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.

 

 

 

Cameronspeak

Wittering Witney has coined the word Cameronspeak refering to the lack of substance, false arguments and statistics, and the ‘clever’ way he words his sentences. Witney’s post prior to Cameronspeak, roll up roll up points to the many times Cameron tells us he and the coalition are “rolling up our sleeves” , supposedly to do some of the hard work required in the governance of the country.

Cameron is just full of catchphrases, one of his favourites is”let me be clear” which it seems he has been using for years now, it often precedes sentence(s) littered with obfuscations, falsehoods, half-truths and more often lies damned lies. Examples include:  here and  here and here and here, and here and here.

There are more still, though you get the point. In George Orwell’s 1984, newspeak removes all meaning from words, and leaves simple dichotomies, which suits the ‘party’ in the aim to make any alternative thinking (thought-crime) impossible. Cameronspeak, similarly removes all meaning from words and leaves simple dichotomies, but the intention is to beguile and mislead the audience, to confuse and deflect attention away from the issues concerned, and to give off the impression of actual depth to what is being said while saying nothing at all.

 

 

“we sceptics”

David Cameron’s speech at the Lord Mayors banquet has been taken in by the msm as an ‘eurosceptic speech(video here) “a significant moment — the clearest articulation yet of his European Policy” clearly they have been mislead, the section of the speech on Europe was carefully worded by Cameron, so as not to offend anyone (Clegg, Merkel) or give any clear definitions on what he would like British European policy to actually be.

Mr cast-iron could not even bring himself to use the word eurosceptic choosing instead “we sceptics” anyone can be sceptic, of what though? is the pace of integration to slow for Mr Cameron? Is he sceptic of the chances Chancellor Merkel has of changing the basic law in Germany in order to change the Lisbon treaty?

Cameron said “Leaving the EU is not in our national interest. Outside, we would end up like Norway, subject to every rule for the Single Market made in Brussels but unable to shape those rules. And believe me: if we weren’t in there helping write the rules they would be written without us – the biggest supporter of open markets and free trade – and we wouldn’t like the outcome.

We can debate all day about what is in the national interest, but it is obvious that Cameron does not put  the national interest as the number one priority all Prime Ministers should hold. The influence he and this government have in Brussels is limited and ebbing away, any inclination he may or may not have to “refashion” the EU is akin to the “grand plans and utopian visions” europhiles tend to fantasize about. Chimerical.

David Cameron’s Lord Mayors banquet speech, said nothing that he has not already said, he wants Britain to remain IN the European Union; he would like to change a few things about it… but not just now; and he weeelly weeelly is ‘sceptic’!

 

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.

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’.

hocus pocus…

It is enough to drive one mad, the Sunday papers are as ever, full of half truths and misinformation. The European Union and Mondays referendum debate receives a lot of attention from all sides of the political spectrum,

All is not well with douglas carswell who today is taking touchy tim’s place , he seems to have lost the plot let alone ‘the plan’, as he does on his own blog he speaks as though he is not part of the “SW1 clique” or “Westminster bubble”, delusional he seems to be publicly leading a double life. Carswell is a conservative MP in the Westminster Parliament, the ‘conservative’ party is leading the government this country has to put up with. In the same vein Carswell pushes the lie that ‘renegotiation’ is possible. One wonders why he does it? Cameron is never going to give him a promotion, so his motives are unclear though I hear that ‘the plan‘ is now an ebook£


Far from the  fight back the government’s press release would lead you to believe matthew d’ancona informs us that

“In private, senior Tories acknowledge that there is no serious prospect of an aggressive programme for the repatriation of powers from Brussels as long as the Coalition exists in its present form”

nick clegg seems to confirm this and has fiercely rebuked the tory ‘eurosceptics’ on the matter, and claims it would be “economic suicide” to try to change Britain relationship with the EU.

Simon Heffer -whose commentary I have to say has deteriorated since moving to the Mail- seems to be naive enough to believe the propaganda as he suggests that we renegotiate or repatriate powers back from Brussels, and then uses David Campbell-Bannerman  and his ‘ultimate plan b’as a source of  astuteness is laughable.

Heffer also pays “a sincere tribute to those who defied the three line whip”, this says it all, the vote on the motion was non-binding: when we see these ‘rebels’ defy the whip on a real in/out referendum debate for a real in/out referendum then they may deserve some sort praise. Peter Hitchens has a half good idea, the problem with it is that, most of those ‘rebels’ in the ‘conservative’ party do not have the guts to do it.

