that “veto”

The hyperbole surrounding David Cameron’s use of the British veto, is just that hyperbole. He has said himself he “effectively wielded the veto

David Cameron did nothing of the sort as richard north of eureferendum has been pointing out. Take a step back from what  the msm is churning out on behalf of Downing St, and you will find that the day before the summit the UK sent over protocol demands to the EU, (these regarding financial services and regulations) Cameron surely knew that  asking to ‘repatriate’ these competences some of which this government have themselves handed over jurisdiction to the EU- and insert the protocol into the Treaty would be refused  and so late in the day look unreasonable to his european partners in the council.

As bagehot notes

“What they asked for was a protocol imposing decision-making by unanimity on a number of areas of regulation currently decided by majority voting. (If you want to be really technical, the choice is voting by unanimity or the special Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) used in the EU, which is a sort of super-majority system taking into account a certain number of countries and also their populations).

As my source puts it, this amounted to a big winding-back of the clock for many EU leaders, setting a “horrendous precedent” that could unravel the single market. As they see it, common rules for the common market have been adopted (with few exceptions, such as tax) by QMV ever since the Single European Act approved by Margaret Thatcher in 1986.”

the colleagues were having none of it

“Britain’s request to move to unanimity was taken as a huge ask that had nothing to do with the subject at hand (saving the euro) or was a sign of bad faith (because it is driven by mistrust regarding future legislation). In my source’s view, Britain also tabled its request very late in the day, simply sending a whole draft protocol to the European Council legal service the day before the meeting without talking the ideas through with key allies and national capitals.”

It is becoming apparent through all the smoke and mirrors being deployed from Cameron and his allies that the whole story has been conjured up to present Cameron as some sort of  genius, this fairytale does not stack up to scrutiny. Cameron claims he used the ‘veto’ in the national interest, once again it is worth being clear David Cameron is interested in himself and only himself after Wednesday’s PMQ’s Cameron looked to be facing an onslaught from his backbenchers and more, to hold a referendum on British membership of the EU, he has consistently said a referendum will not be held and for one reason or another is determined not to regain our national sovereignty nor allow a referendum to be held,  that night herman von rumpoy’s interim report was leaked, which set out how the new fiscal “compact” could be set-up (using protocol 12) without the need for parliamentary votes nor referendums, no sooner had this come out than Cameron was on the airwaves threatening to use the veto if he did not get the “safeguards” he wanted in the “national interest”.

It is a shame that 99% of the media are refusing to question the PM’s side of the story. His version of the events suit him quite nicely, thanks very much; no referendum, no repatriation, and a heroes welcome home. this version has also deflected attention away from the problems at hand which was supposed to be about the salvation of the euro. Merkozy have finally come out of a summit without the markets tumbling instantly -It will not last long- the problems of the single currency still remain intact, the agreement reached covers rules for budgetary discipline and is not much more than the SGP (stability and growth pact), the immediate problem of financing the debt of troubled states, lack of competitiveness and fixing the imbalances within the euro area, were not dealt with so unfortunately the summit agreement looks like it won’t even  save them until Christmas.

 

 

 

Advertisements

something we don’t know?

For all the recent talk of the rise of the Fourth Reich I am wary of conspiracy type theories, but the German Chancellor Angela Merkel has throughout the crisis invoked the consequence of War, today she called the ongoing euro crisis “maybe Europe’s most difficult hours since world war two”

She also said “That’s why I’m saying over and over again if the euro fails, Europe will fail”  the crisis does not “mean less europe it means more europe”

Merkel stressed the need for tough sanctions against countries who violate the treaties, and “there must be the right to go to the European court against such countries”

Evidently across Europe an anti-EU feeling is emerging and growing stronger, the foundations of the  EU as a union of “solidarity and prosperity” has been tarnished and reversed by the crisis and the measures that the EU elites have been  trying to implement/impose on their neighbours. It cannot be dismissed the possibility that Germany’s Chancellor Merkel is giving people ideas, or maybe she knows something the rest of us don’t.

treaty change?

