Friday flurry - NIMBYs

DonDaddyD

Rick Chasey wrote:

DON'T use the veto so soon. Get in there, and argue your face off, not with a menu of demands, but taking the broader macro-policy into play. Say, keep the two speed policy, but only restrict it to pure ESSF or other debt-reducing schemes. Leave the regulation bullsh!t that isn't relevant on the side.

He had a pre-meeting witht he Dark Lord and her Apprentice. That meeting ended without resolution - well there was a resolution, France and Germany weren't going to budge on the treaty. He had two choices, put England in an unfair position by agreeing or veto. Sure he could have played for time, how much more time does Europe, the Euro and the British economy, by extension, have.

Surely to Veto and allowing Europe to get on with it (and end to needless bureaucratic discussion) was more palatable than Cameron/England being blamed for stalling any planned Euro recovery.

Look what happened in America when the Republicans and Democrats spent ages trying to enforce their political ideologies over raising the debt ceiling, in the end the Country suffered.

symo

No the Euro will forever be a basketcase currency whilst the likes of Greece,Italy,Portugal,Ireland and Spain form any part of it. In those countries paying tax is treated as an optional hobby which has led to the crisis we now see, notably that those countries can no longer raise funds as they are seen as unable to pay them back.

Germany know that without the UK the Euro is a joke as they are the only real economy behind it, France goes whatever the Socialists want, and the others quite frankly do nothing about tax avoidance.

The deal we should have gone for is to have nothing to do with any bailout package whatsoever. The city regulation we need should be home grown and not EU grown as France need. Printing money solves nothing, the problem is government policy is now so influenced by economists* that they are actually making things worse by printing more FIAT** currency.

*economist:somebody who looks at previous economic issues in history and attempts to apply them to the current situation. In reality all their formulas assume that infinite growth and supply is possible, which of course it isn't. Note also that not one so called qualified economic expert worldwide predicted the current credit crunch; whereas a simple measure of comparing media wage to median house prices reveals the problem of global consumption really quickly

**Check out this really cool video on FIAT currency http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqicZ8fGMJE

rjsterry

rjsterry wrote:

Did Sweden, the Czech Republic and Hungary not agree with us? Not the biggest players in Europe, granted, but it's not just us.

OK, now it is just us.

symo

Yes we are as isolated as a man who was late to liverpool dock missing his journey on a brand new unsinkable ship.

daviesee

Rick Chasey wrote:

The problem the UK has is that the electorate don't like Europe.

Nail on head.

Like it or not, he represents the electorate. Or at least supposed to pretend.

Anything else is dictatorship.

rick_chasey

Le Monde has come out with a "Britain never more isolated" article...

symo

Ah yes Le Monde, that means so much to the UK.

If we are isolated, I would rather have the monkeys we call MP's than the corrupt bunch of EU statists we had to choose to be with. It will not end well, the Euro will in effect be devaluing further as the contagion will now be allowed to spread to everyone of the 26.

Merkel's face said it all, she has made herself and her party unelectable at home by propping this economic fantasy of a single currency up. You think the average German wants to be paying for the low retirement age in Greece?

edit - shpellin

chilling

Damn, isolated with our Triple A credit rating and functioning currency.

Not that I'm a Tory or anything but I can't see how things could have turned out differently.

I'd much prefer any financial services tax if it were to come in to be used to reduce our deficit rather than prop up the Euro.

We're all doomed.

symo

One of the comments on le Monde website is from someone who gets it:

"This agreement leaves me perplexed. France has been in deficit for practically 30 years. By which miracle we will balance our budget, whereas the growth in eastern europe (something about growing/collecting - pardon ma French ain't so good)? On what will we basing this econmic forecast ? And in same time it will always be necessary to pay the arrears of the debt, with what?"

Cet accord me laisse perplexe. La France est en déficit depuis pratiquement 30 ans. Par quel miracle allons-nous équilibrer notre budget, alors que la croissance en Europe est à la ramasse ? Sur quoi allons nous faire des économies ? Et dans le même temps il faudra toujours payer les arriérés de la dette, avec quoi ?

NGale

daviesee wrote:

Okay, so in the past we have given away:-

Coal mining, Steel manfacture, Shipbuilding, Fishing, Farming, plus more.

