We WILL get an EU referendum

Moby

Fella wrote: »

Moby wrote: »

Worried? I was laughing as I wrote it.

BTW I'd speak to you EXACTLY the same way face to face. And that's something
else you can choose to believe or not.

I do believe you...because you do come across as being rather stupid;)

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Further, Angela Merkel has already stated there may be some room for manouvre in the EU.

But what about that German bloke who said there was simply no room for negotiation and it was either the Brussels way or the highway?

Just shows how politics works - lines drawn in the sand can be moved. We've gone overnight from no negotiation being possible to negotiation being possible but no UK specific deal. In reality of course it means nothing; the EU is in a permanent state of negotiation.

Is it enough to get the conservatives through the next election without self-destructing?

ash28

Fella wrote: »

Yes Labour have been massively wrong-footed by Cameron & are floundering about in a most unattractive way.

Even with everything going against the coalition Miliband was too pathetic to make much of an impact. Stuff like this highlights just what an empty vest he is. Let's hope Labour don't wise up & dump him.

The other parties don't need to do anything - the election is 2 years away. They can just sit back and watch developments for now.

The latest YouGov poll (yesterday) gives Labour an increased lead

-LAB lead 12% in first post Cameron EU speech daily poll CON 31(nc): LAB 43(+2): LD 11(-1):Ukip 10(nc).


Don't forget the Labour party tore itself apart over Europe in the 1970s - the same thing could happen to the Conseratives this time around, united they are not.

Personally I think he (Cameron) has thrown the problem down the road - he should start his renegotiations now and not after the next election.

kbrumann

Negotiation about what? "Call me Dave" hasn't said which powers he wants to repatriate or what he wants from the EU in general.

Maybe Cameron just wants the right to further increase university tuition fees and give up the British rebate in exchange? Or maybe he finally wants Britain to join the Schengen Agreement like Switzerland and Norway did?

I am sure François Hollande would agree with that.

Fella

ash28 wrote: »

Don't forget the Labour party tore itself apart over Europe in the 1970s - the same thing could happen to the Conseratives this time around, united they are not.

I agree the Tories are bitterly split on whether we should be in or out of Europe. But that's not the same thing as being bitterly split on whether we should have a referendum on whether we should be in or out of Europe.


There's no reasonable argument to be made against having a referendum at least, and I think most Tory MPs will be OK with it if it looks like increasing their chances at the next election.


If they did win the election I'm sure there would be huge in-fighting as the referendum approached. Unless by then the EU is such a basket-case that even the wets are happy to leave.

GeorgeHowell

ValHaller wrote: »

That is a whole different debate. If you expect people to obey the law you should give them a say in what that law is. That is equally straightforward common sense & clearly correct. And it is disgusting to impose laws on people which they have no say in.

Fortunately you only post here, you don't make legal rulings. Endless joke postings from the European Gallery of F***ing awful posts made by morons tend to make me think that I would rather have the ECHR making legal rulings than have you doing it.

They do get a say, before they get convicted, and after they have done their time. If they don't want to lose out electorally, then they should not do things likely to earn them porridge.

The ECHR is a (sick) joke, and anyone who does not think so is also, I'm afraid, a joke.

Graham_Devon

Lbour got attacked on the radio earlier, asked "So you think the people you want to vote for you are unable to make a decision on Europe".

The answer was no, they do not think that, however, this isn't the right time, and crucially, told us again, this isn't what WE want, and therefore, it's not in the national interest.

The question was asked how they know what we want if they won't give us a vote, and labour responded that it's what they hear on the doorsteps and that they are not ruling out a referendum at some point in the future.

However, they wanted to criticise Cameron for putting a referendum out there in the future, even though they can't suggest they won't.

They are totally confused, and you can tell there are serious talks being had in the labour party about this. Meanwhile, labour MPs are sent like lambs to the slaughter until they have decided what their real position is.

It's come to a position now of "We know what people want", but it only takes one question of "how, if you won't allow a vote" to bring it all falling down. That's not tenable going forward, and as suggested yesterday to Hamish, Labour will HAVE to offer a referendum going forward. They can't campaign on this confused, we know better than you plebs footing.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

That's not tenable going forward, and as suggested yesterday to Hamish, Labour will HAVE to offer a referendum going forward. They can't campaign on this confused, we know better than you plebs footing.

No, but they can and should campaign on the basis of the following:

1) Committing to a referendum 5 years in the future is a dangerous mistake, it creates business uncertainty and risks inward investment and jobs for the next 5 years.

2) The French are already rolling out the red carpet for companies looking to locate in Europe on the back of Mr Cameron's announcement yesterday, it won't be long before other European nations do the same, and what business is going to locate their European base in the UK when we might not even be a member 5 years from now?

3) We would prefer to work with our partners in Europe from the inside, from a position of mutual respect and with a seat around the table to protect British interests.

GeorgeHowell

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Lbour got attacked on the radio earlier, asked "So you think the people you want to vote for you are unable to make a decision on Europe".

The answer was no, they do not think that, however, this isn't the right time, and crucially, told us again, this isn't what WE want, and therefore, it's not in the national interest.

The question was asked how they know what we want if they won't give us a vote, and labour responded that it's what they hear on the doorsteps and that they are not ruling out a referendum at some point in the future.

However, they wanted to criticise Cameron for putting a referendum out there in the future, even though they can't suggest they won't.

They are totally confused, and you can tell there are serious talks being had in the labour party about this. Meanwhile, labour MPs are sent like lambs to the slaughter until they have decided what their real position is.

It's come to a position now of "We know what people want", but it only takes one question of "how, if you won't allow a vote" to bring it all falling down. That's not tenable going forward, and as suggested yesterday to Hamish, Labour will HAVE to offer a referendum going forward. They can't campaign on this confused, we know better than you plebs footing.

Labour is terrified of anything that would put the brake on us heading towards being part of a federal Europe. It would end their dream of permanent socialist government via Brussels.

Fella

More & more this looks like (uncharacterstically) a brilliant move by Cameron. Labour have been utterly outmaneouvred. Their choices now are to abandon their beliefs AND be seen to just meekly copy the Tories, by promising a referendum, or to stick to the disastrous policy of NOT agreeing they'll have one.

Meanwhile Cameron gets to attempt to negotiate a better deal off the back of the rest of Europe knowing he's not simply bluffing - if the Tories win the only way the UK would stay in Europe is if the electorate like whatever gets agreed.