"We will make progress millimeter by millimeter"

Saw this on Netvibes but I can`t find it on EU Ref so have posted it here instead

EU Politics (3603)

Last week’s European Council has been deconstructed by Le Monde, which is offering an article headed: “Angela Merkel: ‘Sooner or later, the money will explode without the necessary cohesion’”.
Although the piece is a couple of days old, it has enough depth to excite the interest of the Wall Street Journal which has its own analysis in today’s [print] edition, with the online version posted overnight. This English-language report takes as read the Le Monde feed, headlining, “Merkel Hits Wall With Europe Fix”, with the strap: “Angela Merkel’s Signature Project Is Floundering a Week Into the German Chancellor’s Third Term”.
That, then, is the theme, worth recording before it is lost in the black hole of Christmas – a vital “mood music” piece that maybe will set the tone for the next few months, or even longer. At issue was a proposal by Germany under which eurozone members enter binding contracts with the Commission over economic policy. Very much Merkel’s strategy, she wants to make it more difficult for countries to backtrack on labour-market overhauls and other unpopular steps, a changes she believes would help protect the euro from future crises. Now enter Le Monde. From conversations reconstituted by the paper, it is reporting that most of the heads of State and Government of the European Union have “conspired against” the contract idea. That much isn’t new, as it was anticipated before the Council.
As to the details, proceedings were opened Herman van Rompuy, Council President, who told the assembly that more pressure was needed on structural reforms, but he knew it was difficult. From the outset, though, even Germany’s traditional allies distanced themselves from Angela Merkel’s proposal. Austria’s Werner Faymann told the German chancellor that, “Any binding rule must be approved by national Parliaments”, saying that there was to be no surrender of sovereignty. Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said he was “convinced” that the contracts would not help, suggesting that making the contracts legally binding would violate members’ sovereignty. Jyrki Katainen of Finland slammed “bailouts”, which he said, “fueled populism”, which had become a “cancer”. Spain’s Mariano Rajoy led the charge from the south. “Many of us have made reforms”, he said, but insisted that contracts must be “voluntary”. The only support – apart from Barroso – rather predictably came from Mario Draghi, ECB president, who took the contrary view, saying “If you do not reform, you lose national sovereignty”. And there it was, apparently, that Merkel lost her cool, coming up with the headline quote, “Sooner or later, the money will explode without the necessary cohesion”. When the Maltese leader then expressed strong reservations, Merkel retorted that, if the text was not acceptable for Spain, “let’s drop it and come back in ten years”. On the other hand, she said, “If everyone behaves like we could do under communism, then we are lost”.
Francois Hollande, the other half of the Franco-German motor, remained “rather discreet”. He avoided talking about “financial capacity”, code for having Germany pay more into the pot, which France wants in exchange for contracts. “There are those who do not want more discipline and fear that it is binding . And others who do not want to pay”, Hollande said. Both Hollande and the Belgian prime minister wanted to agree on the principles and decide the details after the euro-elections of May 2014. Europe should not be presented as “a big stick”. In the end, Merkel gave way and proposed that the issue should be held over for a year, with the “colleagues” coming back to it in December 2014. “I do not want someone to tell me that he lost the elections” because contracts, she said. For Barroso, December 2014 didn’t matter. “I will not be there”, he said. For Herman Van Rompuy, it did matter. Even if he decided, “I will not die for contracts”, he wanted to finish his work before leaving his post in November 2014. He agreed to postpone decisions from June to October 2014. This is a result which Le Monde described as “une très mauvaise soirée” for the German chancellor – a very bad night. “We will make progress millimeter by millimeter”, a rebuffed Mrs Merkel told reporters after the Council dinner, her face “drawn”.
The thing is, that’s how they always do it – millimetre by millimetre. Give them an inch and they’ll millimetre, one might say. But then they come back for more. October will do very nicely for the “colleagues”. That should rather conveniently coincide with the announcement of a treaty convention.

“We will make progress millimeter by millimeter”

via EU Politics (3603).