Now that the "City" is being attacked it is time to presesrve an industry at all cost.

So are politicians NIMBYs at a world scale or just doing what's best for the country.

Debate............

errrr last time I checked we were still pretty hot on Shipbuilding. In fact we are building ships and vessels for other countries. We also have some of the best Naval Architects and design engineers in the world who companies based in other countries come to.

Stevo_666

A few years ago we were told that we'd be isolated, left behind and doomed if we didn't join the Euro and look what's happened. I really don't think it's time to be worrying now.

jamesco

symo wrote:

Printing money solves nothing, the problem is government policy is now so influenced by economists* that they are actually making things worse by printing more FIAT** currency.

"FIAT money"? Is that the one that rusts if you leave it outside overnight? Seriously, what's the alternative? Would you rather have the money supply go up and down because of how much yellow metal is dug out of the ground in South Africa?

daviesee

NGale wrote:

errrr last time I checked we were still pretty hot on Shipbuilding.

You think?

Try counting the number of shipyards now compared to 30 years ago.
I currently work with quite a few ex-shipyard designers who have moved into the oil & gas industry because there wasn't enough work in their field.
The current aircraft carriers are a job creation scheme as they would have been much cheaper abroad but the Government couldn't face up to that along with the negativity that would follow.

deptfordmarmoset

symo wrote:

One of the comments on le Monde website is from someone who gets it:

"This agreement leaves me perplexed. France has been in deficit for practically 30 years. By which miracle we will balance our budget, whereas the growth in eastern europe (something about growing/collecting - pardon ma French ain't so good)? On what will we basing this econmic forecast ? And in same time it will always be necessary to pay the arrears of the debt, with what?"

Cet accord me laisse perplexe. La France est en déficit depuis pratiquement 30 ans. Par quel miracle allons-nous équilibrer notre budget, alors que la croissance en Europe est à la ramasse ? Sur quoi allons nous faire des économies ? Et dans le même temps il faudra toujours payer les arriérés de la dette, avec quoi ?

I read à la ramasse as scavenging for scarce fallen fruit or firewood, ie a sparse resource. And the quote does not say eastern Europe, it's simply Europe as a whole. The sense is summat like ''while growth in Europe is hard to find''

NGale

daviesee wrote:

NGale wrote:

errrr last time I checked we were still pretty hot on Shipbuilding.

You think?

Try counting the number of shipyards now compared to 30 years ago.
I currently work with quite a few ex-shipyard designers who have moved into the oil & gas industry because there wasn't enough work in their field.
The current aircraft carriers are a job creation scheme as they would have been much cheaper abroad but the Government couldn't face up to that along with the negativity that would follow.

The difference between now and 30 years ago is the ship building industry has consolidated under just a few companies. Its the smaller yards which were economically unviable which were closed down.

Many moved into the Oil and Gas industry because it pays more (offshore earnings are silly amounts but I don't blame anyone who does it) The shipbuilding industry suffered because these men and women left to go into oil and gas because of the money.

Also as far as the aircraft carriers go. Those contracts were given to Babcock and BAE systems because they have the security clearance, ability and location for the work to be carried out in this country. HMS Defender, Diamond, Dragon, Duncan, Dauntless and Daring have also been built or at being built in the UK as well as the Astute class of submarines. The industry isn't doing badly at the moment compared with the 70s and 80s. It has just had to consolidate and adapt

W1

What exactly are we losing?

We will trade with the EU (as if that would stop!), we can just avoid paying into the black hole that it represents.

We'll feel the collapse of the EU whether we'd used the veto or not. It's better to be as far away as possible, and not having to pay in to prop up lax, corrupt countries with no fiscal responsibilities.

spen666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

Ok then, you tell me, what where the options we should have taken/negotiated? Even Labour have admitted they would not have signed.

...DON'T use the veto so soon. ...

36 years is hardly so soon

Jay dubbleU

Cameron has done what his pals in the City wanted and shafted the rest of us

symo

Jay dubbleU wrote:

Cameron has done what his pals in the City wanted and shafted the rest of us

How? Effectively stating that I shouldn't pay for an early retirement for a greek worker, or that my countries tax revenues should not be used to pay taxes for countries who failed to collect tax properly in their own home.

Yeah I feel really screwed over.

