quote John Cooper Clarke:rottenborough said:George Osborne @George_Osborne 19m19 minutes ago
Great prize on offer in referendum: settling our membership of a reformed and more competitive EU #EUReform
I make no further comment...
"No-one's got a good for you. But I have. Twat...."0 -
Legal acts, including intergovernmental agreements between Member States, directly linked to the functioning of the euro area shall respect the internal market or economic, social and territorial cohesion, and shall not constitute a barrier to or discrimination in trade between Member States. These acts shall respect the competences, rights and obligations of Member States whose currency is not the euro.runnymede said:'I think the City has got some protection in the deal'
Can you please explain to us what these protections are?
...
Union law on the banking union conferring upon the European Central Bank, the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, authority over credit institutions is applicable only to credit institutions located in Member States whose currency is the euro or in Member States that have concluded with the European Central Bank a close cooperation agreement on prudential supervision, in accordance with relevant EU acquis.
2. ... Substantive Union law, including the single rulebook concerning prudential requirements for credit institutions or other legislative measures to be adopted for the purpose of safeguarding financial stability, may need to be conceived in a more uniform manner when it is to be applied by the European Central Bank in the exercise of its functions of single supervisor, or by the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, than when it is to be applied by national authorities of Member States that do not take part in the banking union. To this end, different sets of Union rules may have to be adopted in secondary law, thus contributing to financial stability.
3. Emergency and crisis measures addressed to safeguarding the financial stability of the euro area will not entail budgetary responsibility for Member States whose currency is not the euro, or, as the case may be, for those not participating in the banking union.
4. The implementation of measures, including the supervision or resolution of financial institutions and markets, and macro-prudential responsibilities, to be taken in view of preserving the financial stability of Member States whose currency is not the euro is a matter for their own authorities, unless such Member States wish to join common mechanisms open to their participation.0 -
Cameron probably thinks it is a pile of meh but if he says that he has to back Leave. If he wants to continue backing Remain he has to say it's a good deal. And he has to make a choice. Possibly everyone else in the country can be on the fence but not him.SeanT said:
I genuinely don't know. You can believe me or not, but I am truly undecided. I switch every hour (I'm sure you can believe that).
Since the non-deal I've definitely moved closer to LEAVE. I really wanted, and expected, Cameron to bring home something (esp on the City); I knew it was largely a charade but I thought they were at least serious about protecting London and our most profitable industry. But this??
Depressingly poor. And I despise Cameron for trying to pretend it is anything but a pile of meh.0 -
It's his PMQs wardrobe. Never seen him in another one.Bob__Sykes said:
Has Corbyn sat on his glasses?
They're wonky.
Like his jacket...
:-)0 -
The charitable view is that he doesn't want to interrupt his enemy while he's busy making a mistake. The real answer I guess is that to do anything other than to express unconditional support for the EU would be to give rise to a new raft of news cycles of unnamed senior Labour figures briefing against his "extreme" views and their incompatibility with the PLP.TheScreamingEagles said:Why isn't Corbyn asking about the EU.
All six questions should have been about the EU and discomfiting Dave.
#JezIsCrap0 -
As I predicted yesterday. Another open goal missed by sound of it. Have we got to price of stamps yet?TheScreamingEagles said:Why isn't Corbyn asking about the EU.
All six questions should have been about the EU and discomfiting Dave.
#JezIsCrap0 -
Teresa May next to Hammond next to Cameron - statement to remainAlistair said:
May has left herself just enough weasel word room to change her mind in 2 weeks time.NorfolkTilIDie said:Theresa May must be done for next leader now?? Not getting the oxygen of leading a campaign, a deal which won't cut immigration and unable to blame the EU as she backs membership...
0 -
I have to admit that is good.MarqueeMark said:
"Sod it, let's go."Sean_F said:
My parents would never vote UKIP, either. My mother has long disliked the EU, but favoured staying in because of concerns they would retaliate against it if we left, but now she just takes the view "sod it, let's go."