Posted in Politics EU | Leave a comment

We will make progress millimeter by millimeter

Saw this on Netvibes but I can`t find it on EU Ref so have posted it here instead

Angela-Merkel-007

Last week’s European Council has been deconstructed by Le Monde, which is offering an article headed: “Angela Merkel: ‘Sooner or later, the money will explode without the necessary cohesion’”.
Although the piece is a couple of days old, it has enough depth to excite the interest of the Wall Street Journal which has its own analysis in today’s [print] edition, with the online version posted overnight. This English-language report takes as read the Le Monde feed, headlining, “Merkel Hits Wall With Europe Fix”, with the strap: “Angela Merkel’s Signature Project Is Floundering a Week Into the German Chancellor’s Third Term”.
That, then, is the theme, worth recording before it is lost in the black hole of Christmas – a vital “mood music” piece that maybe will set the tone for the next few months, or even longer. At issue was a proposal by Germany under which eurozone members enter binding contracts with the Commission over economic policy. Very much Merkel’s strategy, she wants to make it more difficult for countries to backtrack on labour-market overhauls and other unpopular steps, a changes she believes would help protect the euro from future crises. Now enter Le Monde. From conversations reconstituted by the paper, it is reporting that most of the heads of State and Government of the European Union have “conspired against” the contract idea. That much isn’t new, as it was anticipated before the Council.
As to the details, proceedings were opened Herman van Rompuy, Council President, who told the assembly that more pressure was needed on structural reforms, but he knew it was difficult. From the outset, though, even Germany’s traditional allies distanced themselves from Angela Merkel’s proposal. Austria’s Werner Faymann told the German chancellor that, “Any binding rule must be approved by national Parliaments”, saying that there was to be no surrender of sovereignty. Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said he was “convinced” that the contracts would not help, suggesting that making the contracts legally binding would violate members’ sovereignty. Jyrki Katainen of Finland slammed “bailouts”, which he said, “fueled populism”, which had become a “cancer”. Spain’s Mariano Rajoy led the charge from the south. “Many of us have made reforms”, he said, but insisted that contracts must be “voluntary”. The only support – apart from Barroso – rather predictably came from Mario Draghi, ECB president, who took the contrary view, saying “If you do not reform, you lose national sovereignty”. And there it was, apparently, that Merkel lost her cool, coming up with the headline quote, “Sooner or later, the money will explode without the necessary cohesion”. When the Maltese leader then expressed strong reservations, Merkel retorted that, if the text was not acceptable for Spain, “let’s drop it and come back in ten years”. On the other hand, she said, “If everyone behaves like we could do under communism, then we are lost”.
Francois Hollande, the other half of the Franco-German motor, remained “rather discreet”. He avoided talking about “financial capacity”, code for having Germany pay more into the pot, which France wants in exchange for contracts. “There are those who do not want more discipline and fear that it is binding . And others who do not want to pay”, Hollande said. Both Hollande and the Belgian prime minister wanted to agree on the principles and decide the details after the euro-elections of May 2014. Europe should not be presented as “a big stick”. In the end, Merkel gave way and proposed that the issue should be held over for a year, with the “colleagues” coming back to it in December 2014. “I do not want someone to tell me that he lost the elections” because contracts, she said. For Barroso, December 2014 didn’t matter. “I will not be there”, he said. For Herman Van Rompuy, it did matter. Even if he decided, “I will not die for contracts”, he wanted to finish his work before leaving his post in November 2014. He agreed to postpone decisions from June to October 2014. This is a result which Le Monde described as “une très mauvaise soirée” for the German chancellor – a very bad night. “We will make progress millimeter by millimeter”, a rebuffed Mrs Merkel told reporters after the Council dinner, her face “drawn”.
The thing is, that’s how they always do it – millimetre by millimetre. Give them an inch and they’ll millimetre, one might say. But then they come back for more. October will do very nicely for the “colleagues”. That should rather conveniently coincide with the announcement of a treaty convention.

“We will make progress millimeter by millimeter”

via EU Politics (3603).

Posted in Politics EU | Leave a comment

Big Brother ECHR Ruling

The data sharing bill, which is going through Parliament in the next few weeks, will see government agencies passing intimate details of individuals and families between departments: Libertarians worry that these details will also end up in the hands of government contractors in private companies.

In any case, “The new law would remove the right to protection against misuse of information by thousands of unaccountable civil servants.” Continue reading

Posted in Human Rights | Leave a comment

Is Eureferendum Anti EU

images

Good news! Tycoon Paul Sykes gives UKIP millions to finance UKIP’s efforts to pull Britain out of the EU. But to some it is just another  opportunity to malign UKIP and Nigel Farage, who is to have an operation to treat back injuries caused by his air crash in 2010.

I have a great deal of time for Richard North and very much admire his research, but despair to see him stooping to the lowest form of stupid insult expected of the worst imaginable tabloid hack, something quite shocking from a so called serious blogging researcher. By making something of the fact that Mr Farages surgeon is from Indian immigrant stock, North implies almost directly that UKIP and its leader are racists. It is clear that Dr North and another blogger seem to hate UKIP and its leader so much so that they blind themselves to the fact that as Mr Sykes says, in his Telegraph interview, UKIP are the only game in town.

