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

“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’!

 

theres just no hope for some

this  is the sort of thing that ruins the cause, leads the europhile left-wing press, cameroons etc. to laugh off the idea of Britain as a sovereign state and claim that anyone who thinks being in europe is not the best option is a ‘fruit-cake’, ‘loony’, ‘racist’ or even ‘homophobic’. John Redwood or dead wood as autonomous mind put it, asks his readers “what powers would you like back?” in his latest post, and then reels off a list as though he is a five year old writing out the Christmas wish list.

Leaving aside the fact that powers cannot be returned, the suggestions he makes on the list itself are  pathetic since alone they will not change our relationship with the EU, even if government achieved his whole list.

Redwood forgets that he is  an MP of the ‘conservative’ party, that makes up the majority of the coalition who claim to be “governing in the national interest” but  which has no intention of returning powers from Brussels to the UK and putting the national interest first. Nor does he realise that his leader is quite happy with the status quo and  is dismissive of him and his stated aims, so you wonder why John Redwood takes his frustration out on UKIPers

“who will write in to condemn what we are trying to achieve, I have two simple questions. What power have the UKIP MEPs got back for us? And what progress have the UKIP MEPs made to getting the UK out of the EU in line with their stated policy?”

You do not have to be a UKIP supporter to realise that Britain is better off out of the EU, now I am not a supporter but they simply do not have the capacity to remove Britain from the EU, for one there is not enough of them. Redwood as an MP in the governing coalition could use his own position to influence government policy in-line with his own stated aims, yet his record shows that he has not.

there is just no hope, for some.

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.

withdraw

The backbench debate on an EU referendum has caused much excitement in Westminster, the  motion was ‘negatived on division. (Ayes: 111, Noes: 483)’, the significance of the debate is not as much as the hype being discussed, it will not do what it says on the tin, it was defeated and in any case was not binding on the government. It has though, brought attention to the credibility of Cameron’s leadership and his  preferment for rhetoric over action.

The number of ‘rebels’ was increased by the wording of the motion; including the third option of ‘renegotiation’ allowed the majority who supported the motion a get out clause and a chance to kick Cameron for whatever grievances they may have. Renegotiation is simply not an option, it  needs to be made clear to those suggesting that renegotiation is an option and those that have been naive enough to believe them.

For Britain or any other member state in the European Union decide it would like to withdraw from any policy area signed up to through the various treaties, directives and legislation. Britain or that member state would have to seek agreement from the other 26 member states, and an amendment to the existing treaties would need to take place.

The likelihood of  the 26 member states  agreeing on Britain opting out of policy areas that it does not find favourable, while they themselves remain signed up to it is nil, it is as though those advocating ‘renegotiation’, they seem to think that  EU treaties are  a box of chocolates where you pick out the nice pieces and leaves the rest for the next idiot.

Cameron and co still claim to be eurosceptic, even after all the broken promises and ‘cast iron’ guarantees, some will keep the pretence going – it serves both their interests, others are naive enough to actually believe it. Cameron calls himself a ‘euro-realist’ :read federalist,  he has consistently used the issue of europe as bait to the party using it whenever he needs their support, ignorant when it does not suit his needs.

It has to be asked why those in the party who do not agree with the position of the leadership continue to support the leadership, in the FT today Tristan-Garel-Jones (former minister for europe under Thatcher and Major) another europlast, says those that are “stuck in the 19th century model of the nation-state and who advocate withdrawal from the EU” should withdraw from the party.  it is the obvious suggestion to make while the quisling leadership is so at odds with their views.

pointless posturing

The debate in the House of Commons on Monday put forward by David Nutall MP and granted by the backbench business committee is as follows:

“The House calls upon the Government to introduce a Bill in the next session of Parliament to provide for the holding of a national referendum on whether the United Kingdom

(a) should remain a member of the European Union on the current terms;

(b) leave the European Union; or

(c) re-negotiate the terms of its membership in order to create a new relationship based on trade and co-operation.”