Best LEAVE slogan yet.0 -
I didn't think it was possible...but Corbyn is actually worse this week than all the previous weeks..0
-
It looks like a majority on PB, plus one or two mums and dads and work colleagues are pro Leave.Pulpstar said:Office straw poll:
Colleague voting out because it'll (possibly) mean no more intrastat returns.
4 - 0 to leave.
Nevertheless I predict Remain will win 57 to 43.0 -
Exactly where I am. I nearly joined "Vote Leave" yesterday. This morning I'm all Europhilic again.SeanT said:
I genuinely don't know. You can believe me or not, but I am truly undecided. I switch every hour (I'm sure you can believe that).
Since the non-deal I've definitely moved closer to LEAVE. I really wanted, and expected, Cameron to bring home something (esp on the City); I knew it was largely a charade but I thought they were at least serious about protecting London and our most profitable industry. But this??
Depressingly poor. And I despise Cameron for trying to pretend it is anything but a pile of meh.
I expect me and Sean are like millions of others. Moderate, cautious and broadly conservative in outlook, yet positive and welcoming towards our European allies and cousins, instinctively wanting to remain in the EU, but seething within at the continued incompetence, power-grabbing and money-spunking tendencies of the EU and the vast bureaucracy that goes with it - but not sure where the balance between sticking with all that and the uncertainties of going it alone actually rests.0 -
Both Corbyn and Cameron are having false teeth issues.richardDodd said:
I didn't think it was possible...but Corbyn is actually worse this week than all the previous weeks..
0 -
There must be two very different versions of the preliminary Tusk proposals doing the rounds.rottenborough said:George Osborne @George_Osborne 19m19 minutes ago
Great prize on offer in referendum: settling our membership of a reformed and more competitive EU #EUReform0 -
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 44 secs44 seconds ago
Ouch. Cameron points out Corbyn not quick on his feet. "I think the cogs need to turn a little bit faster".#pmqs
FLASHMAN!!
0 -
Ironically very close to the motto (and title of a book by) that arch europhile, Richard Branson.MarqueeMark said:
"Sod it, let's go."Sean_F said:
My parents would never vote UKIP, either. My mother has long disliked the EU, but favoured staying in because of concerns they would retaliate against it if we left, but now she just takes the view "sod it, let's go."
Best LEAVE slogan yet.
I read his book, its one of the reasons I am in the Philippines now
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Screw-It-Lets-Do-Lessons/dp/07535109950 -
Dave is killing Jezza on Wales NHS0
-
He does have a blue suit. Looks quite smart in it, by his standards.Plato_Says said:It's his PMQs wardrobe. Never seen him in another one.
Bob__Sykes said:Has Corbyn sat on his glasses?
They're wonky.
Like his jacket...
:-)
Today it's back to the old comfort zone and the Mr Bean ensemble....0 -
Without wanting to come over all Peter Hitchens I think it's highly debatable that Britain survived the 20th century in tact. We took some strategically disastrous decisions for dogmatic reasons and then rationalised them self-righteously after the fact.Cyclefree said:@AlastairMeeks
We take the view that the best defence against the virus of extremism is a strong healthy liberal Parliamentary democracy in a nation state. And that is true. And it worked for us. Britain survived many of the stresses and strains of the 20th century in part precisely because of its political and social structures. Our nation and our Parliamentary democracy were tested and not found wanting.
In some ways the EU has learnt one great virtue from us with respect to constitutional arrangements: if it's broken, don't fix it, fudge it. We've managed to muddle through with all of the flaws of our system, our imperfectly united kingdom, our anachronisms, precisely because coming up with something better has never been a sufficiently high political priority for anything meaningful to happen.0 -
I'm Remain. But a deeply unhappy one. The Euro is f-ing economic disaster. But nothing UK does at moment can undo it until the rest of Europe comes to its senses.logical_song said:
It looks like a majority on PB, plus one or two mums and dads and work colleagues are pro Leave.Pulpstar said:Office straw poll:
Colleague voting out because it'll (possibly) mean no more intrastat returns.
4 - 0 to leave.
