My view too. The way that some people look at it as being something we need to get out of ASAP doesn't work, that's the same kind of short term thinking that the RFL specialise in, not politicians.

We need to be in there, leading the way, not standing outside going "tut" when we don't like things, followed by "Well, we want a veto" when the restructuring is finished.

I think had Tony Blair had his way that's what Britain would have done, he was a leader that other European leaders seemed to look up to and respect unlike Cameron who gets treated with disdain (especially by Sarkozy when he was there), Blair's vision would have been that he would have been the big fish alongside his adoring fan Gerhard Schroeder and Britain would have been one of the dominating powers in Europe. However the country as a whole was not in step with Blair's Euro-enthusiasm and Blair would have also had us in the Euro which would have made our recent financial problems a lot worse if we hadn't had the independent Bank of England to lessen the pain.

I wish the single currency had never gone ahead as its the single biggest balls up in the history of the EU and it seems the countries inside are not going to cut their losses and end it but trying to go all in and have a giant fiscal union which means they will have to become much closer on tax rates, budget balances and all sorts. The Germans seem to be driving this but if it is to work then they have to accept the inevitable consequences - the United Kingdom is a fiscal union where the rich regions of the UK end up subsidising poorer regions through transfers of revenues and Germany as the richest part of the EU will inevitably have to subsidise the poorer parts. They have to accept this from the start.

What I fear will happen is Germany will lead calls for a fiscal union, so that it can keep on being inside the Euro which means it has a currency much undervalued compared to what the Deutschmark would be on its own, making German goods much cheaper in Euros than they would be in Deutchmarks hence Germany has a huge export advantage. But they will constantly complain about having to subsidise the others, and castigate them for having higher unemployment, lower productivity, and lecture them on how they need to have lower wages and conditions etc. Unless Germany is willing to accept the rough with the smooth of fiscal union it is not going to work.

One of the biggest issues at present is that Maastricht effectively enshrined neo-liberalism. I think it's Caroline Lucas, outgoing Green leader, who has raised this.

And what Merkel et al want to do is go further and, in effect, outlaw anything else, including, say, Keynesianism.

Corporatocracy here we come. Actually, we're pretty much there.

[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/sep/16/euro.euIt was, in 2003 actually[/url

I caught part of a Hugh Fearnley poshgit programme about fishing and the ridiculous fishing laws. That was to do with the EU regulations wasn't it?

Our poor fisherman once again.

And idiot shoppers too, who only ever want cod or haddock or a bit of skate, when we have extraordinarily rich seas all around these islands.

Conversely, the various Cod Wars had nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with rapacious trawler owners. Left unchallenged, they'd have been happy to decimate Icelandic and arctic waters

What's that go to do with Dally's point? And EU regulations?

I suspect he means that EU regulations stopped that, In other words, there are two sides to the regulation argument.

To my knowledge there have been at least two formal cost benefit exercises on membershop initiated by The Treasury, one was cancelled by Ken Clarke and the other cancelled by Gordon Brown, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out why politicians might decide to do that. You have to bear in mind that the UK has been always been a net contributor since it joined, the only other country in that camp being Germany, so any talk of Nissan style investment has to be offset against billions annd billions in UK net subsidies to the EU year after year.

There is no real reason for the UK not to leave the EU and negotiate a free trade agreement 1) tit for tat customs spats do neither side any good (particularly as the UK runs a trade deficit with rest of EU), and 2) this is the era of of WTA and even the EU has to work with that. These are very heavy realpolitik counterbalance to worries about Nissan style investment leaving if we turn off the taps. If the UK is still part of a free trade zone, and is more competitive as a result, and they've already sunk billions in costs then it's unlikely. What business (like Nissan etc) doesn't like is uncertainty, but that is tough luck anywhere at the moment.