Richard North seems to forget the very important fact that people cannot vote for his ideas because he has not got the political vehicle available. He suggests that it would have been better if  Mr Sykes had spent his money by supporting a think tank to compete with Open Europe. As a researcher perhaps he is forgetting the fact that had Mr Sykes chosen to do so that would still leave us looking for a political vehicle in order to turn the research into votes.

Research no matter how competent does not equate to votes and we need votes to dislodge this political elites stranglehold on our political system,  that will eventually  destroy this country.

Dr North suggests we need to reform our political system to actually make it democratic this he argues will mean our leaders will be forced to take the country out of the EU in any case.
To this end he suggests that we make demands of our politicians  All good stuff, but as it stands at present, to whom will they present their demands. To Westminster or to Brussels, because although Dr North accepts the power to govern has been passed to the EU and we are now left with little more than a local government, he still seem to think presenting his demands to the local government will achieve his ends. Would it not be better to first attempt to return full powers to Westminster before making demands on Westminster to force it to become democratic.

We need votes and we need those votes now, not at some point in the future when Dr North and his friends have managed to complete their research and set up a political system, until then every time they attack UKIP they are giving credence to the idea that Eureferendum is really a quisling front for a pro EU organization.

Posted in Latest Posts, Media, Politics Britain | 1 Comment

Euroscepticism and Freedom

The defence of freedoms when all else has failed is an instinctive reaction tied up with pride. Much of politics hangs on these die-hard freedoms and to what extent they should be reined in by laws and regulations. Nick Jacobs  But much of it doesn’t – and yet cliques have realised that they can achieve their own minority interests by convincing people that their freedoms are at stake when they are not.
The result is a highly destructive force in politics.

Jacobs sets out his stall and then fills it a load of imagined rubbish, even his own argument is rubbish he says:  minority interests convince people that their freedoms are at stake when they are not.
He says: Bob Crows objection to the EU is based on a general lament about inter-EU and non-EU immigration undercutting British salaries and working conditions.
He says: Bob Crow is being hoodwinked by a clique of company CEOs whose ability to exploit their workers and capture the lion’s share of profits could be threatened by current and future social legislation which can be stifled more easily at national than EU level; and the city of London, whose freedom to speculate, pay out exorbitant bonuses and operate without a financial transaction tax hinges on multiple legislative debates in Brussels. Continue reading

Posted in Latest Posts, Political Humbug | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Tory`s not really running after Eastleigh

After Eastleigh if they are not running scared they are giving a very good impression, the glorious leader says they are not for lurching, but then we have John Redwood the Tories Eusceptic lightning rod suggesting a mandate referendum for a referendum, now Europhile Jesse Norman Hereford and South Herefordshire has visited Eutopia and did not like it.

Mr Norman “came out” in a speech this week for Localis the opinions behind the speech became an article in the Telegraph The EU’s insidious war on the nation state must be halted  Mr Norman seems to have just discovered all these problems with the EU and has yet to comprehend that they do not just happen by chance but are in the DNA of the EU. Continue reading

Posted in Latest Posts, Politics Britain | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Direct EU Taxation

Direct EU Taxation.

The FOC “Myth Series” states clearly that “We control tax and social security”
The Government negotiated successfully to keep a national veto over tax proposals. Social Security proposals are subject to an effective veto through a national ‘emergency brake’ mechanism allowing any Member State to refer a proposed law to the European Council (the body composed of national heads of state/government) for decision by consensus.

Of course, this means that direct taxation should specifically be out of bounds to the ECJ, according to the treaties. But it’s clear from the number of cases the Commission has brought recently, that both the Court and Commission are intent on brushing that rule aside.

Their ultimate aim is nothing less than pan-European Union tax harmonisation. They even have a Commissioner for duties and taxes Laszlo Kovacs, who is pushing to harmonize rules on VAT among the new and old member states of the EU. This would call into question exceptional rules such as the 0 per cent VAT on children’s clothing in the UK. Also the EU Commission yesterday backed moves to tax aviation fuel, purportedly to fund aid to developing nations – a step that would not only increase airfares but set the precedent for an EU wide tax, this will then be used to further the intention of tax harmonisation. .

So we keep our veto, big deal, this does not mean there will be no harmonisation of taxes across the EU, that is what they are pushing for all the time, it only needs Tony Blair to sign a piece of paper and hey presto, they have harmonised tax systems. The EU will then be in charge and have the authority to set the rates across the whole EU, so this government would have removed taxation from the political power of the British parliament and our power to vote for a party that promises to lower taxes or to increase social security spending.