Angela Merkel has accepted that the current situation needs change.

“he debt crisis is not just something unpleasant, it is a turning point, an opportunity to create something new.”

It may be empty rhetoric of old, and she does not say what that “something new” would be. Merkel received a report

from her economic advisers, who suggested various ‘solutions’ to the crisis, all of which Merkel said

“would require a huge number of treaty changes”

It is clear that any plausible solution to the eurozone crisis will require treaty change and fundamental institutional changes to the EU. The British government is still pushing for further integration of the eurozone, whilst insisting that treaty change will be for the countries with the euro, and therefore does not affect Britain nor require treaty change under the referendum lock.

Treaty change proposals have not been precisely outlined but if the eurozone is to carry on they are required, and they will have repercussions for Britain. It is odd that on the one hand George Osborne and David Cameron say that the British economy relies on the euro working and are calling for the “remorseless logic” of full fiscal union, and on the other that treaty change will not necessarily effect Britain.

Angela Merkel seems to acknowledge whats required, she is still yet to act, but while we are waiting to see if the euro is going to be saved, maybe she can tell Gideon and Donald how the EU works.

“euro is the norm”

Apparently “the euro is the norm”, so says Barroso anyway, Nick Robinson of the BBC asked Jose Manuel Barroso

 “If the eurozone nations are to become a much more tightly aligned fiscal and political unit – and that is what most economists think has to happen for the Euro to survive – then what happens to those on the outside, like the UK?”
The idea that “in principle” all members of the european union will eventually be eurozone members, ought to worry everyone looking at the situation as it is.
More to the point Britain seen through the eyes of the EU elites is a laughing-stock:  in the link above  Barroso says, “oh the British” in response to Nick Robinson this morning on radio4 Robinson told of how those in the room of the EPP meeting the room filled with laughter at the mention of the British, this is days after Sarkozy told us we “don’t understand Europe” because we are an island.
It is becoming clearer and clearer that Britain in Europe is not working as it is and that even the EU wants a decision ‘ in or out?’ Britain cannot remain in the EU half heartedly it leaves us in the worst possible position.
The sooner we get out the better, that it is now it is some sort of  trend in the UK to be against Europe, shows that attitudes change dramatically it is not unthinkable that if the  euro survives there would be clamour for the UK to join the euro,instead of being ‘left out’. I do not see anyone in Westminster who is willing to defend our sovereignty against the EU at the moment, why would they in the future? It cannot be left up to the puppet politicians we have, if not the people maybe we’ll have to rely on the markets.

euro-deviants

The truth is now out about who is really running the EU project, the Groupe de Francfort includes only “an unelected cabal made of up eight people: Lagarde; Merkel; Sarkozy; Mario Draghi, the new president of the ECB; José Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Commission; Jean-Claude Juncker, chairman of the Eurogroup; Herman van Rompuy, the president of the European Council; and Olli Rehn, Europe’s economic and monetary affairs commissioner.”

I doubt this group is new, it is only now we have found out. Since the rebuttal to ex-Prime Minister George Papandreou’s referendum idea, from Merkel and Sarkozy “we are prepared no matter what response the Greek Parliament or people give” Merkel said of saving the euro. The language used by those in the Francfort Groupe has become increasingly petulant.

It is as though the EU project is now do or die for the FG, they can see the euro is in severe crisis and those in the FG have been consistent in keeping with the mantra that the euro cannot fail or Europe will fail, citing war and social strife etc. The EU ‘elite’ are finding themselves against the markets and economic reality, the people, national parliaments et al. And it seems that it may just be that with this crisis and the attention it is gaining that the real motivations of EU project are getting through to the masses,  when even the Telegraph has taken to calling this set-up the Politburo , one hopes that the  “ignorance is strength” is being diminished.