Nevertheless I predict Remain will win 57 to 43.0 -
Most likely, I'd have thought, is that he really doesn't care about the EU very much either way.Polruan said:
The charitable view is that he doesn't want to interrupt his enemy while he's busy making a mistake. The real answer I guess is that to do anything other than to express unconditional support for the EU would be to give rise to a new raft of news cycles of unnamed senior Labour figures briefing against his "extreme" views and their incompatibility with the PLP.TheScreamingEagles said:Why isn't Corbyn asking about the EU.
All six questions should have been about the EU and discomfiting Dave.
#JezIsCrap
0 -
Cameron getting the tone horribly wrong on that last question about welfare.0
-
He keeps that for Sunday best on MarrBob__Sykes said:
He does have a blue suit. Looks quite smart in it, by his standards.Plato_Says said:It's his PMQs wardrobe. Never seen him in another one.
Bob__Sykes said:Has Corbyn sat on his glasses?
They're wonky.
Like his jacket...
:-)
Today it's back to the old comfort zone and the Mr Bean ensemble....0 -
Sounds like you and Mr Knox are stuck in victimhood but are tempted at the thought of standing on your own two feet and controlling your own future. Courage!Bob__Sykes said:
Exactly where I am. I nearly joined "Vote Leave" yesterday. This morning I'm all Europhilic again.SeanT said:
I genuinely don't know. You can believe me or not, but I am truly undecided. I switch every hour (I'm sure you can believe that).
Since the non-deal I've definitely moved closer to LEAVE. I really wanted, and expected, Cameron to bring home something (esp on the City); I knew it was largely a charade but I thought they were at least serious about protecting London and our most profitable industry. But this??
Depressingly poor. And I despise Cameron for trying to pretend it is anything but a pile of meh.
I expect me and Sean are like millions of others. Moderate, cautious and broadly conservative in outlook, yet positive and welcoming towards our European allies and cousins, instinctively wanting to remain in the EU, but seething within at the continued incompetence, power-grabbing and money-spunking tendencies of the EU and the vast bureaucracy that goes with it - but not sure where the balance between sticking with all that and the uncertainties of going it alone actually rests.0 -
Except, the UK voting to Leave is about the one thing that could bring it to its senses....rottenborough said:
I'm Remain. But a deeply unhappy one. The Euro is f-ing economic disaster. But nothing UK does at moment can undo it until the rest of Europe comes to its senses.logical_song said:
It looks like a majority on PB, plus one or two mums and dads and work colleagues are pro Leave.Pulpstar said:Office straw poll:
Colleague voting out because it'll (possibly) mean no more intrastat returns.
4 - 0 to leave.
Nevertheless I predict Remain will win 57 to 43.0 -
I'm strangely reminded of Peter Mandelson's "nowhere else to go” comment. Although given UKIP's current state that might be true at the moment.rottenborough said:George Osborne @George_Osborne 19m19 minutes ago
Great prize on offer in referendum: settling our membership of a reformed and more competitive EU #EUReform
I make no further comment...0 -
The Hodge review is in:
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago
Given the context, that was easily Corbyn's worst performance since becoming leader.0 -
Angus Robertson says Scots are "too stupid" to vote in June...0
-
Yes yes yes, but where is the meat. That's a letter, it's effectively warm words, it might even get shown around the Council and get approving nods, but its still a letter and still warm words. The the extent that is says anything at all, which isn't a lot, its not binding on anyone, and absolutely not on their successors. It will get forgotten about the moment it becomes inconvenient, at which point Dave will adopt that "sorry chaps I tried my best" look I am sure. The small bits that have any meaning will get shredded by the ECJ which rules on on the basis of the treaties, and with the aim of furthering, wait for it.... ever closer union.Richard_Nabavi said:
... big quote from the letter snipped ...runnymede said:'I think the City has got some protection in the deal'
Can you please explain to us what these protections are?
The Dublin Agreement got dropped in half a second when it became inconvenient, what makes you think this sort of warm wordery will last any longer?