The Constitution makes it clear that the EU will fund its own spending, it can only do that by direct taxation.

Posted in Latest Posts | Tagged , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

The EU, Castro and freedom

Caribbean Net News: Outside View: The EU, Castro and freedom:

“Outside View: Caribbean Net News: Outside View: The EU, Castro and freedom: “>The EU, Castro and freedom
by Frank Calzon, UPI Outside View commentator
Thursday, February 3, 2005

WASHINGTON, USA (UPI): At a time when President George W. Bush is reaffirming America’s commitment to freedom around the world, the European Union, at the behest of socialist Spain seems to be ready to turn its back on political prisoners of Fidel Castro’s communist dictatorship in Cuba.

The leaders of the EU countries met recently to consider, among other things the recommendation of the Spanish government that they cease inviting Cubans dissidents to their national day celebrations at their Havana embassies. The policy of inviting dissidents dates to 2003, when Cuba arrested and sentenced to long prison terms some 75 peaceful advocates of democracy who Amnesty International identified as prisoners of conscience. Prior to those arrests, a few governments were already inviting members of Cuba’s democratic opposition to the celebrations.

Castro’s immediate response was to freeze relations. Cuban officials would no longer attend any functions at the European embassies on the island, and Cuban diplomats around the world refrained from carrying out most normal diplomatic communications with governments to which they have been accredited.

In political terms, Castro understands ‘the power of the powerless,’ which is to say that if a powerless majority gains recognition and organizes, it can force change. So Castro ignores no opportunity — however petty — to prevent recognition of Cuba’s powerless majority. In this instance, he petulantly demands Europeans make a choice: Deal with him and protect their Cuban investments or invite his democratic opponents to their diplomatic receptions. When Spain’s new socialist government was elected, it decided to withdraw Spanish forces from Iraq and to acquiesce to Castro’s demands. Spain carries inordinate weight in determining European pol”

More:

Posted in Latest Posts | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

An Historical Failure

The German government is starting as it means to go on.

EU Ministers set out yesterday a timetable for reviving the Constitution, with the hope of concluding negotiations on a new document by late 2008.

In a move to isolate countries which have not ratified, the18 countries that have already ratified will attend a meeting in Madrid on 26 January.

A separate meeting amongst countries that have not yet ratified the Treaty will be held a month later on 27 February.

These meetings will enable Germany (which assumes the presidency 1 January) to formulate a report on the future evolution of the EU Constitution.

Angela Merkel made it clear yesterday that she will use the German Presidency to get the European Constitution talks back on track. she said “I would consider it an historical failure if we do not succeed in working out the substance of the constitutional treaty by the time the next European elections take place,” she said the German government would work “intensively” during the six-month Presidency “so that such a treaty, based on our common values, can go into force.”

EUobserver reports that Jose Barroso is confident that the Constitution will be revived saying, ”I believe we are going to make real progress during the next presidency”.


The European Voice reports Margot Wallström, European commissioner for communication as saying

You cannot disregard citizens. It is important to make sure the renegotiation is not only about horse-trading behind closed doors,” “I know the German presidency says that there should not be too many people involved in the negotiation, but we could invite the European Parliament, national parliaments, the civil society, to show that we welcome contributions on the future of Europe.”

She added that getting input from citizens, national parliaments and the European Parliament would be crucial not only for showing that Europe listened to its people, but also for “anchoring” any new treaty text in the member states and helping it win their approval.

The commissioner urged “a co-ordinated effort, a public consultation on any new text simultaneously in all member states”.

“I am not talking only about referenda: if referenda are not possible, according to national traditions, different ways of consultation can be chosen: in some member states it could go through the national parliament, in others there could be consultation through electronic methods, and so on; the important thing is to consult the people.”

While member states could choose the method, “they should do it the same day, in a co-ordinated way, to give the impression the whole of Europe is engaged in this”.


When will these people get it into their heads that this is not an EU wide initiative, each Nation State Member must decide on its own if it wishes to transfer these powers to the EU, all they are trying to do is to use the numbers of people in some countries like for instance Germany, to suggest that the majority of the people want this, but they will not actually be asking the German people to vote in a referendum. So they will not be country the Germans who do not want it or even proving a majority of them do.



Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Posted in Latest Posts | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Fat Cats EU Club II

The Fat Cats EU Club II

Why Britain needs the constitutional treaty
To modernise the way Europe works, so it can advance our common interests more effectively while respecting national differences and becoming more accountable to its peoples.

