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?!

And Cameron has managed to exactly the opposite by uniting the other 26 nations against the UK.

It is looking ever more likely that Commerzbank will require a further bailout - interesting article here about prospects of German bailouts.

There's quite a lot that can yet go wrong with the much vaunted deal - the Socialists in France are dead against it (and if they return to power, may seek to extricate), Sweden and the Czech Republic haven't totally agreed (they will put to their Parilaments and the outcome is definitely not a done deal), and it's similar for Hungary. If another country departs, the whole lot may yet crumble. DC is in an exposed position as the current scapegoat, but the EZ agreement may well yet fail as countries examine whether it is indeed a good deal.

Cameron is a clown. He went to that meeting having persuaded himself and everyone else that he could skilfully steer a course between his EU-hating backbenchers and his europhile coalition partners, but he may as well have walked into that conference chamber in nothing but a pair of y-fronts worn back-to-front.

Bullshitting skills from an expensive private education can only get you so far, and the boy Cameron was found wanting.

What has he achieved, precisely? His 'veto' is anything but - a veto is supposed to stop something happening and he's stopped bugger all. The only thing he has gained is the ire and contempt of our neighbours and trading partners, and he has lost the ability to set the agenda in Europe in favour of following meekly behind. Idiot.

FantasticV, and if he'd have agreed to it then we'd all be now saying he sold our sovereignty to the EU and got nothing in return.

Sarkozy pulled a blinder and put Cameron in between a rock & a hard place. It really was a case of heads he won, tails we lost.

niceguy - Cameron took his bat and ball home rather than negotiate because he wanted to look after his rich banker mates.

As David Gow said in the Graun:

Barroso has blown apart Dave's main justification that he was "defending the single market" by saying his six-point demand threatened it - and he, Barroso, tabled a compromise talking about protecting the single market and, specifically, financial services. The pent-up venom towards the UK is also now spewing out in the European Parliament - including from anglophiles.

What people don't seem to get is that Merkel also went out of her way to help Dave as she doesn't want Germany irrevocably tied to France and is closer on economic policy etc to the UK. But the demands he tabled at 3am on Friday last week, senior sources say, were for an effective veto on all single market legislation: "obviously, out of the question." What if Merkel had demanded special protection for the German car industry - VW (soon to be the world's biggest car-maker), Mercedes and BMW? Or Sarko for the French energy sector - EDF/GDF Suez/Areva? Cameron would have gone crazy...

YANBU. the answer to "we need the EU" is Switzerland doesn't. They have a similar, finance and services based economy to us.

OldMumsy - very very true what you said.

"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."

You could add Spain with its fishing rights to that list along with many other vital national interests.

It is a myth that EU countries are united in a common objective. In truth it is a bunch of self interested countries who only stay in the EU for what they can get out of it. Most countres are net takers from the EU in the form of subsidies and cheap loans in more recent times. Only a few countries like Germany and the UK are net contributers.

I firmly believe we should renegotiate and the fact that we are net contributers is something that the other countries, especially France, will not want to lose and hence will acquiesce to our reasonable demands.

He who pays the piper.....etc.

We are not Switzerland, HappyCamel.

Their population is a fraction of ours and with a much higher level of education.

I wonder if many people share my view that the casino financial services trade is what has brought us all into the pit, and we have been drowning them in our money baling them out at enormous expense.

I don't feel much desire to carry on featherbedding them in the hard times, just so they can grow richer at our expense in the good times. Obviously, from their PoV, being allowed to do whatever they want to make maximum profit and fat short-term bonuses, with the rest of us covering their risks of failure, is super way to carry on.

So I don't share Oilyboys's desire to put the Financial Services trade first.

As it's a multinational casino, it needs multinational control.

The issue of properly regulating financial services and making sure banks hold enough capital to support their trading activities is really a quite separate issue from the crisis in the Euro Area chiefly related to member countries borrowing far too much money they cannot now pay back after living way beyond their means for decades.

There is a deliberate ploy by France/Germany to conflate the two issues in order to distract voter attention away from the need for Govts to get their own house in order.

"a quite separate issue"

And it doesn't need to be addressed as part of the general financial crisis, you mean?

Or it does need to be addressed, as long as Oilyboy's chums don't have to follow the same rules as everyone else?

FV, the problem is that Merkel & Sarkozy were not being pressured to sign a treaty where there are plans to tax farmers or the car industry. Had there been, I think they'd be doing exactly what Cameron was. Protecting their own interests.

Piglet, the financial services caused a big mess. But this is not the cause of the Euro crisis. That is caused by the sudden realisation that all these European countries have been borrowing large amounts of money for decades with little ability to pay it back.

