Are Labour two faced or two stupid?

CLAPTON

Mallotum_X wrote: »

Do you think the process is allowing the EU politicians to sort the problems out, or is it typical short-termism to get re-elected rather than fix anything.

I believe in democracy, even if it is a flawed system.
The alternative of rule by dicator is even less atractive.
When you say 'sorted' out do you mean 'sorted ' as for the benefit of Germany or Greece.
There are genuine differences of view how best to approach these problems; the process of compromise and agreement is a messy business.
Or of course we could adopt a more independant model and simply have a free trade area which would give each country much greater control over their own policies whether right or wrong.

StevieJ

JayScottGreenspan wrote: »

Would it really have been better to renogotiate to something that is moderately bad for Britain? Better that we don't sign up and it doesn't apply to us.

If someone's offering you a s**t milkshake you tell them to keep it. You don't dilute it and drink your share.

If the EU try to force any of this on us through the back door, then surely that would have to be referendum time, and hopefully they could kiss goodbye to our fairly substantial share of the farm subsidies and wage bill.

What I don't understand is why people think that teaty related to us rather than the Euro17?

FTBFun

"Opposition Party Tells Party in Power It is Wrong"

In other news:
- bears "to !!!! in woods"
- pope "is a roman catholic"

Mallotum_X

CLAPTON wrote: »

I believe in democracy, even if it is a flawed system.
The alternative of rule by dicator is even less atractive.
When you say 'sorted' out do you mean 'sorted ' as for the benefit of Germany or Greece.
There are genuine differences of view how best to approach these problems; the process of compromise and agreement is a messy business.
Or of course we could adopt a more independant model and simply have a free trade area which would give each country much greater control over their own policies whether right or wrong.

Only now they are able to come up with whatever suits them, yet any downside will still impact on us with no option to influence things.

CLAPTON

Mallotum_X wrote: »

Only now they are able to come up with whatever suits them, yet any downside will still impact on us with no option to influence things.

I'm unclear who 'they' are? elected parliaments or european bureaucrats?

Mr_Mumble

StevieJ wrote: »

What I don't understand is why people think that teaty related to us rather than the Euro17?

I don't know why you think it'll apply just to the Eurozone, from the, admittedly flimsy, 'agreement':

The objective remains to incorporate these provisions into the treaties of the Union as soon as possible. The Heads of State or Government of Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Sweden indicated the possibility to take part in this process after consulting their Parliaments where appropriate.

Europhiles seem to be saying it only applies to Euro area countries because of the wording of provision no. 5:

The rules governing the Excessive Deficit Procedure (Article 126 of the TFEU) will be reinforced for euro area Member States

But they are ignoring the wording of provision no.4 that applies to every signatory:

General government budgets shall be balanced or in surplus; this principle shall be deemed respected if, as a rule, the annual structural deficit does not exceed 0.5% of nominal GDP.

It makes sense that the budget rules applies to more than the EZ17 since there needs to be a mechanism for aligning the six prospective EZ members' fiscal rules.

JayScottGreenspan

StevieJ wrote: »

What I don't understand is why people think that teaty related to us rather than the Euro17?

Well it would have applied to us if we'd signed it. As we didn't, it won't.

chewmylegoff

lvader wrote: »

Labour have criticised the Tories for vetoing a treaty that would require the UK to cut the deficit to no more than 3% of GDP and at the same time saying they are cutting too fast too soon.

Are Labour two faced or two stupid?

You do know that the UK is not a euro zone country, right?

Mallotum_X

CLAPTON wrote: »

I'm unclear who 'they' are? elected parliaments or european bureaucrats?

In the case of this particular deal its a mixture of both (or rather the EU, and representatives from member states).

JayScottGreenspan wrote: »

Well it would have applied to us if we'd signed it. As we didn't, it won't.

I doubt we will get away without any impact even though we havent signed up. Hopefully if the EU/EU members can muddle though this without any significant crisis.

But it still comes back to the impact on us if the brown stuff hits the fan. We will be in it up to out necks. If a major bank were to fail as a result of say greek debt (not that likely as the debts not that big in reality). Then we would be impacted. Everything is so closely interlinked that simply saying "its your problem, sort it" is a head in sand attitude.

StevieJ

Mr_Mumble wrote: »

It makes sense that the budget rules applies to more than the EZ17 since there needs to be a mechanism for aligning the six prospective EZ members' fiscal rules.

No it doesn't, the prospective members only need to align with the rules when they actually join.