1. Simpler – The treaty consolidates existing EU treaties into a single
document, simplifying and clarifying the rules of the European club.

Hardly simple the Constitution also:
abolishes national control in nearly 30 new policy areas. re-founds the EU on the basis of its own State Constitution. The power of the EU will flow directly from the Constitution not the member states, it also brings in the,removes the national democracy and political independence of the Member States. Legally and politically they are being turned into provinces of an EU State,
It gives greater power to Germany and Fance, more centralisation in Brussels and less power for national parliaments. It establishes an EU Foreign Minister and diplomatic service, separate from those of its Member States, an EU Public Prosecutor able to prosecute people across national boundaries. Forbids Member States to operate an independent foreign policy. Greatly extends the scope and reach of the EU by giving its Court of Justice in Luxembourg the power to determine the fundamental rights of EU citizens, overriding national Constitutions and Supreme Courts, opens the way for ever further expansion of EU powers at the expense of national parliaments and the citizens that elect them, without the need for their prior consent.

2. A union of nation states, not a superstate – The treaty sets limits on the
EU. It puts national governments firmly in the driving seat: the EU can only
act where Britain and other countries agree it should. We retain our veto in
core areas of national sovereignty, such as tax, foreign policy and defence.

There are no limits on the EU there are only some areas where Britain claims to have a veto, in each of those areas Foreign policy, defence, immigration, tax the EU has the clear intention to subvert and eventually to remove those vetoes. The EU calls on the principals of good faith and loyal cooperation to the EU Institutions by member states the ECJ has repeatedly underlined that these principals are a fundamental value of the EU system, and involve an obligation of positive assistance to the EU in achieving its goals. The Constitution also gives the EU the power to take more power that it does not have to adopt measures aimed at achieving a treaty goal.

3. More effective – Where we are better off working together with our European partners, the treaty will make the EU more effective, by streamlining decision-making, making the voting system simpler, fairer and more efficient and make it easier to drive forward EU governments’ agenda.

The key point is “EU government” this EU government is unelected and unaccountable to the British people, the EU Constitution will make it easer for that government to drive forward its agenda thus over riding the wishes of the British people and the Government we elect.

4. Better off – The treaty guarantees Britain’s access to the EU single market,
boosting businesses and jobs.

As already mentioned we do not need to be in the EU to trade with EU countries and we certainly do not need to make the EU our government to do so.

5. Fairer – The treaty entrenches social rights, and commits the EU to pursuing full employment, combating social exclusion and stamping out discrimination of all kinds.

We elect the government we want the EU will not add one thing to any rights we have.

6. Safer – The treaty will make our borders more secure, by making it easier
for Britain to act with our neighbours against terrorism, illegal immigration
and international crime where we want to, while doing our own thing where
we prefer to.

How on earth can it make our borders safer to pass the power to the EU which the Constitution does. These things can be achieved by cooperation amongst ourselves we do not need and EU Government to implement them.

7. More say on the world stage – Where we can agree a common position with other EU countries, the treaty will give Europe more clout with America, China and Russia in areas such as trade, global warming and human rights.
As already discussed this is nonsense “where we can agree” we can already have more clout we do not need the EU to have the power to tell us what our foreign policy is or should be that is what we elect our government for.

8. More flexible – The treaty makes it easier for countries that want to cooperate more closely in future to do so, without obliging others to join in if they don’t want to.

But it does not allow countries who do not want to cooperate more closely in the future not to do so, it does not return any power to the nation state.

9. More open, accountable and democratic – The treaty gives the British and European parliaments more say over EU decisions. It also creates a new citizens’ initiative right, which gives you the power to directly influence Europe’s agenda.

The Constitution gives no power to the British government to stop any law the EU makes becoming applicable in Britain the EU can simple ignore any protestations out government may make. The citizens cannot influence the EU agenda in fact the EU does not like any popular consultation with the people because it feels that this would put a break on EU integration even if we did get a petition with a million signatures across several states the EU can simply ignore it as it can ignore the subsidiarity clause.

10. A victory for Britain and reform – A former French prime minister is against the treaty because he says it is too “britannique”: it embodies the British vision of Europe as a loose grouping of nation states that is lightly regulated, outward-looking, business-friendly and open to reform.

Utter rubbish, the Constitution is more integrationist heavily regulated inward looking unfriendly to small business and certainly not open to reform, everybody has been complain about CAP about Fraud about Fishing for years and the EU has not reformed any one of those to any satisfaction. All the reforms this Constitution brings is the removal of the right for the British parliament to veto any further reforms to the Constitution.

Posted in Latest Posts | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment