Politics The Politics thread

Discussion in 'Gravel Trap' started by Jen, Jul 14, 2011.

  1. cider_and_toast

    cider_and_toast Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex Staff Member Premium Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    34
    I laughed out loud when he said "I am not Tony Blair" and there was a cheer from certain sections of the audiance. Oh, how short are the party memories.

    The other thing that made me puke is the warm tribute to the Harperson. This was the same woman who was caught on camera clapping as Ed Milliband condemmed the war in Iraq to be asked by David Milliband "Why are you clapping? You supported the war" to whcih she replied "He is the new leader and we must support him". Now that's politics.

    Finally, they were interviewing Harperson on the politics show before Eds speach and asking her about the new proposition that if the Labour leader should be a man then the deputy must automatically be a women or vice versa. She initially would not rule out though that if the leader was a women then deputy leader could also be a women. Now that's equality !!! All people are equal but some are more equal than others !!
     
    Fenderman likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to remove all adverts.
  3. Brogan

    Brogan Leg end Staff Member

    Featured Threads:
    5
    A singularly detestable individual.
     
  4. cider_and_toast

    cider_and_toast Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex Staff Member Premium Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    34
    Which one? That could be anyone from around 650 MPs?
     
    Fenderman and mjo like this.
  5. Brogan

    Brogan Leg end Staff Member

    Featured Threads:
    5
    ;)
     
  6. Galahad

    Galahad Not a Moderator Valued Member

    Featured Threads:
    6
    Q: Why do political parties release their leaders' speeches to the press in advance?

    A: So that the hacks will spot the nonsense contained therein before it reaches the general public:

    http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-cameron-hard-to-credit-on-consumer-debt/8096
     
    Fenderman and jenov2003 like this.
  7. FB

    FB Not my cup of cake Valued Member

    Featured Threads:
    54
    Fantasy F1 Profile:
    FF1 Profile
    Fantasy F1 Team-mate:
    FF1 Team-mate
    Fantasy F1 Rival:
    FF1 Rival
    Probably worse that Theresa May and the "Cat flap" scandal but unlikely get the same amount of press coverage. There's bollocks, complete bollocks and political conference speeches. BTW, any one see Bo Jo on Newsnight last night - wonderful interview, Paxman teasing him brilliantly.
     
  8. Brogan

    Brogan Leg end Staff Member

    Featured Threads:
    5
    I've been following the story of "the veto" with interest today.

    What's been interesting is seeing the reaction of all the critics, blaming Cameron for everything from genocide to global nuclear war.

    Just to put things in perspective though, these are just some of the points which relate to the veto.
    Unsurprisingly I agree with the action taken.

    Here's what UK officials say to all this. They say that first it wasn't an "open-ended veto" they were after, but a handful of quite specific demands, in areas where ministers had reason to worry that a more integrated Europe would take Britain in the wrong direction.

    Specifically, here's what they wanted enshrined in any revised treaty:

    First, a solid principle of non-discrimination. So, for example, the European Central Bank (ECB) couldn't demand that all financial clearing houses that deal in euros be located in a eurozone economy. The UK is currently taking the ECB to court on precisely this point.

    Second, the UK wanted the area of "maximum harmonisation" to become subject to unanimity. In plain English, this would mean that the UK - and everyone else - would have a veto on any decision to set a ceiling or maximum on a given part of financial regulation.

    This would mean, for example, that in implementing the Vickers report on banks, the UK could not be prevented from requiring UK banks to hold more capital - or liquidity - than required under EU regulations. This is another ongoing dispute with the European regulators, in which the IMF has recently taken the UK's side.

    In that sense, officials say it's wrong to argue - as some have - that the government was trying to protect the City from more regulation. Here, at least, David Cameron was trying to obtain the freedom to regulate more.