Stevo_666

I'm not feeling particularly screwed over either. Cameron didn't have much choice but he still did the right thing in the circumstances. Now whether Sarko and/or Merkel deliberately set out to make sure he'd have to say no (thereby distracting attention from the eurozone mess that they are in) is another question...

symo

Much better if we had the same arrangement Norway,Sweden,Iceland,Switzerland,China,USA,Brazil,Russia and the rest of the world have with Eurozone.

rick_chasey

Economists are usually more articlate than I am. Re Cameron 'protecting the City's interests':

Simon Tilford, chief economist at the Centre for European Reform, told me <(the guradian blogger)

I find it very hard to understand why the exercise of this veto is some kind of victory for the City. I don't think that's shared unanimously across the City. It's not going to make it easier to contest ill thought out regulations, if anything it's going to make it harder because Britain has burnt a lot of bridges here.

It's going to make it difficult for Britain to forge the necessary coalitions of interest. It's going to make it even easier for Britain to be pigeon holed as in the pockets of the city. That's quite unfair because it has done more to address the problems than Germany and France in splitting banks and improving capital requirements. The French and Germans have been foot dragging. I find it very difficult to see any silver lining in this. Had he vetoed this on the grounds of it being a suicide pact that believes the crisis can't be helped by ever increasing austerity, I would have thought he had an argument. He obviously felt the need to throw the Eurosceptics some red meat but the danger is he will have emboldened them and weakened the UK in Europe.

rick_chasey

Seems that a) what Cameron veto'd is going ahead anyway and b) some of the things Cameron went in requiring were either not part of the proposal, or can still be enforced even after the veto.

W1

Great, another Guardain blog. Truck of salt required, as usual.

Didn't we have all the same sort of bleating when we didn't enter the Euro? Which, in hindsight, was a rather fortunate decision.

rick_chasey

The blog's a summary of various experts opinion..

Open Europe, which receives funding from the City and has a largely critical stance on the EU, last week published a report identifying the 49 regulations that it said was a threat to the City. Mats Persson, its director, argued that Cameron had no choice but to veto the treaty because of the political pressure at home - but also because of the potential threat to the City. He said:

In what was a very difficult situation, Cameron had little choice but to wield his veto. He was under domestic political pressure but, most importantly, he genuinely felt that there were vital UK interests at stake. However, this use of political capital will only be a sound investment if it is followed up with a concerted push for a more flexible, adaptable and competitive EU in which the UK can feel at home.

The eurozone countries now enter a legal minefield in their bid to draw up new treaty commitments on debts and budgets that can credibly be enforced and, for the UK, the threat remains that the EU institutions are colonised by eurozone interests.

Interestingly, he argues that in the battle that will ensue over whether the 26 states are allowed to use the EU institutions, there is room for further negotiation. This is a point that Professor Chalmers also made to me. He suggested that there was more room for negotiation, for example Cameron could allow the 26 to use the institutions in exchange for some amendments to the financial transactions tax. He said:

It's not inconceivable that they will negotiate so that the 26 can use the institutions and Britain gets some amendments to the FTT. If I was betting money that's what I would suspect.

notsoblue

Rick Chasey wrote:

Seems that a) what Cameron veto'd is going ahead anyway and b) some of the things Cameron went in requiring were either not part of the proposal, or can still be enforced even after the veto.

He just turned up, had 26 people disagree with him and then left.

VICTORY.

daviesee

I may have over-achieved here.

This was only supposed to be a Friday troll thread.

Stand down.

Stevo_666

daviesee wrote:

I may have over-achieved here.

This was only supposed to be a Friday troll thread.

Stand down.

Aww - it was just getting interesting again.

daviesee

Stevo 666 wrote:

daviesee wrote:

I may have over-achieved here.

This was only supposed to be a Friday troll thread.

Stand down.

Aww - it was just getting interesting again.

Stevo does what I say. :shock: Yeah!

DonDaddyD

This thread was always going to be epic. We haven't even begun to unpick Cameron's House of Commons "Veto that sh*t b*tch" statement.

RJS still needs to chime in with renewed faith that his "Liberal High Lord Clegg" has finally grown a pair.

And all that before a back bencher (W1) suggests the plausible right wing "UK to withdraw all EU funding unless they negotiate" threat.

Sheesh this could run on for a week.