To think Cameron did the right thing saying no in the latest EU vote as that he should go even further and get us out of the EU altogether?!

[runningwilde]

I have always been a Euro sceptic, never liked the idea of the Euro and think that places like Norway and Sweden were very sensible staying out of the EU. Although, of course, there are some very good arguments for being in the EU, I can't help but think we are better off out of it?

Would love to hear what others think about this. Aibu to think like this? Agree or disagree?!

Look forward to your dismay about the cost of having to pay for a new non-EU passport if and when we pull out, and listening to all those with relatives who have retired to Spain banging on about the disruption with medical care and pension payments, and the loss of agricultural subsidies for farmers (the last great class of producers in the UK) and the loss of grants for regeneration and business schemes in our deprived city centres.

And we need this thing called Trade.

Thanks For the link! It's really interesting x

Ooh yeah, I'm really ranty on there aswell!

The EU was fine whilst it was just a collection of countries with a common interest for trade. It has now got to big for its boots.

Power goes to those with the money and as German and France have it they will rule the roost but how long are their own voters going to be happy to be the ones footing the bill for other countries failures.

Um, Sweden is in the EU.

YAB ignorant.

Runningwilde, Sweden is a member of the E.U.

I don't know where DC is going eu wise, but wonder if referendum needs to be held at this stage as there really seems to be so much popular opposition to Britain's membership.

For me, the term splendid isolation springs to mind. Easier to do in the 19th century than now.

I think the OP meant to say that we should be out of the EU - like Norway and Switzerland.

Sweeden is in the EU but hasn't adopted the Euro as it's currency.

Fiscal union, which the others are forging ahead with, is just another step towards the 'ever closer union' that has always been part of the blueprint since the CM/EEC/EU etc conception.

I just look at the non-democratic unelected Governements led by former EU bureaucratics that have been installed in Greece and Italy and thank goodness that we're not part of the Eurozone.

We should renegoiate our membership and have the same affiliation as Norway and Switzerland. We should also be focusing on creating tarde links with the growing Asian and Pacific rim economies instead of with Europe, where the market is in decline.

So YADNBU.

Completely agree WetAugust.

Alarm bells should be ringing all over the place at the speed with which France and Germany are bringing in this new treaty with it basically giving unelected bodies in Brussels control over national budgets, policies etc. Very dangerous stuff, and the speed with which it has been drawn up shows that this has been waiting in the wings and Merkel and Sarkosy have just been waiting for the opportunity to push it through.

WetAugust and Alibaba I completely agree. I liked the quote regarding Britain now being isolated, 'We are isolated in the same way as a passenger left on the quayside as the Titanic sets sail'. This is a perfect analogy.

Cameron did not "veto" anything. Veto implies that by voting against something it is blocked. This didn't happen. The rest of them went ahead and did what they wanted without the UK. He didn't secure any of the things he wanted, like protection for The City. What he HAS done is risk being outvoted by 26 to 1 on any measure the rest of them want to bring in the future. There are loads of things that they can impose on the UK under the current treaty and the UK will be powerless to stop it because we are now isolated. Frankly, he couldn't have done any worse!

There are two choices really. Embrace Europe like the Lib-Dems want or put out altogether of the EU like the Tory backbenchers want. Both would have its' plusses and minuses. What Cameron has done is neither and will only bring bad news for the UK.

Grrr... That should read "pull out altogether".

I think Cameron was stuck between a rock and a hard place.

He had to protect our financial services which despite popular belief, pays a lot of taxes each year. Money we sorely need at the moment.

He knew if he came home having signed up without getting anything in return, he'd be defeated in Parliament. So the only thing he could do was veto.

This does mean that the rest of Europe now move on without us and longer term I think this does give us a problem.

I agree that we do need to decide as a nation whether or not we stay in Europe or out. Right now this cherry picking the bits we like and being awkward about the bits we dislike are winning us no friends. Right now we're the schoolchild stood all on our own in the playground that noone wants to talk to.

Time for a referendum. This is a huge issue and is something that the people ought to be deciding, not a government without overwhelming public support.

A trade agreement is one thing, a federal Europe is quite another. Seems the least a government could do is ask us before handing over our right to self govern. Of course, they won't, because this is not a democracy and the government are scared of the potential result.

We fought two world wars, to stop Germany from taking over Europe. This is their third crack at it, with different tactics.