From the telegraph euro-crisis live blog this morning bruno waterfield posted this:

A new name for the club – “the euro deviants” – has been coined after Jose Manuel Barroso, the commission president, explained that “not belonging is the deviation from the rule” because all EU members, bar Britain, are committed to eventually joining the single currency.

Evidently if you deviate from EU doctrine you get the boot with  George Papandreou and Brlusconi removed and being replaced by the  installed ‘national unity’ governments, national parliaments are now nothing but card-carrying members – an ‘outer party’ to the EU elite, who must stick to the rules or leave.

leadership… found wanting.

David Cameron said the  word ‘leadership’ 19 times in his conference speech in Manchester titled ‘leadership for a better Britain‘ in an attempt maybe to brainwash the public into believing he actually has the abilities to lead a nation. He does not.

And yet, the G20 has shown that the world over, ‘leaders’ are not leading but limping far behind events that have happened last week; month; year? The Greek tragedy that has consumed the whole event is not the worst of their worries, nor is Italy’s predicament. what are called the Western democracies of the world are suffering a complicated shift in the way the world works and the distribution of power via wealth (of nations) is the central cause.

what the G20 summit has achieved is to present the EU summit of October 27th as a triumph, that created a plan to sort the eurozone crisis out and that must be followed. This is an example of the lack of leadership we have in current politics, the EU summit conclusions were picked apart by markets and analysts within 24hours, and found out to be half measure without structure nor any actual cash to back the plans up. For the G20 to be exclaiming that countries must follow this plan and stick to it, without anything new to fund proposals. Sadly means they have no idea how to solve the current crisis.

Which brings me back to David Cameron, who is stuck in opposition mode. pre-crash 2008 he and boy George were committed to Labour spending plans and only changed course once the election was in sight and they could not any longer persist with the mantra of ‘sunlit uplands’ and ‘sharing the proceeds of growth’, when Lehman’s went down the conservative party was consistently on the backfoot with no ideas let alone a plan to ‘save the world’.

The situation is the same now with the eurozone crisis, the government had no idea what to do, so has decided on the one hand to try to offload the crisis onto the eurozone alone, and push for closer integration of the eurozone countries, whilst at the same time wanting to increase the IMF budget. This is obviously to do with the fact that British banks are more exposed than even the German’s. So why doesn’t the government be straight with the British people and explain the situation instead of trying to cover up their misgivings.

We also have the situation where the eurozone may indeed follow George Osborne’s “remorseless logic” and integrate further, which will inevitably push Britain further away from decision-making, not that Cameron has not done enough already to leave Britain looking like a pathetic bystander while events happen elsewhere. This is one of the main problems, not only are the eurozone nations going to be putting their own interests first but Cameron + co are happy to stand back and watch it happen without the slightest thought about the future consequences.

And yet the conservatives believe they will be able to take back powers ‘repatriate’ ‘renegotiate’ whatever you want to call it, Germany has said nien to the idea, so it seems that even this false scenario is not going to be achieved. Cameron is too weak to even attempt to gain back any meaningful powers for this country . in the event he does make a squeak, the eurozone will agree a new treaty outside the EU involving only eurozone nations, making the veto useless.

Maybe the lacklustre performance is due to Cameron’s own faults; David Cameron edited the Big Issue in the summer he spoke of  his youth and how he “didn’t always put the effort in” and “just went through the motions, drifting along

Some things never change, eh’.

matter of time

Throughout the eurozone crisis, time has been of the essence, while EU leaders have been fighting against the markets, they have been fighting time which they cannot preserve. Each summit, meeting or plan they have produced has been solely to buy themselves time, for a variety of reasons, not least for the stronger currencies of the eurozone to get their own houses in order.

George Papandreou’s call for a referendum was a lost cause before it even got off the ground. The idea of democracy ‘coming home’, sounds all well and good, until you realise that Papandreou is a politician not unlike those in Westminster. Do not be surprised if David Cameron is holding his own ‘get out of jail free card’ close to his chest in the form of a referendum on Britain’s place in the EU, for the security of his own premiership is not guaranteed but unstable.