0 -
The UK clearly didn't survive even the first quarter of the 20th century intact.williamglenn said:
Without wanting to come over all Peter Hitchens I think it's highly debatable that Britain survived the 20th century in tact. We took some strategically disastrous decisions for dogmatic reasons and then rationalised them self-righteously after the fact.Cyclefree said:@AlastairMeeks
We take the view that the best defence against the virus of extremism is a strong healthy liberal Parliamentary democracy in a nation state. And that is true. And it worked for us. Britain survived many of the stresses and strains of the 20th century in part precisely because of its political and social structures. Our nation and our Parliamentary democracy were tested and not found wanting.
In some ways the EU has learnt one great virtue from us with respect to constitutional arrangements: if it's broken, don't fix it, fudge it. We've managed to muddle through with all of the flaws of our system, our imperfectly united kingdom, our anachronisms, precisely because coming up with something better has never been a sufficiently high political priority for anything meaningful to happen.
It's a good point about fudge. It puzzles me when people complain that the EU fudges, is inconsistent, kicks the can down the road. These are things that we see as virtues in our own history. Or, rather, some of us do, which is perhaps the point.0 -
Possibly, afraid I'm not convinced so far. Electorates in Euro zone countries electing governments who want out of Euro might be the way forward. But I fear these will end up being far-right ones.MarqueeMark said:
Except, the UK voting to Leave is about the one thing that could bring it to its senses....rottenborough said:
I'm Remain. But a deeply unhappy one. The Euro is f-ing economic disaster. But nothing UK does at moment can undo it until the rest of Europe comes to its senses.logical_song said:
It looks like a majority on PB, plus one or two mums and dads and work colleagues are pro Leave.Pulpstar said:Office straw poll:
Colleague voting out because it'll (possibly) mean no more intrastat returns.
4 - 0 to leave.
Nevertheless I predict Remain will win 57 to 43.0 -
Richard Nabavi quotes a wall of text from the draft memo on currency treatment but strangely missed out the introductory paragraph. Why would he possibly exclude this line?
"Any difference of treatment [between member states of different currencies] must be based on objective reasons."
He literally started quoting from the next sentence because that line undoes his whole argument.0 -
David Cameron says he can "guarantee" the EU referendum will not take place within 6 weeks of the May elections. That leaves June 23 free.0
-
I think you are right that the French resisted a better deal, they know that if we were given a veto (or something similar) on FinReg it would allow us to opt-out of most of the stupid regulations coming out of Brussels and our financial services sector would be much more competitive than Paris.SeanT said:
It is notable how badly Cameron managed expectations on the - stop laughing - "deal". They surely wanted and anticipated a better reaction than this outright derision. Cameron is being laughed at. Not good.Jonathan said:
You know the tories are in trouble when they fall back to blaming blair'n'brown. It's like the old "fatcha" complaint on the left.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's not about the deal. No-one in their right mind was expecting Cameron, with a weak negotiating position and no vetos thanks to Blair and Brown, to be able single-handedly to restructure the EU. I'm surprised that he didn't get more on Benefits, but otherwise the deal is much as expected, a little better on Eurozone protection.Casino_Royale said:
So what's your problem then? Just don't want to be wrong? Obstinate? Devil's advocate? Fatalist? Or just pure loyalty to Cameron? Hate Leavers as a whole?Richard_Nabavi said:
Poppycock. My business is 95%+ with the US, and mostly invoiced in US dollars. We'd actually benefit hugely from the fall in sterling on Brexit.Casino_Royale said:
Richard's business is very dependent on the single market and the EU.
I think he fears it would be disruptive if we Leave and wants certainty and clarity on what would merit the disruption for him before he'd ever consider it.
You know this deal is crap. To your credit, you admitted as much on the Red Card yesterday.
But, as I keep saying, it's not the problems of the EU that I need convincing about, it's the proposed solution of leaving, which doesn't seem to actually work.
Cameron raised expectations on the eurosceptic right deliberately to shut them up during the general election. He was very successful.