But it's been a great way for the government's to deflect blame off themselves, just in the same way that the environment has been a great excuse for lots of new taxes.

So now they're planning to tax bankers to pay for their reckless overspending because they've calculated that most public don't understand/care about bankers and they are the 21st century equivalent of the bogeyman.

However, given 80% of the financial services are currently in the UK, they're in effect wanting to tax the UK to pay for the Euro's failure. A currency we said wouldn't work and not a part of.

Wetaugust It is not a benign dictatorship, ffs! It's a "governo tecnico", guaranteed by the Presidente della Repubblica. And we still have the same Parliament, you know, voting for reforms etc?

I wish people would stop banging on about Switzerland as a model of what we want to be. The UK is nothing like Switzerland. Our population of about 7 million (ie smaller than that of London). We have over 60 million. And how many of you would be happy to pay Swiss prices in shops I wonder?

Sorry, 'their' population is about 7m

and it is also as boring as hell!

I doubt the hug a hoody brigade would like Switzerland's anally retentive approach to social conformity either

niceguy2 - what you're forgetting is that the Tobin Tax proposed (at the hugely "punitive" rate of about 50p on every £1,000 of financial transaction) was to raise funds to assist in ensuring countries don't ultimately default on the debt that banks hold.

I can imagine the conversation when Dave got his pre-conference phone call: "Hello David old bean! Just wanted you to know that even though we caused this mess in the first place we aren't prepared to help pay for it. Obviously we can't tell you what to do what with you theoretically being the Prime Minister, but we'll be considering our options carefully when it comes to appointing non-exec directors after your political career. Toodle pip!"

Anyway - in a negotiating chamber you're supposed to negotiate. Cameron seemed to forget that bit, didn't he?

What you seem to never mention niceguy is that Cameron didn't protect the City and the other EU countries can still pass that tax and there's not a damn thing the UK can do about it! Anyone who may have voted with us are so pissed off they won't bother.

The EZ countries do indeed seem to be signing up to a whole raft of intervention in their sovereignty over tax. But if they decide on tax to be paid for action in their territories, it doesn't impinge on what tax we levy here. It's not just on banks or transactions in those territories, it's their whole budgets and therefore every single tax, other revenue raising and also spending decision.

There are different taxes on all sorts of things across the EU already. I don't see why adding one new tax makes that much difference.

We can choose to act with them, or not, as and when suits us. The prospect of EZ/EU bureaucrats having the power to reject the whole UK national budget strikes me as excessively risky.

And even if it can be shown to be a good step in preventing future crises (which is uncertain thus far) it does nothing to solve the current one.

niceguy2 - spot on. Totally agree with you @ 12:24:48.

Banks need much much stricter regulation and I fervently wish we had the BoE in charge of it rather than the FSA who yesterday I notice finally admitted they failed to properly regulate RBS. Of course the financial services industry regulation needs sorting out but it has absolutely nothing to do with European Govts borrowing more money than they can ever pay back.

Handy to blame a 'bogey man' as you say.

amicissima
"A lot of people here seem to find the City distasteful and seem to be implying that we don't want them and their money. I wonder where they are thinking of finding the £54 billion (having read the thread about potential cuts to carers benefits, I personally, would like to see the income replaced before we encourage our financial sector to move out)."

Their money?

It's an interesting threat that they might want to move somewhere more accomodating, like Uzbekistan, where the UK taxpayer wouldn't be obliged to bale them out next time they go bust.

At the moment they have multi-billion guarantees underwritten by the British taxpayer. Can you imagine, for example, the governments of Singapore or Hong Kong wanting to offer such guarantees to flybynight companies that want to flit in from the UK for a while, on the understanding that they'll flit off somewhere else if there's a risk of tax or regulation?

And who would want to deposit their funds in a jurisdiction without a rock solid guarantee? Somewhere like Iceland or Jersey, for example?

Who are exactly these EU puppets? Don't you ever vote in European elections?

Thing is FV. Theoretically I am in favour of a Tobin tax. As long as it's applied globally. Banks can and do relocate their HQ to suit and it's one thing saying "Ahh it's only 50p per £1000" but when you are doing millions and millions of transactions, that adds up. Especially when you can just officially relocate your HQ to say Hong Kong which is one of the lowest personal/corporation tax regimes in the world and there'd be no Tobin Tax at all.

Furthermore....so the way I understand it would work is that this tax would go into the stabilisation fund for the Euro yes? But we're not in the Euro......so we're paying the majority of the money to shore up somebody else's banks. To a fund which we'd never be able to directly use if our own banks went tits up. That I have a problem with.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the result we got was a great one by any stretch of the imagination. But I think DC did the least worst thing.