Papandreou’s supposed show of strength in calling the referendum, had been diminished by his summoning before Merkel and Sarkozy. It is obvious that even were the referendum to be held whatever the question, EU politics dictates that a vote against the EU’s wishes will be dismissed.

The fact that exit of the eurozone has now been talked about by EU leaders, is not an end in itself, it was always possible if events required. Merkel and Sarkozy using it as a threat was only to bring  Papandreou into line.

The endgame is just a matter of time, for now I think that the eurozone in whatever composition will survive for some time longer, like trying to keep a  bicycle with two flat tyres going, those with much to lose if it fails will keep the show on the road for as long as possible.

 

eurozone crisis

events are moving in the eurozone super fast, in their race to the bottom, reflections will be made once the situation is more clear but for now follow the FT eurozone crisis live blog or the telegraph debt crisis live blog

 

speaking in tongues

Just when you thought the madness of the european integrationists was at a  standstill, they push ahead further and probably faster, the crises of the eurozone, with Greece  particularly in the spotlight. The pursuit of further integration and more europe, still drives the minds of the europhiles, so detached from the realities that europe faces,
they see the only solution to the problems as more and more europe, regardless of what the people of these member states believe, need or want, regardless of economic realities and regardless of democratic legitimacy (lack thereof).

The EU summit last week discussed (mainly) the issue of the Greek economy, the debt ridden -once soveriegn- nation who will sooner or later have to default on its debts (partially or otherwise), nearly every economist predicts a Greek default, one way or another. Europe has few options to choose from, about the way they wish to react to the crises.

george Papandreou the Greek PM, will try on Tuesday to push through the Greek parliament the austerity measures required by the troika, in order for the Greek to receive the next tranch fromthe first bailout last year.
Opposition party New Democracy (apt) maintains they will vote against, the people of Greece, are unlikely to accept more austerity since, thus far the first bailout, austerity measures and reform seem to have had little effect.

eurocrat talk, initiated by one Angela Merkel, proposing that borrowers take ‘volutary’ losses, and an introduction of debt guarantees proposed by Alex Weber , the former Bundesbank chief, Sarkozy\’s ideaof private investment funds helping the bailout, amongst other initiatives coming from euroland are in reality trying ot fiddle the situation, economists and the markets have said many atime that any restructuring of the debt (in whatever form) will be seen as default. Together with the the unlikely event that Greece can reform its finances before 2013 when the EFSM package is intended to be introduced, Greece is not going to repay its debt, full stop.
Over here in blighty we have to witness the ‘\”genuinely eurosceptic\” David Cameron who insists that Britain will not play a part in the bailout, he blatantly forgot to mention our participation through the IMF, and even then as the eu keeps “kicking the can down the road”, making up new rules as we go along _ bailouts are illegal under the ‘constitution’- and as we have in David Cameron a europhile premier of the highest proportions, Britain can expect to be dragged into funding the Greeks further.

You may of noticed the attention theat the new ‘moderate eurosceptics’ have been getting in the prees, after the letter by 14 of them in the FT calling for a change in policy toward Europe. For some time there has been talk of the ’40’ who are of the 2010 general election intake, these are supposedly moderaters and modernisers, but ‘very eurosceptic’. The likes of George Eustice, Priti Patel etc… however looking at their records it can be said that the new intake are simply additions to the cameroon pack, talking the talk, tripping over when they need to walk.

The above link from conhome by Eustice makes patently clear the mirage they have painted themselves, that he says of Cameron that: “We now have a genuinely eurosceptic Prime Minister who is better placed to deliver than any of his predecessors, including Thatcher. He means business,”
is beyond parody, though should not be laughed at, if these are the sorts of people we have in Parliament, -notwithstanding the european union- directing policy then we are in serious trouble, the media are playing along, the opposition is a shambles and most of the country has not woken up to the facts.