Someone who knows what he is talking about is Christopher Booker with the only article I can find in the msm today of any grasp of the facts and realities of the EU, from his piece:

“because the way Britain is governed has become so inextricably enmeshed with “Europe”. Anyone who thinks we can “renegotiate” has no understanding of what this project is about, or its most sacred principle – that powers, once handed over, can never be given back. So we must stay in, dragged along by a process over which we have no control…”

and

“…the project is slowly heading for very messy and prolonged disintegration. Everyone involved, it seems, is trapped, and the only way Britain will leave the EU is when it falls apart, around us and everyone else…”

No doubt this idea of repatriation or renegotiation of powers will continue to be pushed by the government and its followers, even though the facts say different. As Booker says the process of collapse of the EU has started, it is just a matter of time.

The only thing people who believe that Britain should be out of the European Union can do now is try to speed up the process; getting the facts out there is most important, so that the public is informed  that  is  best way to put pressure on those in power.

who is steve hilton?

David Cameron, is filling out the scroll, of how many (m)uck ups he can make, week after week, day by day more uturns on coalition policy are made.

The person David Cameron, relies on most is steve hilton who is described as the “pint-sized Rasputin”, he is behind the conservative modernisation or ‘detox’ programme, from the beginning of the Cameron leadership, he has played an influential role  getting Dave to ride on his bike to work (with a driver behind him), hugging huskies , right down to the conservative party’s logo change to a type of tree.

he is described as david cameron’s secret weapon (£) , but is he? Hilton has often been called  the backbone of the modern conservative party and the coalitions reforms, directing policy and initiatives in policy areas such as the NHS, the ‘red-tape challenge’ etc. But all his re-branding and decontamination, didn’t help Cameron win a majority, so why is he so influential?

Today in the Mail it is noted that

“One person who works with No10 complains that Hilton ‘doesn’t understand the process you need to go through to make things happen, how to pull the levers of power. Saying stuff doesn’t make it so’.”

Quite, the whole programme for government of the coalition, is based on this pretence, that announcements  are made and therefore implemented when this is and has never been the case. The government governs by headline, by this they create the headline then only afterwards make the plans to implement them, only later realising that the polivy will not work.

In the same article it is said

“Hilton dreams up policy ideas in an instant and wants them implemented immediately.”

such amateur behaviour is not suited to British government, as most people know, but the coalition has not yet grasped.

It is evident Cameron follows where Hilton leads, the fact that steve hilton was reported as threatening to quit his role in government, makes one hope he does, then for Cameron to follow his lead.

such amateur behaviour is not suited to British government, as most people know, but the coalition has not yet grasped.

european disunion

The crisis ongoing in Greece at the moment, the strikes, the riots, the lack of a clear direction for the country, a government in office but without power –over its economy or otherwise-, etc.

Is emblematic of the dilemma facing the entire European union, whilst the media report on the Greeks striking and rioting over austerity measures forced upon the country by the EU, ECB, IMF it is also a case of, nationalism. Like most nation states they believe themselves to be sovereign and therefore see a patriotic duty in fighting off those institutions demanding further austerity, it is debatable as to whose error it is that this is the situation they face (afternoon siesta’s, early retirements and an overblown public sector, are obvious contributers)  though it also clear that the EU and ECB are only out to save their own skins, for fear of contagion across the eurozone and eu member states, with Germans economy likely to take the biggest haircut were Greece to default, exit the euro or both.

Our masters in Brussels, unashamedly require the living standards and livelihoods of those in Europe to diminish for the sake of a united Europe, evidently the peripheral countries in the eurozone or the PIIGS, should not have signed up to such an agreement, the European elite are trapped in the belief that if they wish away the problems it will all work out fine, and the united states of Europe will be on course to true realization, the truth is that the peoples of eu nation states are at odds with their leaders.

British people (a majority) would like a referendum on our membership of the club, the German’s are reluctant to pay for the profligacy of PIIGS, the Finnish recently voted overwhelmingly in favour of the eurosceptic true finns party, the Portuguese, Irish and Greeks are fed up with the eu as are Spain, the majority of EU citizens are unhappy with the institution, the way it works, its leaders, the overall direction and at the top of the list the dictatorial attitudes of the Union in handing down the rules of governance beyond its remit.

In the United Kingdom, we face the farce of a ‘conservative’ prime minister and his foreign secretary posing as eurosceptics, the EU Bill is a case in point the referendum lock, has been voted down by the HoL with Lord’s passing an amendment that will make the lock expire at the end of each parliament, whether or not the commons vetoes this, is no reassurance since no Parliament can bind its successor.

As for the British economy, Europe has plans to interfere in this matter, too. George Osborne and/or treasury minister(s) are to be summoned by Brussels (the commission) to appear before them to explain Britain’s economic policies, and the commission is to scrutinise whether Britain’s economic policies are in accordance with the EUs overall strategy.

Early in David Cameron’s leadership of the conservative party in opposition, he made clear he wanted the issue of Europe -to not be an issue, and for the conservatives to stop “banging on” about Europe. The reality of the situation is Europe is at the forefront of many of the governments’ problems, the PM and those around him must wake up to this fact and act upon it, holding a referendum on our membership is an ideal way of beginning the process. Though, since Cameron+co are reluctant to do this or for that matter to raise the issue, a start would be for Chancellor Osborne and Cameron to renegotiate our contributions not only to the bailouts but the union as a whole.

election 2015?