The motion for the debate itself is utterly flawed, (a) to remain a member of the EU on current terms, is a scenario no one wants not even the most enthusiastic eurofanatic believes that Britain’s relationship at present is ideal, it is Cameron’s rosy scenario where the issue can be brushed away and people stop ‘banging on’ about europe, however it is not even an option crisis in the euro zone and its spillover effects will not allow for the status quo.

whilst (b) leaving the european union is the favoured option, the fact is a new political arrangement needs to be ready to take its place, those in Westminster are not up to the task of governing without the influence and direction of the EU, were the country to put its fate in the hands of  the party (lib/lab/con), democracy, governance and our politics would indeed worsen.

As wittering witney and autonomous mind point out the country is not even ready to be asked this question in a referendum, with the public so ill-informed on the subject, through obfuscation from our politicians and the media, the whole issue of the European Union is boiled down to headline grabbers such as the infamous straight banana or what the definition of chocolate is.

A comment by don wreford on autonomous mind’ post above makes the point asking if “we may have to have a phd on politics to understand?” a phd may not be needed, but vast amounts of reading and inquiry are, to understand the workings of the EU and the consequences of being a member. Educating the public is not going to be an easy task when the people who gain most from the EU’s very existence rely on misleading the public and keeping them in the dark about the facts, to keep the charade going.
Exit from the EU now or in the forseeable future, is not likely to come from referenda, the only route is the long road through clear information getting through to the wider public, or with self inflicted implosion, which is not as unlikely as once thought.

(c) in the motion to renegotiation  membership to create a relationship based on trade and co-operation; is simply not an option, membership of the  European Union is not a pick and choose situation, the other 26 members would not agree to Britain remaining in the EU on a trade based negotiation, while they remain signed up to the unfavourable arrangements. Those that believe this outcome is possible are on never-never land, there is more chance of us being booted out than this idea.

we wont leave europe, but it wont rule us” is a re-hash of William Hague’s  old “in europe not run by europe”  slogan  the europlasts use for cover,it is not only misleading it defies reality. The 27 nations that are in the EU are run by the EU whether leaders admit it or not. CCHQ  have put out this briefing  going over the same old lines as, ‘blame labour’, ‘we need a majority’, ‘we have a referendum lock’ etc. is a smokescreen to try to hide behind, attempting to keep up the pretence that the conservative really are sceptic.

Even in the event of Westminster initiating such ‘renegotiation’ what could be expected? a few more fish allowed to be kept by fisherman? or no increase in the British contribution to the EU budget? it would be a continuation of bone-throwing to the Conservative party while Cameron tries to keep his position. The sideshow tomorrow in the HoC, will come to nothing, it is not binding and will serve only to detract attention away from the governments incompetence over economic policy and pretty much all else. Britain has signed up to the Treaties, which once signed are simply not up for discussion, with David Cameron speaking for the country in Europe there is even less hope of any good deal arising, unless you are angela merkel treaty change, worthy of the name is not an option.

Cameron + co, are only too pleased with how the debate looks set to go, the ‘rebels’ are unable to force a referendum, and will be made to look supposedly out of touch. Having moved the timetable of debate, Cameron gets to enjoy the sound of his own voice for longer, and will limit time for discussion, so from the backbenchers who do get a say, we will most likely hear them once again speaking to themselves rather than the people they are supposed to represent.

It is pointless posturing, the hype over tomorrows debate is going to leave everyone underwhelmed, whatever is said in the Commons tomorrow is of little importance, compared to whats happening with the euro .

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.

changes

It has been a while since I last posted due to personal reasons and finding an internet connection i would advise against using vodafone! however I shall be posting regularly again for those few that read  the blog, whilst I have been offline I have still been reading other blogs and keeping up to date with the goings on in politics and current affairs.

Quite a lot has happened, and yet the situation has not changed much. But there are refreshing  signs that things are moving forward, I have been intrigued with Mr North’s idea  of referism over at eureferendum, as well as independent political blogger\’s which are both a bit of what is needed if we are to move forward.

However, as can be seen here and here, and here amongst other places, the msm and the bumptious likes of tim montgomerie, james forsyth and peter oborne continue to prove to be merely Cameron lapdogs, spitting out the cameroon tune; they are either applying for a job in the cameroon circle or are pathetically ignorant to the facts.

The politico’s in the  bubble of Westminster continue to talk amongst themselves and in doing so are deaf to the realities of ‘ordinary folk’. with the politicians and the msm hand in hand they are in agreement with eachother on issues, which if they look outside the bubble would see that theyare contrarient with the peoples priorities.

