rolling 'eurozone? more like LOLozone' thread

Cameron won't go for peer pressure.

End of the world as we know it, I guess.

So happy we get to keep the deregulated financial services industry that's done us so well over the last few years.

Yeah, this from the government who railed against our over-reliance on the financial services industry. Silence from their Coalition partners on this one is deafening. Noticed on Question Time last night that there wasn't a single Lib Dem on the panel, which probably hasn't happened since Jeremy Thorpe was the leader.

Unfortunately the problem with being over-reliant on the financial services industry is that, being over-reliant, it's quite difficult to wean yourself off it - it's over 11% of the Treasury's revenue as it is. Fuck knows how we get out of this really but neither of the options on the table yesterday looked particularly appealing.

OTM x2

1. Leave the EU
2. Suck up to the US a bit more
3. ???
4. PROFIT!

could you all plz hold off til like nov 4th 2012, thx

Lord Oakeshott (via Michael Crick on Twitter):

"a black day for Britain and for Europe."

"when the western economies + our banking system are on the edge of a cliff, David Cameron's top priority is special pleading ..."

1. Leave the EU
2. Suck up to the US Chinese and Indians a bit more
3. ???
4. PROFIT!

... sorry Merkins, you're so over

Lord Oakeshott is basically the last Liberal in Britain

I'm sure China and India will have plenty of time for a small, bankrupt island off the west coast of the European mainland.

It'll be a bit like when the Barclay Brothers bought one of the Channel Islands.

Yeah not sure the US is that relevant here right now. Doubt there's much love lost between Cameron and Obama as it is.

Actually is there a single world leader out there that doesn't hate Cameron? I'm really struggling to think.

Still, maybe we can sort something out with Sweden, the Czech Republic and Hungary.

Actually is there a single world leader out there that doesn't hate Cameron?

Think he's quite popular in the Gulf States. That's somewhere else where we're going cap in hand for dosh to.

Think some Arab leaders quite like having an Old Etonian at their beck and call

See Jonathan Aitken

Would rather be owned by Sheikh Mansour than the Glazers tbh.

'Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg discussed the EU negotiations with the prime minister throughout last night and had agreed to the use of the veto, according to senior Tory sources.'

Can always rely on Nick Clegg to sell out on everything he's ever believed in

on bbc earlier I thought the reporter had bravely said "Cameron played the retard"

unfortunately it was "v-card" as in veto.

'Nigel Farage is having a field day in the atrium of the Justus Lipsius building where the summit is being held. "EU leaders' lunch cancelled - even I'm more popular than Cameron," he quips.'

Still, maybe we can sort something out with Sweden, the Czech Republic and Hungary.

Apparently not:

'Hungary's Europe minister has told the BBC that the Hungarian government is willing to sign up to the inter-governmental treaty agreed by eurozone countries. Eniko Gyori denied that Hungary had refused to sign up to it, as French President Nicolas Sarkozy had stated this morning. She said the UK is the only country that ruled out signing up to the agreement.'

isn't one of the main reasons for Chinese investment in the UK that we offer a cheaper deregulated route into the EU? cut off that route and be interesting to see how attractive an investment opportunity the country looks.

I mean FWIW yeah I know fuck off Tories and fuck off the City and all that but I'm not crazy about any agreement that would bind the UK to probably unachievable austerity targets that we couldn't disengage from even if* we elected a government that was minded to do so.

*Massive 'if' obv.

I read a tweet earlier, which I think resonates with Matt's earlier point, that said Cameron is throwing his support behind the financial sector because that's basically all the country has left. That it does nothing of any actual value and screwed us many times over is irrelevant, because without The City on the country's balance sheet, what else is there?

A propos of nothing I liked the line from the French this morning, comparing Cameron to a man who turns up to a wife-swapping party without his own wife.

Also I feel it needs to be pointed out that what Cameron did was 'taking his ball and going home' and not in any way 'a veto'.

Actually that implies he had the ball in the first place. It isn't even taking his ball and going home, it's going home while the other children keep playing.

I'm not crazy about any agreement that would bind the UK to probably unachievable austerity targets that we couldn't disengage from even if* we elected a government that was minded to do so

i have massive doubts about the whole EU project as it exists, but this looks a lot like cutting off yr nose to keep yr party onside tbh

Actually that implies he had the ball in the first place. It isn't even taking his ball and going home, it's going home while the other children keep playing.

Or going home and taking your jumper which was being used as goalpost, even though someone else has a bag that they can use instead, which would probably work better anyway.

Or going home and saying "you can carry on using my ball, put it back in my yard when you are finished" and it's not even his ball.

I'm still very unclear on what exactly Cameron rejected that is any different than what, say, France rejected. Didn't France retain a veto over spending plans dictated to it from Brussels?

I mean FWIW yeah I know fuck off Tories and fuck off the City and all that but I'm not crazy about any agreement that would bind the UK to probably unachievable austerity targets that we couldn't disengage from even if* we elected a government that was minded to do so.

Well, as I understand it, as we're not in the Euro (thanks to Gordon Brown) we wouldn't be subject to any such targets

So, yes, this is really about protecting the City and appeasing Bill Cash

'Former British finance minister Lord Lamont says Mr Cameron is "absolutely right". He argues that the situation the UK prime minister was in meant "he had no alternative". Lord Lamont, who as finance minister in the early 1990s was advised by Mr Cameron, adds that he doesn't believe the consequences for Britain will be damaging.'

And he's one guy who knows all about how to damage Britain

... and your name's pronounced /ˈlæm ənt/ not /lɛ ˈmɒnt/, ya dick

I mean FWIW yeah I know fuck off Tories and fuck off the City and all that but I'm not crazy about any agreement that would bind the UK to probably unachievable austerity targets that we couldn't disengage from even if* we elected a government that was minded to do so.

*Massive 'if' obv.

― Matt DC, Friday, 9 December 2011 13:35 (Yesterday) Bookmark Permalink

I think we can all agree on this. It is just that he walked out without really explaining his reasons and now has just left us stranded w/out a paddle when we could have used it as an opportunity to be a major part of figuring shit out.

In the nick of time, a well-placed source (a senior official who is broadly neutral towards the British government in this fight) has given me his reading of what happened, and where it all turned sour for Mr Cameron. It rings true to me.

Mr Cameron had two problems, as my source sees it. The first was the nature of his demand, and how it was made. In essence, the British did not ask for an "emergency brake" clause or opt-out for financial regulation.

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 much-discussed Financial Transactions Tax issue already requires unanimity and therefore could never be imposed on the City of London without Britain's agreement. What is more, as was pointed out in Brussels with some vehemence, when it comes to financial services there have hardly ever been any cases of Britain being outvoted in the adoption of such legislation.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2011/12/britain-and-eu-1

its...almost as if...Cameron engineered this situation out of nothing so he cd play the big man in front of his xenophobic backbenchers?

in all honesty, considering the issues the EU are trying to address, how this was ever going to be about the UK and Big Dave Cameron beggars fucking belief really. it's some attention ho shit for real.

The much-discussed Financial Transactions Tax issue already requires unanimity and therefore could never be imposed on the City of London without Britain's agreement. What is more, as was pointed out in Brussels with some vehemence, when it comes to financial services there have hardly ever been any cases of Britain being outvoted in the adoption of such legislation.

I wouldn't be surprised if Cameron actually didn't know this

Can't remember who said this bit I read something yesterday heavily implying that Sarkozy doesn't actually want a financial transactions tax and has engineered a situation where it can be scuppered and blamed on Cameron.