Labour and the Euro summit

Malcolm.

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Another point. The Euro-sceptics think we can now renegotiate our relationship. Well, that is not correct because we have thrown away all our cards. Cameron should never have boxed himself into the corner he found himself in.

The choice now is to stay in the single market, with little influence on European policy. Or leave, and still have to play along with EU rules to trade with them, just as Norway and Switzerland do (I have professional experience in this).

This is not an issue to play silly games with.

There's plenty of cards to play with old chap. Common Agricultural Policy for one, amongst others.

TBH, I can't see the new treaty working. Too many countries want to be saved, too few countries want to pay for it.

As has already been said, schisms will appear.....watch this space.

Sir_Humphrey

ILW wrote: »

Are European countries going to refuse to buy our goods because of this. If not, what is the problem?

It makes it easier to tilt EU trade rules away from the UK, because we have no influence any more. This is not the way to make friends and influence people.

If you are not at the negotiating table, then it is difficult to influence people.

It is much better to act like an adult than do a flounce.

Graham_Devon

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

It is much better to act like an adult than do a flounce.

Cameron hardly did a flounce.

Come on now. The discussion was worth partaking in before you came up with that.

ILW

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

It makes it easier to tilt EU trade rules away from the UK, because we have no influence any more. This is not the way to make friends and influence people.

If you are not at the negotiating table, then it is difficult to influence people.

It is much better to act like an adult than do a flounce.

I fail to see what influence the UK ever had. What did we ever achieve in discussions that the french or germans didn't already want anyway?

Sir_Humphrey

Malcolm. wrote: »

There's plenty of cards to play with old chap. Common Agricultural Policy for one, amongst others.

TBH, I can't see the new treaty working. Too many countries want to be saved, too few countries want to pay for it.

As has already been said, schisms will appear.

FWIW, I agree that the new treaty is a crock, because it imagines that austerity is a solution to Europe's problems. However, Cameron seems to think that is the case as well. That is not why he vetoed it.

But it does mean that no-one will want or have to listen to us next time they try.

There is no way for the UK to renegotiate anything, because there will not now be a new treaty. Cameron would not want one in any case because it would cause him huge political problems. The Eurosceptic Tory right are too thick to realise this (at least yet). The event which would give us leverage is not going to happen now.

Malcolm.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Sarkozy is already blaming London for all of the EU's woes. Something he has only done after vetoeing.

Anyone would think he was leading upto an election. Oh, he is!? That explains it!!!

Sir_Humphrey

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Cameron hardly did a flounce.

Come on now. The discussion was worth partaking in before you came up with that.

He left the table and got the Eurostar back to London. That meets the Heseltine definition of flounce.

Graham_Devon

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

He left the table and got the Eurostar back to London. That meets the Heseltine definition of flounce.

What would you have preferred him to do?

Waste his time swanning around? He's done what he went to do.

You complain about not being included, and then complain when he comes home as he's not included. If he's stayed there, no doubt you would suggest he's now wasting his time and hiding in Brussels for fear of coming back.

Sometimes, you just cannot get through the political agenda to make way for any reasonable discussion.

As for your talk of negotiating power, does today not show you we had none in the first place?! Even before this, just 2 or 3 weeks back, Sarkozy was threatning Cameron in the press, and telling him to keep his nose out of EU business. Things change rapidly in the EU at the moment, and one minute he wants us to keep our noses out, the next he wants us in. Either way, he's TELLING us what to do, when to do it and how to do it. We have no negotiating power against France and Germany. Just like Greece has none either.

Sir_Humphrey

Malcolm. wrote: »

Anyone would think he was leading upto an election. Oh, he is!? That explains it.

Sir Humphrey, are you truly a civil servant. I thought you were supposed to act neutrally(?). Frankly, you come across left wing at times.

I am allowed to have personal opinions. All my comments on here are my personal opinions. I am also sufficiently junior to be allowed to express them.

I am pointing out that even if you were to agree with Cameron's objectives(and to be honest I am not quite clear what they were), he has not achieved them and may actually damage his objectives.

My understanding of French objectives in Europe is to marginalise the UK - this goes right back to de Gaulle. Sarkozy achieved this objective.

Malcolm.

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

FWIW, I agree that the new treaty is a crock, because it imagines that austerity is a solution to Europe's problems. However, Cameron seems to think that is the case as well. That is not why he vetoed it.

But it does mean that no-one will want or have to listen to us next time they try.

There is no way for the UK to renegotiate anything, because there will not now be a new treaty. Cameron would not want one in any case because it would cause him huge political problems. The Eurosceptic Tory right are too thick to realise this (at least yet). The event which would give us leverage is not going to happen now.

Alliances within europe, form and break all the time. I wouldn't worry too much. Countries historically take alliances where they can find them. They're a little fickle like that.

I agree about the political problems. The biggest danger to the govt, is the european issue has always split the conservative party. Probably more-so given the government are a coalition. It could potentially break the government.