This lends more credence to my theory that there was a last minute French spanner in the works. The deal was meant to be better.0 -
He was once anti-EU which wouldn't help if Remain try to portray Leavers as some sort of out of touch headbangers, which they probably will.SouthamObserver said:
Most likely, I'd have thought, is that he really doesn't care about the EU very much either way.Polruan said:
The charitable view is that he doesn't want to interrupt his enemy while he's busy making a mistake. The real answer I guess is that to do anything other than to express unconditional support for the EU would be to give rise to a new raft of news cycles of unnamed senior Labour figures briefing against his "extreme" views and their incompatibility with the PLP.TheScreamingEagles said:Why isn't Corbyn asking about the EU.
All six questions should have been about the EU and discomfiting Dave.
#JezIsCrap0 -
Of course it's not yet agreed, but assuming it does get agreed , the proposal is to make it a binding document:Indigo said:Yes yes yes, but where is the meat. That's a letter, it's effectively warm words, it might even get shown around the Council and get approving nods, but its still a letter and still warm words. The the extent that is says anything at all, which isn't a lot, its not binding on anyone, and absolutely not on their successors.
Most of the substance of this proposal takes the form of a legally binding Decision of the Heads of State or Governments. We should also be prepared to discuss the possible incorporation of the substance of a few elements covered by the Decision into the Treaties at the time of their next revision.
0 -
Possibly true, although he's mildly-anti, it's a long way down the list of things on which he disagrees with PLP orthodoxy and even Jezza has a limit to how many irrelevant fights he can pick simultaneously. Which is a shame given that this one's actually quite important.SouthamObserver said:
Most likely, I'd have thought, is that he really doesn't care about the EU very much either way.Polruan said:
The charitable view is that he doesn't want to interrupt his enemy while he's busy making a mistake. The real answer I guess is that to do anything other than to express unconditional support for the EU would be to give rise to a new raft of news cycles of unnamed senior Labour figures briefing against his "extreme" views and their incompatibility with the PLP.TheScreamingEagles said:Why isn't Corbyn asking about the EU.
All six questions should have been about the EU and discomfiting Dave.
#JezIsCrap0 -
Nonsense. Of course Eurozone countries will be treated differently on objective reasons. The only way that could not be so would be if we were all members of the Eurozone.NorfolkTilIDie said:Richard Nabavi quotes a wall of text from the draft memo on currency treatment but strangely missed out the introductory paragraph. Why would he possibly exclude this line?
"Any difference of treatment [between member states of different currencies] must be based on objective reasons."
He literally started quoting from the next sentence because that line undoes his whole argument.0 -
OK Richard - now explain to us how that cut and paste chunk differs from the current position.
And how it fits with the bit you missed out, i.e. that non-euro members cannot veto decisions made by eurozone ones
'Member States whose currency is not the euro shall not impede the implementation of legal acts directly linked to the functioning of the euro area and shall refrain from measures which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of the economic and monetary union.'
....and that discrimination is OK as long as it is on 'objective' grounds.
These two get out clauses make a mockery of your claims.0 -
I must admit, I read through this bit first time as just some clarification separating Eurozone and non-Eurozone countries, but I take it you are reading as potentially a fairly wide-ranging opt-out from Financial Services regulation by the EU (although point 2 alludes that a rule set would still apply in some manner)?Richard_Nabavi said:
Legal acts, including intergovernmental agreements between Member States, directly linked to the functioning of the euro area shall respect the internal market or economic, social and territorial cohesion, and shall not constitute a barrier to or discrimination in trade between Member States. These acts shall respect the competences, rights and obligations of Member States whose currency is not the euro.runnymede said:'I think the City has got some protection in the deal'
Can you please explain to us what these protections are?
...
Union law on the banking union conferring upon the European Central Bank, the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, authority over credit institutions is applicable only to credit institutions located in Member States whose currency is the euro or in Member States that have concluded with the European Central Bank a close cooperation agreement on prudential supervision, in accordance with relevant EU acquis.
2. ... Substantive Union law, including the single rulebook concerning prudential requirements for credit institutions or other legislative measures to be adopted for the purpose of safeguarding financial stability, may need to be conceived in a more uniform manner when it is to be applied by the European Central Bank in the exercise of its functions of single supervisor, or by the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, than when it is to be applied by national authorities of Member States that do not take part in the banking union. To this end, different sets of Union rules may have to be adopted in secondary law, thus contributing to financial stability.