Talk of human rights, meat in sausages or cucumbers are p.iss weak red herrings, they are not dependent on the wider EU project with its bureaucracies, talking shops and corruption so deep and widespread nobody even bothers to bat an eyelid at it any longer. You can have institutions managing international trade regimes, providing aid to poor European countires, or promoting universal human rights standards, you don't need the trappings and cost of the EU for all that, in fact many such organisations already exist outside the EU. Trade does exist without the EU, and human rights actually existed in Britain before the Human Rights Act even if it wasn't around to justify a range of undesirable actions subsequently garishly splashed across the viewspapers, an expensive political integration project is not a pre-requisite for any of these things.

Now I appreciate all this realpolitik s.hit may not be as cuddly as 27 nations all proudly hugging each other under a flag of peace blah blah, but it's a moot point now anyway, the EU has already overstretched itself, it's pulling itself apart trying to maintain a common currency that doesn't work for half of it's members. If the Euro fails then what is the point of ever greater integration? The Germans are only really propping the whole thing up because their banks are so heavily exposed to the banks in weak economies (particularly Spain) that they'll have a banking meltdown if they exit. Afterall who will pay the German banks back what they lent to banks in Spain etc if the German people don't stump up the cash to keep the circle intact? Everyone is worried about a flight of capital out of the weaker economies into Germany if one of them exits, but what happens when Germany's banks start to take hits as a result of their losses from an exit? Gotta keep kicking that can along...

From memory the programme was about throwing dead fish back into the sea and not being able to sell it, thanks to EU regulations. I simply added an EU regulation that was bolloçks to the dear working folk (fishermen) back in blighty to the people's ridicules of ones that apparently are good.

Over 40 years ago. Weren't the cod wars over before we joined the EEC? Actually don't answer, this is how threads get derailed.

Aside from whether the others will accept formally ceding control of their economies to Germany (even if they've already done so in practice), there is this suggestion that the German economy is going to soften later this year, and if this happens then the German people may get even more tectchy than they already are, and there are plenty who are not keen on Merkel repeatedly handing over their money to countries out of step with the German work ethic.

The problem is the Germans aren't propping it up, they're trying to get everyone else to prop it up. They want the benefits (better for German exports) but don't want the costs (helping out the poorer areas). The Euro would work either if it was restricted to nations of similar size economies or if (like in nations outside the Euro) the rich areas subsidise the weak. Since the Germans don't appear to want either, it won't work.

As for the EU, I'm sure there is plenty of unnecessary and wasteful expenditure, but I'm of the school that you attempt to make something better before chucking it away entirely. I don't see why those parts can't be controlled with effective leadership (that does not include btching from the sidelines with no proposals only complaints).
A big problem for the EU is that no one understands how it works. It needs simplifying and far greater transparency introduced. People are suspicious of things they don't understand. If there was greater transparency there would be greater understanding and therefore greater pressure brought to bear upon our European representatives. People barely know who their MP is but I think people at least know if theyre in a Tory or Labour constituency. Without looking, I have no idea who, or what party my regions' MEP's are from or even how many there are. And I'm at least somewhat interested in politics.

Quote ="Kelvin's Ferret"Aside from whether the others will accept formally ceding control of their economies to Germany (even if they've already done so in practice), there is this suggestion that the German economy is going to soften later this year, and if this happens then the German people may get even more tectchy than they already are, and there are plenty who are not keen on Merkel repeatedly handing over their money to countries out of step with the German work ethic.'" One thing I find interesting is that people often talk about the famous German work ethic but they work fewer hours than we do, the EU average weekly hours worked per worker is 37.4, Germany is 35.6 and the UK is 36.3. This includes part time and full time workers, if you view it just by full time then the EU average is 41.6, Germany is 42 and the UK is 42.7. On both counts the longest hours worked in Europe are in Greece although Greece has a high unemployment rate so that partly explains that one. Germany's strength comes from its high productivity, 23.7% higher than the EU average, whereas we are 7.2% higher than the EU average, Greece is 23.7% lower than the EU average, and also its export advantage being able to export quality goods at cheap price because it has an undervalued exchange rate by being in the Euro rather than the exchange rate they would have in the Deutschmark. Germany has quite good pensions, employment rights and social welfare, the right wingers often hold Germany up as a benchmark of austerity but they have achieved their high levels of productivity through strong state investment in education and infrastructure and also support for industry, it is not through cutting taxes to the rich to the lowest possible level to attract investment and having low wages and no working rights to make them competitive... www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... king-hours

Quote ="Kelvin's Ferret"Aside from whether the others will accept formally ceding control of their economies to Germany (even if they've already done so in practice), there is this suggestion that the German economy is going to soften later this year, and if this happens then the German people may get even more tectchy than they already are, and there are plenty who are not keen on Merkel repeatedly handing over their money to countries out of step with the German work ethic.'" One thing I find interesting is that people often talk about the famous German work ethic but they work fewer hours than we do, the EU average weekly hours worked per worker is 37.4, Germany is 35.6 and the UK is 36.3. This includes part time and full time workers, if you view it just by full time then the EU average is 41.6, Germany is 42 and the UK is 42.7. On both counts the longest hours worked in Europe are in Greece although Greece has a high unemployment rate so that partly explains that one. Germany's strength comes from its high productivity, 23.7% higher than the EU average, whereas we are 7.2% higher than the EU average, Greece is 23.7% lower than the EU average, and also its export advantage being able to export quality goods at cheap price because it has an undervalued exchange rate by being in the Euro rather than the exchange rate they would have in the Deutschmark. Germany has quite good pensions, employment rights and social welfare, the right wingers often hold Germany up as a benchmark of austerity but they have achieved their high levels of productivity through strong state investment in education and infrastructure and also support for industry, it is not through cutting taxes to the rich to the lowest possible level to attract investment and having low wages and no working rights to make them competitive... www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... king-hours

The tone of those posts went a bit 'woosh', didn't they?



Well indeed. All the corruption in the UK can quite clearly be blamed on the EU.

Interesting article this morning: www.cityam.com/latest-news/allis ... ed-reality Just about sums my view up that politicians have / continue to mess things up (in the UK, with the EU, etc. etc).

Interesting article this morning: www.cityam.com/latest-news/allis ... ed-reality Just about sums my view up that politicians have / continue to mess things up (in the UK, with the EU, etc. etc).

[url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2e74ceba-afd2-11e1-a025-00144feabdc0.htmlFar more interesting – and less hysterical – from the [iFT[/i.[/url

There was nothing hysterical about the article. You seem to have to register to see the FT one.

It is true, though, that so unfeasibly corrupt and incompetent is the EU that auditors have point blank refused to sign off its accounts, for about the 100th year running, due to improbable gazillions being unaccounted for. The missing figure is, you may not be surprised to hear, always a blck hole, and never an unexplained huge surplus.

In ANY other organisation this would have led to a lot of extremely hefty jail terms many years ago, but for some reason, the annual refusal to sign off the accounts, which should be one of the world's biggest scandals given the money gone adrift, is almost universally ignored.

So that's alright then.

Then register. I'll make a change from the comics you usually link to.

I like the fact that the cityam article pulls rank by saying FA Hayek was more distinguished than Krugman, so he must be right.

I respond by saying Keynes was more distinguished than Hayek, so anything Hayek says is superceded by Keynes.

I wasn't taking those posts seriously, I don't even take the subjects seriously, there are pro-EU myths and there are anti-EU myths, people take their pick as they see fit.

And talking about corruption in the UK is a complete diversion tactic, it doesn't make it better, the issue is we give billions in net contribution to an organisation that is infamous for pork barrel politics, corruption and opaque financial management. If you ditch the political project you can still have many of the social and economic strands (that you may or may not agree with), because they exist outside of this particularly expensive padded box.

You dont need to know who your MEP is, they dont make the decisions. And better leadership is only possible if the various institutions and EU mechanisms allow for it, which they dont.

The EU has just become too big and unwieldy. But how do you simplify it? Or make it more transparent? Its easy to say that, they're motherhood and apple pie statements, but the thing's just become too complex. Unravelling it is virtually impossible because any changes that are made will have an adverse effect on at least one member state. Its got a huge level of inbuilt inertia.

The only way that they'll resolve the problems of the Euro is to move to much greater financial and political integration. But who really wants that?