As for the goings on within the EU it is apparent that the eurozone is crumbling before us and the longer that those in power try to prop it up (pdf) , the worse the end outcome will be, and yet we have a prime minister all to happy to join in

blogging has resumed.

 

more on that ‘peoples’ pledge.

Today at muffled vociferation has posted on the deception of the peoples pledge, it has made me think about the campaign in more depth, having joined the dots it would seem that those serial con artists Douglas Carswell and Daniel Hannan, are most likely the (real) organizers of this, I have posted previously on the issue of them wanting to close down B.O.O.

And both Carswell and Hannan are on the advisory council and are promoting the pledge. As the post by MF suggests they may just be a bone thrown to the right of the party and the conservatives of the public still hoping that Cameron’s ‘conservatives’ might just one day fight the sceptic cause. It would suit all the culprits, Cameron does not really mention the subject of a referendum or withdrawal unless pressed and Carswell and Hannan, publish books, make television appearances, keep their seats in Parliament(s) and purport to be for all things they set out in the plan.

I may be wrong that those two are not some cons, but having been blocked by Carswell for asking perfectly reasonable questions regarding democracy questioning his eurosceptic credentials, his lapdog adherence to every word that comes from Dan Hannans mouth, and his stooge like performance in Camerons precense. It would seem he has something to hide. As equally does Hannan, just why they wanted to shut down B.O.O. still remains unclear.

the peoples pledge, is in effect the same as the pledge by all Liberal Democrats (ALL) signed the NUS pledge card to stop any increase in tuition fees, and yet reneged. Cameron reneged on his pledge to the sun of holding a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty as did the nulab and libdems when they put the policy in their manifesto’s all those years ago.

So even if these MPs who are being targeted sign the pledge, who or what is to say they will stick to it? There is no evidence to suggest they would, and the party line always take percedence over personal belief. I have not signed the peoples pledge as yet, and am not planning on doing so. As it says on the site the aim is not to exit europe but to have a referendum, the idea sounds great until you dig a little deeper.

If a referendum is held, will the reult be taken into account if a NO vote is produced or would the country be forced to vote again (as in Ireland). None of the three main parties proposes exit and with the referendum funding policy being changed who’s guessing that the lib/lab/con wont conspire against an out campaign and if an IN vote is won the sceptic cause will be lost for a generation.

Anything to do with those like Carswell and Hannan need to be gone over with a fine tooth comb, as i suspect they have different motivations than those who would like to see Britain out of europe. Maybe UKIP is the only hope (at the moment)?

in-out in-out shake it all about

Today, comes good news and hope for those of us who wish to see, the politicians of Westminster squirm then relent and grant the public the referendum they not only want but deserve.

Only last week quisling Cameron, declared that he wishes to stay in the European Union and that an in-out referendum was out of the question, as most know a referendum on the issue of Europe has not been held since 1975 that even was only on the issue of the EEC, David Cameron , nick clegg, Ed Miliband etc, can try to put this off as they wish, but in the end the political class will  suffer the consequences; those being  the result of an even more frustrated electorate delivering an out answer.

The peoples pledge, is an initiative of the left, in favour of membership but realising the democratic deficit of EU membership and the people of this nation need to have a say. Caroline Lucas of the Green party, Keith Vaz of Labour and other unexpected names have cropped up, are in favour but want the decision to rest with the people and whatever you may think of them they have to be applauded for this.

David Cameron like Blair, Brown and Clegg pledged to hold a referendum then reneged, (“I know best. Your views are irrelevant. Get used to it.”)promised to claw back sovereignty and competences, and has reneged, (the EU Bill is nothing but a token gesture). He is now so in hock with the EU, Merkel, Sarkozi, etc. He yearns for the next EU summit, as it is known these summits and gatherings are pure photo opportunities and serve only to cause more trouble back in the leader own backyards when they return home.

It is now time for a referendum, and I urge everyone to sign the pledge , the country has been betrayed by our leaders repeatedly on this issue, and it will be them who are left on the back-foot for not initiating this themselves.

The media seems also to be waking up to the elephant in the room, the Daily Mail, Express, and Guardian have recently started printing (talking) about the issue more prominently, it is only thoe who have ‘power’ who would not  like a referendum, realising that a no vote would end their cosy dwellings once and for all.

sign the pledge