3. Emergency and crisis measures addressed to safeguarding the financial stability of the euro area will not entail budgetary responsibility for Member States whose currency is not the euro, or, as the case may be, for those not participating in the banking union.
4. The implementation of measures, including the supervision or resolution of financial institutions and markets, and macro-prudential responsibilities, to be taken in view of preserving the financial stability of Member States whose currency is not the euro is a matter for their own authorities, unless such Member States wish to join common mechanisms open to their participation.0 -
Only for those who think the EU is an organisation which acts in bad faith.runnymede said:OK Richard - now explain to us how that cut and paste chunk differs from the current position.
And how it fits with the bit you missed out, i.e. that non-euro members cannot veto decisions made by eurozone ones
'Member States whose currency is not the euro shall not impede the implementation of legal acts directly linked to the functioning of the euro area and shall refrain from measures which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of the economic and monetary union.'
....and that discrimination is OK as long as it is on 'objective' grounds.
These two get out clauses make a mockery of your claims.
To the extent that they are right, I still don't understand how your favoured proposal of EEA membership, where they could still shaft us, with us having zero say, and wouldn't even have to justify it to anyone or defend it in the ECJ, would be better.0 -
PFI, Labour its part in its set up. Not a wise question from Stella Creasey.0
-
The Electoral Commission won't like it, or any date before mid-September, and if we are lucky someone might file for a Judicial Review on an early date on that basisPlato_Says said:David Cameron says he can "guarantee" the EU referendum will not take place within 6 weeks of the May elections. That leaves June 23 free.
0 -
Richard Nabavi also cut out the paragraphs saying that non-Euro states aren't allowed a say in future Eurozone integration. And even his middle paragraph is completely meaningless. Substantive union law 'may need to be conceived in a more uniform manner' in Euro states than non-Euro states?? Thats a legal protection he is happy with?0
-
Hmm..Bob__Sykes said:SeanT said:
I genuinely don't know. You can believe me or not, but I am truly undecided. I switch every hour (I'm sure you can believe that).
Since the non-deal I've definitely moved closer to LEAVE. I really wanted, and expected, Cameron to bring home something (esp on the City); I knew it was largely a charade but I thought they were at least serious about protecting London and our most profitable industry. But this??
Depressingly poor. And I despise Cameron for trying to pretend it is anything but a pile of meh.
I expect me and Sean are like millions of others. Moderate, cautious and broadly conservative in outlook0 -
One of those "objective reasons" will inevitably be, not being in the Eurozone, which makes the whole thing worthless.Richard_Nabavi said:
Nonsense. Of course Eurozone countries will be treated differently on objective reasons. The only way that could not be so would be if we were all members of the Eurozone.NorfolkTilIDie said:Richard Nabavi quotes a wall of text from the draft memo on currency treatment but strangely missed out the introductory paragraph. Why would he possibly exclude this line?
"Any difference of treatment [between member states of different currencies] must be based on objective reasons."
He literally started quoting from the next sentence because that line undoes his whole argument.0 -
Yes, plus the bit about 'intergovernmental agreements', which would give us some protection against stitch-ups outside the EU formal framework.Pro_Rata said:I must admit, I read through this bit first time as just some clarification separating Eurozone and non-Eurozone countries, but I take it you are reading as potentially a fairly wide-ranging opt-out from Financial Services regulation by the EU (although point 2 alludes that a rule set would still apply in some manner)?