The disquiet felt in Europe about aspects of the EZ deal is hardly being reported: it's certainly not receiving an unqualified welcome. I am not sure it is going to produce an efficient bloc which will want to act together; it may well fall apart when the realisation dawns of what it will mean to have Eurocrats vetoing national budgets; and it does not solve the EZ debt crisis (anyone know how the markets are reacting today?)

So I think it's too early to say whether he did the wrong thing or not.

I do not think we should leave the EU. But nor do I think it would be excessively detrimental if we did, as long as we remained in EFTA and EEA (like Switzerland).

As long as we remain in the EEA, that's fine, as you have some of the benefits, but not all the pain and remain associated with the EU.

All the Europe is going through a rough patch, it is one of the largest markets in the world, and to become more isolated is not necessarily a good idea.

I just wish the newspapers would stop using this as an opportunity to get all crazy jingoistic and xenophobic (Metro this morning - better a British bulldog than a poodle, I mean, FFS).

Longer term I do think we need a referendum. But now is probably not the right time.

I mean the Tories are natural Eurosceptics and the lib dems pro Europe. So that would finish off the coalition. This would cause a huge confidence problem in the markets, the results would not only deeply affect us but Europe too.

Plus what question do you ask? Right now I fear any question would result in no as people use it to protest whats happening now rather than a sensible choice.

The French protect their farmers, the Germans protect their manufacturing, why should the British not protect the City? They pay a lot of tax which we really need right now.

Norway isn't a member of the EU but is an associate of the EU through its membership of EFTA. This means Norway has to accept all financial and related EU legislation without having anyone in the EU Parliament or on the Commission, just so they get a preferential trading deal. Hardly a position to envy.

While I'm generally fairly pro-EU I think this treaty amendment might be a step too far and is not guaranteed to work, either in terms of the financial situation or administratively between the states.

A lot of you seem to be missing the point. Cameron's "veto" didn't actually protect the City or ANY British interests! He walked away from the table without any safeguards at all. On top of that he pissed off the other 26 nations and it'll be unlikely they'll support him when it comes to a vote of all the member nations. They can still impose their transaction tax (or any other policy that'll hurt our interests) and the UK can do nothing about it except be vote "no". All of this is still covered by the current treaty that we're signed up to.

Leaving th EU will have a disastrous effect on our farming and manufacturing industries. The EU is not perfect, but nor is any system. DC has made a big mistake. He is employed to get us the best deal possible. I do not believe that he has done this by walking away.

For all those who say it would be disasoutrous for farming or manufacturing why?

We are a net contributor to the EU (to whom we give billions of £££) surely if we pull out that money at least in the short term can be used to shore up our farming and manufacturing sectors as they a) find other markets or b)neogiate deals within a new structure. If we pulled out we would also have a better chance of reinevestiment for capital building projects within the UK (like the train building that went to France etc).

Sarkozy and Merkel also pushed DC into the corner way before the negioatitions took place.

I firmly believe the unspoken agenda is for United States of Europe, and there's no time like a crisis to push through legislation that would not be accepted at any other time.... you only have to look at history and the weimar republic etc to see the legislation made in like this has longer term implications.

In terms of us leaving the EU, the issues would be huge, but just a couple of examples:

1. We joined the EC in 1975 because the markets which we had previously done business with were, by then, trading largely with EC nations, as were we. That situation continues. Were we to leave the EU the cost to industry and farming would be enormous. Where would these new markets be that we could cultivate? Britain is not backwards in coming forward with regards to new business so which people are we not dealing with now that we should? Many companies have spoken out and said they deal with British firms or have factories in Britain because of our EU membership rather than inspire of it.

1. Yes, we are a net 'giver' to the EU, that isn't the whole story. We cannot accurately quantify the amount of money that is made by individual companies within the EU so while we do give more than we receive in terms of government money, once an estimate of the amount business makes is added in, means we as a nation receive a huge amount more than we pay out.

1. In terms of legislation, we are so embedded in the EU that it would take an eternity (I read a guess that it was somewhere between 5-25 YEARS!) to rework the domestic legislation, let alone the money involved.

The EU, as others have said, is not perfect but it is necessary. This particular issue has been handled very badly by many, not least Sarkozy and Merkel, and Cameron has done himself no favours I fear. But to assume from this that EU membership is a bad thing is not accurate, although it is a very common view to hold in Britain.