Only 1423 days to go, until the next general election  (according to the coalition agreement), and from d\’ancona we read that “senior adviser Steve Hilton – often warn him that one term may well be all that this Government gets. Hilton sees it as his responsibility to shake Cameron into acting as if these are the only five years he has: seize the Dave, so to speak.”

Indeed, as has been obvious for some time, Cameron may have the personality of Mr Blair, but he does not have the capability to win an election, it cannot be repeated more often, up against one of the most unpopular Prime Minister’s in recent times Cameron blew his chance, having fixed himself the top job and  fixed the terms (five years), it is most likely he will only have the one term -if that.

With the constant uturns, the failed ‘detoxification process, and his high self regard, Cameron fails to see his faults through his supposed good traits, which even then can often be attributed to luck.

George Osborne was/is campaign manager for general elections, as well as being chancellor D’ancona goes on…

The alternative perspective is one with which we became familiar in the New Labour era – namely, that the fundamental purpose of a government is to get re-elected. This view is increasingly ascribed to George Osborne

He, after all, is personally responsible for the most radical and risky proposals that this Coalition has undertaken, and he is under huge pressure to translate policy boldness into political dividend. It would be absurd to accuse Osborne, of all people, of timidity. At the same time, he is the Government’s key political strategist, as well as its fiscal crusader, the man charged with winning the next election (May 7, 2015, according to the Coalition Agreement) – and with avoiding the misery of a second hung Parliament.

Having set course to wipe out the deficit, Osborne’s eyes are now firmly fixed on election day 2015, the reduction of the number of constituencies from 650 to 600, and the new boundary commission reports due by October 2013.”

The fact that the government and the prospect of an overall majority for the conservatives at the next election, rely on the economy picking up and Osborne being able to tell the country he managed to get the economy back on track. The conservatives under cameron and osborne will require a lot more luck, the way it looks, whilst unemployment is down and the cost of debt are reasonable, it is not guaranteed to last, for if the British economy does not start producing real growth than the deficit will not reduce substantially enough. And with the coalition programme only expected to cut the deficit at a rate of 1% more than the Alistair Darling plan would of, it is not likely that the prosperity envisaged by dave and george will come to fruition,

I suspect that as with most coalition policy it will have to be revised, not due to the usual media or focus group opposition  but through the force of the markets. i also believe that the coalition will split before 2015, leaving “the misery of a second hung parliament” a viable prospect.

all relative

the Sunday’s are full of personality politics, still it matters all the same, the people central to their respective political parties shape the direction of the party they represent and determine political discourse should they gain power.

Following friday’s leaks by the telegraph theres  the guardians ‘exclusive’ the speech that never was, from the other Miliband, David, the book on the milibands and the crowing from the ‘big beasts’ of the labour party.Something’s up here, rightly, the labour party since Ed Miliband became leader, have failed spectacularly to gain any traction in the media, rightly because they haven’t anything like resembling a credible alternative themselves to the coalitions  policies for the problems the country faces, and rightly they should dispose of him.

it is curious that the Ed Balls file leaks and the David Miliband speech, the Miliband book and chatter of removing Ed Miliband have emerged all in the same week, that Tony blair swept back into town to promote his paperback version of his own memoirs, A Journey, It may be coincidence, then again maybe not-apparently the leaks are not from the same source- the Labour party though (mainly Blairites) must of realised that Ed Miliband is the wrong leader if the party is to get back into government and not spend the next decade and more in opposition.

Those david miliband supporters may just be bitter, it exposes the fact that the party is still divided along the TB/GB lines, and those in the most prominent roles Ed Balls Ed Miliband etc consist mainly of Brownites and those that are the most likely briefers against them are the Blairites recently departed to the backbenches.

the labour party might change, it held onto Gordon Brown for so long after it became obvious he was an election loser even with all the botched coups, it realises that Ed won’t win them a general election either (not an outright majority anyway), and just now neither the conservatives nor labour want another coalition government.

Whilst Ed M has no plan for his party, the coalition does not have a credible opposition party, sufficiently opposing its program, ed Miliband is a blessing to the coalition and David cameron can rest easy knowing Ed is  leader of the labour party, but for the conservative party it is not all good news, whilst Cameron is PM driving a social democrat policy agenda through, many of the traditional conservative policies/programmes which are needed are not being implemented.

and as we are constantly being reminded of  tony blair\’squalities and three election victories it is predictable that all parties want an outright majority at the next general election, after all the gossip about the labour party this week, what remains of the conservative party should be thinking about their own successor to David Cameron and working on that outright majority themselves, labour looks like it will be fighting amongst itself for the forseeable future.