0 -
Beats Blackpool by look of it.SeanT said:If anyone needs cheering up, I've just been told I'm staying here in March.
http://www.comohotels.com/umapunakha/
Then I'm staying here.
http://www.comohotels.com/umaparo/?gclid=CMauv_rL28oCFUTnwgodqsUKZw
Well, it cheered me up, anyway.0 -
Paul Waugh
.@stellacreasy just found out the hard way that pmqs isn't the best forum to make nuanced points about failings of your own party's policies0 -
A bold claim indeed.rottenborough said:The Hodge review is in:
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago
Given the context, that was easily Corbyn's worst performance since becoming leader.0 -
People have been pissing on about the EU for my whole adult life and I'm 50. How can we possibly need more time? We could have the referendum tomorrow for all the light that will be shed during the campaign.Indigo said:
The Electoral Commission won't like it, or any date before mid-September, and if we are lucky someone might file for a Judicial Review on an early date on that basisPlato_Says said:David Cameron says he can "guarantee" the EU referendum will not take place within 6 weeks of the May elections. That leaves June 23 free.
0 -
But literally any argument could be claimed to be 'objective reasons', thus negating rest of point 1. Point 2 is just some 'mays' so meaningless. 3 is something that had already been agreed but ignored in last Greek bailout.Richard_Nabavi said:
Nonsense. Of course Eurozone countries will be treated differently on objective reasons. The only way that could not be so would be if we were all members of the Eurozone.NorfolkTilIDie said:Richard Nabavi quotes a wall of text from the draft memo on currency treatment but strangely missed out the introductory paragraph. Why would he possibly exclude this line?
"Any difference of treatment [between member states of different currencies] must be based on objective reasons."
He literally started quoting from the next sentence because that line undoes his whole argument.
0 -
"legally binding Decision of the Heads of State or Governments" you mean like the Dublin Accord, or the Schengen Agreement ?Richard_Nabavi said:
Of course it's not yet agreed, but assuming it does get agreed , the proposal is to make it a binding document:Indigo said:Yes yes yes, but where is the meat. That's a letter, it's effectively warm words, it might even get shown around the Council and get approving nods, but its still a letter and still warm words. The the extent that is says anything at all, which isn't a lot, its not binding on anyone, and absolutely not on their successors.
Most of the substance of this proposal takes the form of a legally binding Decision of the Heads of State or Governments. We should also be prepared to discuss the possible incorporation of the substance of a few elements covered by the Decision into the Treaties at the time of their next revision.0 -
I don't want to DavidL the England cricket team, but I'm going to back England to win the World T20 tournament.
You can get 8/1 with some bookies.0 -
Dave is desperate to get the vote through before there is a migrant crisis this summer. This is wholly disingenuous, it's trying to get the public to vote to stay in the EU before one of the major problems of being in the EU makes itself felt. I fail to see why anyone should feel the need to help him in this deception.Wanderer said:
People have been pissing on about the EU for my whole adult life and I'm 50. How can we possibly need more time? We could have the referendum tomorrow for all the light that will be shed during the campaign.Indigo said:
The Electoral Commission won't like it, or any date before mid-September, and if we are lucky someone might file for a Judicial Review on an early date on that basisPlato_Says said:David Cameron says he can "guarantee" the EU referendum will not take place within 6 weeks of the May elections. That leaves June 23 free.
0 -
New Thread New Thread
0 -
As always you destroy any shreds of credibility you might have by making such outlandish lying false claims such as the EEA having zero say over policy. Once again this is an outright lie from you given how many times you have been told this is not the case.Richard_Nabavi said:
Only for those who think the EU is an organisation which acts in bad faith.runnymede said:OK Richard - now explain to us how that cut and paste chunk differs from the current position.
And how it fits with the bit you missed out, i.e. that non-euro members cannot veto decisions made by eurozone ones
'Member States whose currency is not the euro shall not impede the implementation of legal acts directly linked to the functioning of the euro area and shall refrain from measures which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of the economic and monetary union.'
....and that discrimination is OK as long as it is on 'objective' grounds.
These two get out clauses make a mockery of your claims.
To the extent that they are right, I still don't understand how your favoured proposal of EEA membership, where they could still shaft us, with us having zero say, and wouldn't even have to justify it to anyone or defend it in the ECJ, would be better.0 -
No, like these precedents:Indigo said:"legally binding Decision of the Heads of State or Governments" you mean like the Dublin Accord, or the Schengen Agreement ?
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/a-legally-binding-commitment-to-treaty.html
Look, nothing is going to make committed leavers, who are 100% convinced that the EU is the root of all evil, that the agreement is worth a fag paper. That was always going to be so. However, this mechanism is as solid as it possibly could be, given that there it would obviously be impractical to revise a treaty with of 28 countries in anything less than years.0 -
You're saying that the migration crisis has not been in the news so the public won't be able to take it into account? That's what you're saying? Boats in the Mediterranean, Calais, Cologne, none of that has been reported and the voters are completely in the dark about it?Indigo said:
Dave is desperate to get the vote through before there is a migrant crisis this summer. This is wholly disingenuous, it's trying to get the public to vote to stay in the EU before one of the major problems of being in the EU makes itself felt. I fail to see why anyone should feel the need to help him in this deception.Wanderer said:
People have been pissing on about the EU for my whole adult life and I'm 50. How can we possibly need more time? We could have the referendum tomorrow for all the light that will be shed during the campaign.Indigo said:
The Electoral Commission won't like it, or any date before mid-September, and if we are lucky someone might file for a Judicial Review on an early date on that basisPlato_Says said:David Cameron says he can "guarantee" the EU referendum will not take place within 6 weeks of the May elections. That leaves June 23 free.
0 -
-
I could, but I'd be moderated.rottenborough said:George Osborne @George_Osborne 19m19 minutes ago
Great prize on offer in referendum: settling our membership of a reformed and more competitive EU #EUReform
I make no further comment...0 -
No, I am saying its going to be an order of magnitude worse this summer, and that is going to have an effect on public perceptions. Care to suggest other reason for the unseemly scramble to get this negotiation done and dusted by the middle of the year at the latest, especially when a more lengthy coalition building attempt at renegotiation might have yielded rather more.Wanderer said:
You're saying that the migration crisis has not been in the news so the public won't be able to take it into account? That's what you're saying? Boats in the Mediterranean, Calais, Cologne, none of that has been reported and the voters are completely in the dark about it?Indigo said:
Dave is desperate to get the vote through before there is a migrant crisis this summer. This is wholly disingenuous, it's trying to get the public to vote to stay in the EU before one of the major problems of being in the EU makes itself felt. I fail to see why anyone should feel the need to help him in this deception.Wanderer said:
People have been pissing on about the EU for my whole adult life and I'm 50. How can we possibly need more time? We could have the referendum tomorrow for all the light that will be shed during the campaign.Indigo said:
The Electoral Commission won't like it, or any date before mid-September, and if we are lucky someone might file for a Judicial Review on an early date on that basisPlato_Says said:David Cameron says he can "guarantee" the EU referendum will not take place within 6 weeks of the May elections. That leaves June 23 free.
0 -
Fudges work when they are held together by the glue of a shared culture. We have that (or rather had it - Scotland's culture seems to be going a different route to E&W now) in Great Britain, so our fudges have worked. The EU does not have a shared culture, so there is no glue to hold the fudges together. Thus deals in the EU have to stand on their own merit - on the letter of the law.Wanderer said:
The UK clearly didn't survive even the first quarter of the 20th century intact.williamglenn said:
Without wanting to come over all Peter Hitchens I think it's highly debatable that Britain survived the 20th century in tact. We took some strategically disastrous decisions for dogmatic reasons and then rationalised them self-righteously after the fact.Cyclefree said:@AlastairMeeks
We take the view that the best defence against the virus of extremism is a strong healthy liberal Parliamentary democracy in a nation state. And that is true. And it worked for us. Britain survived many of the stresses and strains of the 20th century in part precisely because of its political and social structures. Our nation and our Parliamentary democracy were tested and not found wanting.
In some ways the EU has learnt one great virtue from us with respect to constitutional arrangements: if it's broken, don't fix it, fudge it. We've managed to muddle through with all of the flaws of our system, our imperfectly united kingdom, our anachronisms, precisely because coming up with something better has never been a sufficiently high political priority for anything meaningful to happen.
It's a good point about fudge. It puzzles me when people complain that the EU fudges, is inconsistent, kicks the can down the road. These are things that we see as virtues in our own history. Or, rather, some of us do, which is perhaps the point.0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
