Cameron is pushing the UK further out towards the fringes of the European Union.
But is this necessarily a bad thing? If the UK only wants to be a partner on a trading basis, perhaps we should give up any political influence that doesn’t relate to that.
There is absolutely no doubt that it will bite him – and us – in the backside later on as the European-Political-Union countries divvy up the best deals between themselves.
Cameron’s gamble is that this will only affect the well-being of plebs like you and This Writer, while the conditions he negotiates will ensure that Tory donors – big businesses and those who own them – will see ever-greater benefits at our cost.
What do you think?
David Cameron has been told by an influential German MEP that Britain will need to forfeit its veto in European Union decision-taking if it wants to be exempted from the EU’s definition as an “ever closer union”.
Manfred Weber, the politician who leads the bloc of European Christian Democrats, met the UK prime minister last Friday to discuss the referendum and British negotiations with the rest of the EU, which have been gathering steam since the general election.
Weber said Cameron’s demand that ever closer union should not apply to Britain could be accommodated by a special “protocol” to the EU treaties enshrining a UK opt-out.
“But if there is a request for an opt-out for the UK, we can ask for compensation,” he said. “If the British want an opt-out, the rest of the union can ask that they lose their veto on the system. They cannot have the right to block the others if the others want to go forward. We should add [to any opt-out] that Britain has in the future no right to use its veto in any domain if the others go further [in integration].”
Source: Britain must give up EU veto if it opts out, Cameron told | Politics | The Guardian
Well how much do we give and how much do we get back in rebates you bet the rich get the lion share of it but iceland and norway are outside the eu still dealing selling and buying from them but this lot has we now will sell us down the river jeff3
There is no doubt that a total sort out needs to take place in the EU but Cameron has no chance of changing a cosy little club which we were never invited to.Our punishment for joining this trading block was to lose all of our heavy industry which was far superior to anything the EU had,we lost our motor industry and have been carved up ever since leaving the very dubious financial sector…The late Tony Benn was always against the EU because he knew what would happen and I remember the big debate for and against the EU.The vote carried us in and we have suffered ever since.If we are able to change the EU’s way of trading then so be it but I very much doubt it can happen.
You’re mistaken about our industry.
Margaret Thatcher scrapped the UK’s heavy industry because the consequent full employment was giving too much security to the working people, who were demanding higher wages as a result.
Tony Benn’s attitude to the EU changed over time.
Am I the only one who doesn’t see this in purely economic terms? Whilst it is generally agreed the we do get back more in financial terms than we put in, what we do get is a very civilising influence that would be lost if we leave. Sadly I am of an age that can remember what life was like before this country had the consideration of civilised law makers, who now ensure a degree of compassion in their legislative deliberations.
With the callousness of this present government it is even now more important to have a court, free of direct UK political influence, deliberate on cases involving human rights.
I don’t think the European Court of Human Rights is part of this, being as it’s part of the Council of Europe – of which the UK would remain a fully paid-up member – and not the EU.
That being said, Cameron wants out of the European Court too.