    A third demand was for all transfers of supervisory or regulatory powers to EU institutions also be made subject to a unanimous vote - again, effectively giving the UK a veto. This is an area where team Cameron sees the Commission eager to expand its reach. They wanted to stop it.
    More here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16116902

    It's quite clear that it is Germany's (and France's) intention to sideline the financial services sector of the UK.
    First by getting it written into law that all Euro related transactions must take place in a Euro country, presumably Germany (and France).
    Second, the proposed financial transaction tax would hit the UK hardest as the sector in London is much larger than any of the Euro zone countries.

    France has tried several times to get the UK kicked out of the club, so why don't we save them the trouble and tell them to get stuffed?
    Good riddance to the lot of them I say.
     
    mjo, GeoffP, jenov2003 and 1 other person like this.
  9. gethinceri

    gethinceri Daniil Kvyat Fan. Alfa Romeo Fan. Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    2
    Tell them all to **** off, let their silly little currency go tits up, allow The City to be the hub for European banking and stocks.
     
    mjo likes this.
  10. Jen

    Jen Here be dragons. Contributor

    I was trying to recall the name of the leader of 'other' 24 countries involved - I failed abysmally which, to my mind, is a finding in itself. :dunno:
     
    mjo likes this.
  11. Cookinflatsix

    Cookinflatsix Banned

    Cameron was left with no real choice. The chances are that the Eurozone will have to become a single country in fiscal terms to avoid disaster and even then eventually breakup is still likely anyway at a future date. To be in the EU without being part of the fiscal union will be pointless. To have to be dictated to by the likes of the Germans in order to trade with a basket case economic union is ridiculous.
    For 10 years, Frankfurt has tried everything to become the new financial hub of Europe, and it hasnt worked. The French have spent the time acting as Germanys poodle in the conspiracy against the 'irresponsible Anglo Saxon financial system'
    Lets see how the French feel when Germany starts to dictate to them how to be good hard workers and to stop taking the whole summer off work, lets see how they feel when their biggest enterprise becomes acting as waiters and servants to Germans holidaying on the French riviera. It will be too late by then and Sarkoface will be retired living on Elba by that time!

    Europe wont refuse to trade with Britain when the crunch comes.

    Britain is probably the one country in Europe that can make it work outside the union. We can leverage on our time zone position between US and the far East and on the massive fact that we speak English. Which is still the main business language globally.

    Nope Cameron had no choice in this matter, dammed if he did, dammed if he didnt, at least this way Britain chooses which way it wants to suffer the next few years

    >:(

    :rant over:
     
    Road of Bones, mjo, F1ang-o and 3 others like this.
  12. FB

    FB Not my cup of cake Valued Member

    Featured Threads:
    54
    Fantasy F1 Profile:
    FF1 Profile
    Fantasy F1 Team-mate:
    FF1 Team-mate
    Fantasy F1 Rival:
    FF1 Rival
    Never forgot that part of what drove Cameron to take the position he did was that if there is a new treaty he would have to have a referendum and, even if he agreed with it, would probably lose resulting in his party pushing for another referendum on the UK continuing as a member of the EU. Sad as it probably is the UK needs to continue within the EU. The risk is, if we want to trade with Europe, we would have to comply with all their rules and regulations whilst having no influence over what they are.

    To coin a phrase, we are better off being on the inside pissing out rather than on the outside trying to piss in. I appreciate that many on here might not agree but the UK needs Europe and all the time the EU exists in its current form we are better off trying to change it from within than simply shouting Yah! Boo! from the side lines.

    The EU has some pretty crazy and stupid ideas and it needs some British rationalism to control its excesses. The Eurospectics, particularly in the Conservative party, would have you believe that the UK economy could continue to thrive if we sat outside of the European Union but, I'm afraid, it can't all the time it exists. Better to return to the original idea of a "Common Market" but I think things may have gone too far for this ever to happen.

    BTW - interesting comment on the radio this morning that "France is milking the EU for every penny it can get". Having been to a French development area only last week I have seen this in action. Perhaps the UK needs to wise up and start playing the game the way the others do? If they want a Tobin tax on financial transactions let's push for a similar tax on all cars produced by Germany and French manufacturers around the World as a "green tax". Anyone got any other ideas where the UK could "play the game"?
     
    mjo and GeoffP like this.
  13. Jen

    Jen Here be dragons. Contributor

    We could just ignore all the rules like most of the other members do.

    That's a nice theory FB but whilst Merkel and Sarkozy are 'in charge' no-one will take any notice of Cameron and the UK's standpoint or needs. Cameron was wasting his breath and didn't really have any other option.
     
    gethinceri likes this.
  14. Galahad

    Galahad Not a Moderator Valued Member

    Featured Threads:
    6
    Much as I dislike the man, Cameron had no real alternative. Over 30 years so much of our economy has become dependent on the City that we cannot afford for that to be threatened by direct regulation (even if it will be severely hampered by indirect action anyway). We reap what we sow.

    Leaving the EU isn't realistically on the cards and is not what British business wants or needs. We'll just have to make the best of a strategically weak position.
     
    Cookinflatsix and GeoffP like this.
  15. gethinceri

    gethinceri Daniil Kvyat Fan. Alfa Romeo Fan. Contributor

    Featured Threads:
    2
    Merkel holds the economic cards, Sarkozy holds the Vive La Difference mantra. Historically the 3 can't work together once 2 have combined forces. General Election if the coallition disintegrates followed by a right dominated Conservative government and years of misery for every taxpayer in UK.
     
  16. Galahad

    Galahad Not a Moderator Valued Member

    Featured Threads:
    6
    Everyone's facing years of misery, it's just a matter of degree. Not sure about the Conservatives winning an election at the moment, either.
     
  17. Brogan

    Brogan Leg end Staff Member

    Featured Threads:
    5
    Agreed on both of those points G.

    Whoever won the last election was destined for a pounding at the next election, primarily because the majority of the electorate won't appreciate that there is very little any party could have done about the current situation, and they will punish them accordingly.
     
  18. Jen

    Jen Here be dragons. Contributor

    I'm actually looking forward to Cameron's statement on his EU decision and answering questions in Parliament this afternoon - could be interesting!

    Do you think I need 'to get a life'? :)
     
    gethinceri likes this.
  19. Brogan

    Brogan Leg end Staff Member

    Featured Threads:
    5
    Just to throw some figures into the discussion.

    The global daily money transactions total around $4 trillion.
    Of that, 18% happens in the US and 37% in the UK.

    Hence why Cameron vetoed the deal due to the proposed financial tax which would have hit London hardest.
    A lot of firms would have just upped sticks to the US.
     
  20. Cookinflatsix

    Cookinflatsix Banned

    Exactly, and London would suffer disproportionately, property, jobs would be devastated, as for the rest of the UK, even worse

    The Germans and French don't have much to lose from a transactional 'brady' type tax, Britain does as the far East etc won't impose any type of tax and so the banks that matter, US and bric will move.

    With Britain not signing up to these silly ideas, European banks will probably not be allowed to remain in London but apart from Deutsche Bank and maybe a couple who cares? The French Belgium etc banks are going to be the first to fold anyway because they are most exposed by selling sovereign credit default insurance

    Good riddance
     
  21. Bill Boddy

    Bill Boddy Professional layabout Premium Contributor

    I seem to remember that nice fellow Dave telling me before the last election that he would make those who created the financial problems pay for them. Now it seems that he is sticking to his word by demonising those who are the poorest and least able to defend themselves.

    However, we must mollycoddle the bankers, look at how much they have done for us over the past few years. Just as an example RBS saved themselves money by not conducting due diligence on ABM Amro before taking it over. This resulted in us being able to show our generosity by giving them virtually all the money they spent on the transaction. Wasn't that good of them?
     

Share This

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use it, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice