Cameron Fights to Make the EU Worse 101


Every one of the changes for which Cameron is arguing in Europe will make both the UK and the EU worse. It is undoubtedly true that these reforms are marginal, and not in any sense worth the drama with which Cameron seeks to imbue them in the run-up to a pre-cooked mainstream media acclamation of significant victory. But even though Cameron’s proposals are highly marginal, and all possible without treaty amendment, insofar as there is any effect, it is a bad effect.

Cameron’s primary focus is on preventing much needed regulation of banking and financial services. He wants a veto in what is currently recognised as a qualified majority area. The banking system is at the heart of the channelling of most wealth to a tiny elite. 70% of all the money in the world is tied up in derivatives markets, which is terrifying. Deutsche Bank holds derivatives equivalent to 21 times German GDP, to give a striking example. There have been continued attempts by the EU to introduce a transaction tax on every derivatives bet, as a move towards calming this market. Cameron is determined to make sure the City of London remains a great casino, safe for his banker mates. That is the primary question at issue today.

The other issues involve Cameron’s attempts to pander to xenophobes by putting a brake on in-work benefits and child benefit to migrants. This is economically insignificant. It affects less than 40,000 people in the UK, and in the case of child benefit would only bring a marginal reduction anyway. It is simply an effort to join the Duncan Smith stigmatisation of the low-paid to racist sentiment.

I wish to state loudly that I believe that the existence of the European Union with a common citizenship, where we all enjoy the common rights of citizens, from Bucharest to Dublin, is a marvellous thing. It is undeniably the greatest political advance of my lifetime. As a continent with a free flow not only of people, but of trade and capital as well, it is a fantastic field of economic potential. As the political expression of the wonderful civilisations of the European nations, it has the capacity to be a force for good in the world, and is so more often than not.

I look forward to ever closer union becoming a reality, and the day when the EU encompasses all of Europe, including Russia. I look forward to Scotland being one of the nations within a federal European structure, contributing to a common foreign and defence policy. I fully expect these things to come to pass, while Cameron and his charade of renegotiation will be long forgotten.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

101 thoughts on “Cameron Fights to Make the EU Worse

1 2 3 4
  • Tony_0pmoc

    The EU is a totally undemocratic highly corrupt Centralised Dictatorship, largely controlled by vast American wealth. The EU is directly responsible for the impoverishment of Southern Europe.

    I voted for the EEC as a free trading area. I did not for for a United States of Europe, controlled by incompetents, who’s ultimate agenda is to control the entire World.

    The EU, and the National Governments of its members do not even represent the people of their own countries. That much is obvious following the US coup in Kiev. The Sanctions against Russia are also a direct American attack on Europe.

    European politicians and not working for the people of Europe. They are working for Americans.

    Tony

  • CE

    Didn’t take long for the tinfoil hats to come out.

    Not much to disagree with there apart from the rather fanciful notion of Russia joining/being absorbed by the EU. The only way I could see that happening is the complete disintegration of the Russian state as we know it.

    Like Craig I would be delighted if an independent Scotland was a full member of a fully federal EU. Our different, and some would say more progressive, attitude to the EU and immigration is another marker of the widening political rifts between Scotland and rUK.

    Not the biggest fan of Corbyn but good on him for actually speaking some truth on this matter rather the usual xenophobic and bigoted dog whistles we get treated to.

  • Clark

    Craig:

    “…the existence of the European Union with a common citizenship, where we all enjoy the common rights of citizens, from Bucharest to Dublin, is a marvellous thing. It is undeniably the greatest political advance of my lifetime.”

    I strongly agree.

    “There have been continued attempts by the EU to introduce a transaction tax on every derivatives bet, as a move towards calming this market”

    Who or what is preventing progress, and how?

  • Anon1

    “Like Craig I would be delighted if an independent Scotland was a full member of a fully federal EU.”

    Erm, so you would swap the near independence you have now for virtually no independence whatsoever? And you call that Independence.

    These Scots nats are funny aren’t they.

  • katherine hamilton

    I think you’re very wrong about the bankers being Cameron’s mates. Should be masters.

  • Anon1

    “Every one of the changes for which Cameron is arguing in Europe will make both the UK and the EU worse. It is undoubtedly true that these reforms are marginal, and not in any sense worth the drama with which Cameron seeks to imbue them in the run-up to a pre-cooked mainstream media acclamation of significant victory.”

    Why do you think that is, Craig? Because the “renegotiation” is just a charade that enables all the establishment interests that you claim to despise – political, media and corporate – to tell us it’s safe to stay in. You are absolutely onside with those interests.

    And you’ll win.

    We either remain in this deeply undemocratic, unaccountable and oppressive experiment that is heading towards disaster or we get out get told to vote again.

  • craig Post author

    Katherine,

    I stand corrected!

    Clark,

    The answer to your second question is that the UK has been able (just) to gather enough support from other countries to block.

  • Enoch Powell

    The only mainstream medium here is the Daily Mail, and they think Cameron is a tosser.
    Real money is in people’s pockets, not in derivatives. Your stats are as dubious as your political acumen.

    “I wish to state loudly that I believe that….” -just do it then.

    Have you ever thought about testing your views at the ballot box?

  • Chris Rogers

    CM.

    I applaud your valour in promoting the EU, and welcome some common sense as far as Russia’s status as a european nation is concerned, however, from being a full proponent of the European project as envisaged by Jacques Delors, that of a ‘Social’ European construct, that vision is now in tatters, far from the Social Europe Delors inspired many of the Left with, we have a highly dysfunctional EU pushing a neoliberal economic agenda that is in opposite too what many within the EU desired or wished for. I’m afraid the EU’s neoliberal economic prescriptions in the Baltic, the Iberian Peninsular, Italy, Greece & Cyprus has been anathema to me, topped by its support of TTIP, which has nothing to do with ‘free trade’ and everything to do with enhancing multinational corporate power – the ever centralising of which is a clear and distinctive threat to our liberty and an existential threat to the nation state.

    Now I know many argue that the EU can be reformed, but the evidence available since the 2008 financial crisis suggests otherwise, to the extent that whilst I remain committed to a European idealism that favours all of Europe’s citizens combining effort and skill to build a more equal and just civic society, the present EU structure undermines this, to the extent it requires tearing down and the process begun over from scratch. As such, and in line with many on the Left who feel asI do across Europe, i’m probably going to vote that the UK leaves, if only based on the fact, and despite the odds, UK Parliamentary democracy and Westminster are far more susceptible to change, than that which exists today in Brussels and Strasbourg presently. As for the UK’s political isolation within the EU, well we know that can be blamed squarely on the Tories, who have made a complete hash of relations with the EU since 2010.

    Without an existential threat to its existence the EU will not change. And one is not referring to the racist pro-FIRE neoliberalism that the Tories aspire too, one’s referring to change that benefits all, and not a tiny elite milking all and sudsy across Europe of any wealth, however limited, they may hold.

  • eddie-g

    I’d love to share your optimism about the EU – a fantastic project for so long in terms of the creation of a common market and a shared European identity – but the single currency is destroying so much of the good work of the last 70 years.

    Where this of related importance here is that by not being a part of the Eurozone, the UK should have some opt-outs in terms of banking regulation reforms. The Eurozone needs a pan-European banking regulator; the UK does not need to be a part of it.

    Certainly not questioning your arguments about Cameron’s motivations in these negotiations, but there’s a pretty robust argument that a UK bank need not answer to a European regulatory body on its risk-taking – and if the EU won’t cede this point to Cameron, this is a reflection on them and their fear of losing banking business to London. Why exactly they should be fearful is a question best answered without recourse to logic.

  • Geoffrey

    Craig,remaining in the EU must be one of the few subjects where you find yourself on the same side as David Aaronovitch and most Neo-cons.

  • Leonard Young

    Financial Transaction Tax is hardly onerous, and is a tiny, miniscule percentage. Yet the banks have joined arms to resist it at all costs. The Green Party’s equivalent – the Robin Hood Tax – has attracted over a million supporters just in the UK, and The Labour party supports it too. More than 60% of the EU electorate supports it. Osborne and Cameron are saying they will accept it only on condition it has world-wide support rather than within the EU, knowingly perfectly well that will not happen.

    The EU has been plugging away at this for years. The social benefits of such a tax are huge, but the banks are so mean that they claim this tiny commission on their already vast profits, bail outs and bonuses is somehow going to threaten their existence. That’s as disgraceful as it is untrue.

  • Leonard Young

    “Craig,remaining in the EU must be one of the few subjects where you find yourself on the same side as David Aaronovitch and most Neo-cons.”

    But the core reasoning of the neo-cons is not the same. Theirs is almost solely concerned with corporate trade and corporate advantage, rather than the wider purpose of the EU regarding better justice, human rights, freedom to move, better regulations to protect consumers and encouraging civilised rapport between EU nations. Few of those notions are shared by the Neo-cons.

  • bevin

    ““…the existence of the European Union with a common citizenship, where we all enjoy the common rights of citizens, from Bucharest to Dublin, is a marvellous thing.”

    It is not unlike the Hapsburg Empire: you are citizens but not electors. It is now clear, more than half a century after the Treaty of Rome, that the thing to which you refer is never going to be democratically structured.
    What you have is a system of indirect representation that makes the USA look democratic. It is no accident that the current head of the EU comes from Luxemburg and his predecessor came from Portugal.

    Any understanding of the EU has to begin by looking at Greece.
    Tony O. at 1.02 pm (is it that late already?) got it right.

  • Aurora

    My problem with the ‘European project’ has always been precisely the encouragement and endorsement of self-glorifying hyperbole like “the wonderful civilisations of the European nations”. This magnificence must presumably refer to the post-Renaissance period of European history and therefore colonial expansion and the emergence of predatory capitalism, with all the inglorious history that has entailed. If Europe collectively does have a “capacity to be a force for good in the world” surely that has to be with a little less hubris and more recognition of its colonial past.

    I’d also question your desire to expand Europe to Russia – and there it stops? An economic bloc? Opposing China, Asia generally, Africa, the Islamic bloc? Surely your internationalism and sense of global justice doesn’t need this reification of Europe and the Scottish Nation to work?

  • Mark Golding

    Tony has the insight – Cameron is tasked to secure UK’s role in the EU because Britain can be counted on to argue for and support positions in Brussels consistent with, or at least not far from, those of America.

    Brexit means a more parochial and less influential UK leaving a German dominated EU weaker.

    A decision by the British people to leave the EU would also put the question of Scotland’s independence squarely back on the agenda and may even fire up an increase in terror between pro-UK Unionists and Republicans seeking to join Ireland.

  • craig Post author

    Aurora

    I don’t think the incredible scientific, industrial or social democratic achievements of the European peoples post renaissance can be denied. are you advocating Luddism?

  • Habbabkuk (for fact-based, polite, rational and obsession-free posting)

    On the free movement of workers.

    I have said it half a dozen times and shall say it again.

    The free movement of workers goes together with the other freedoms – of capital movements, goods, etc; labour is, after all, one of the factors of production.

    What many people tend to forget is that at the time of Messina and the Treaty of Rome there were five economically booming Member States with a shortage of labour and one economically booming Member State (Italy) half of which (the Mezzogiorno) had a labour surplus.

    The five northern EEC Member States – and indeed other non-EEC states – were big importers of labour – either from abroad (from the Maghreb, Turkey, Portugal, Spain, the Commonwealth……) or internally (the depopulation of rural France, for example).

    At that time, therefore, it made perfect sense and suited all of the Six to have freedom of movement for EEC workers.

    It would however not have entered the mind of the founders of the EEC that the position might one day be one where, on the one hand, most of the EU economies are stagnating and there is an overall surplus of labour and, on the other, some EU Member States have (for the moment at least), a huge surplus of labour which they are all too happy to be able to export.

    The question is really whether “principles” born out of given circumstances should remain absolute and immutable even when those circumstances have undergone such change as to become unrecognisable or whether they should be capable of, at the least, a certain adjustment or qualification.

    An analogy might be drawn with various UN humanitarian Conventions (refugees, asylum, etc) drawn up, in a world still marked by colonialism, in the light of the experiences of WW2 and perhaps not entirely suited to the circumstances of an entirely changed present world.

  • Republicofscotland

    “Erm, so you would swap the near independence you have now for virtually no independence whatsoever? And you call that Independence.”

    _______________

    Anon1

    I think you’ve missed the whole point, there old chap. Scottish independence would remove a needless layer of government namely Westminster. It would then allow Holyrood to deal directly with the EU.

    There are many disagreements over policies between Westminster and Holyrood, such as the ECHR and 40% union strike bill. As well as the letting of foreign graduates remain to work in the country or the continuation of immgrants who fill low paid jobs.

    Other contributing factors that make independence appealing are control over farming and the fisheries industry, which Scotland would negotiate directly with the EU, without Westminster’s intervention.

    Yes the EU has its down sides, corruption, favouritism, abuse of power (the handling of the Greek affair) and dysfunctional trade agreements such as the TTIP deal.

    But what’s the point of carping from the sidelines complaining that you don’t like this or that. That could be the position of the UK very soon indeed.

    Brexit, could leave the Tories with a virtual carte blanche in the UK on just about every political aspect, (except devolved issues) is that really what you want?

  • Habbabkuk (for fact-based, polite, rational and obsession-free posting)

    Tony Opmoc

    “The EU is directly responsible for the impoverishment of Southern Europe.

    I voted for the EEC as a free trading area.”
    ____________________

    Given that you are probably thinking of economic impoverishment (which can come about if you don’t trade successfully) the above seems to indicate that you see yourself as guilty of having contributed to the impoverishment of Southern Europe

  • Uphill

    Disappointing generalizations on this subject, witch EU? The totally opaque – undemocratic institutions who make choices for us in the dark.

    I thought Caroline lucas nailed it down well at the Diem25 launch. Especially regarding Cameron and his intentions. It’s clear the EU is screwed, and of course the simpletons want to present a false choice to us.

    I fear, as usual, the UK establishment will continue to play a regressive role in whatever will be, being so up it’s own ass constantly, and regarding nothing but power and privilege of the few. Life’s all about money you see. Creeps.

    I imagine few if any here have really been down. But let me tell you, the fact that the EU hasn’t rolled out a basic income yet is a disgrace on humanity. They make you literally sell yourself to the lowest common exploiters, if your lucky. Every child knows, deep down, they are worthless pieces of meat in this Roman “free Marketa” arena, while the wealthy protected socialists sit on the terraces and extol the virtues of the system “survival of the fittest” reading Ann Rand and cheering for war, as civilization goes down the pan.

    Hunger games is their “vision”. It’s a deeply disturbed society, system, that causes untold suffering to the masses for what? A bankrupt fascist ideology of totalitarian control, tries to deny or suppress consciousness to revert us back to some fantastical fantasy they NEVER come close to conforming to. And it’s certainly not how humans progress or survive.

    Utterly screwed up inhuman system of mass exploitation they call “civilization”.

  • David

    I’m firmly for the out vote, nothing to do with immigration or any other pretend issue. I want out because the EU project stopped being about the EU people a long time ago. The EU is the puppet of global companies, just as the USA is. Almost no accountability, no true oversight and corruption and fraud on a vast and indeed industrial scale. TTIP is the tip of the ice berg. Sorry Craig but the Europe you have in your head simply does not exist in the real world any more.

    Cameron is weak beyond belief, even coming back with his pathetic deal he will try and claim victory, I personally hope that the people of this Island see right through it all and say enough is enough. He had an opportunity here to really put a gun to the EUs head and demand real substantial and proper change, or the removal of the UK from the EU.

    Despite the lack of interest on the continent at the moment, probably because they don’t think we will leave, the UK exiting the EU will almost certainly spell the end of the EU in its current form. It will lose a huge chunk of its financing, and if they play really hard ball then they may lose access to one of their best export markets.

    The EU needs the UK more than the UK needs the EU. I will never vote to stay in an organisation that is undemocratic and unanswerable to the people it governs. Exactly the same sentiment expressed by the Scottish independence movement.

  • Republicofscotland

    My own opinion, is that David Cameron is on a EU mission to protect the city of London, and its interests, especially the financial sector which is home to the headquarters of many financial institues.

    By hawking his wares around Europe (so to speak) I’d imagine David Cameron has lost a lot of clout, and alienated himself in certain countries. He does the average Brit no favours, going cap in hand to plead, for the rich, and well to do of London and the South East.

  • Aurora

    No Craig, I’m suggesting that “the incredible scientific, industrial or social democratic achievements of the European peoples” might have been based, for example, on the appropriation of Islamic and Chinese science and technology, the expropriation of land and enslavement of workforces to achieve industrialization, and contact with non-European (indigenous peoples) as an essential element in the *return* of Europe to some semblance of ‘social democracy’ after the impositions of nation-building and sovereign power in the Middle Ages.

    You can’t bluff your way into making a case for essential ‘European goodness’. The whole idea of Europe as an entity is inextricably tied to European colonialism. Like I said, you’re promotion of the EU as an entity seems to need this obfuscation of a less beneficient European contribution to world history and the erasure of what other peoples have contributed. That was my point.

  • Tony_0pmoc

    CE @ 19 Feb, 2016 – 1:23 pm “Didn’t take long for the tinfoil hats to come out.”

    Try this as an antidote to your alpha state. I gave it up nearly 20 years ago (watching TV).

    This is a powerful observation from outside the Western Bubble of which the EU is a major part.

    “Erbil: Western Propaganda and Two Parallel Realities”

    By Andre Vltchek

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article44260.htm

    Extract

    ” Now, being stuck in this extremely uninformed pro-Western enclave, I was in need of an urgent update. But my hotel only allowed those official propaganda outlets of the Empire like CNN, Fox and the BBC – outlets beaming their vitriolic propaganda 24/7.

    Both CNN and BBC were blasting visuals from the Syrian-Turkish borders. The narrative was the same on both channels: people are fleeing Aleppo, trying to cross into Turkey to save their lives. Turkey “does all it can to help”.

    Syrian and Russian gains were portrayed as a disaster, a true calamity.

    These two television stations are influencing billions of people worldwide, dictating how the most important events should be perceived on all continents. They are manufacturing one uniformed narrative, one dogma.

    As I gazed at the screen, it suddenly occurred to me that the world now has two realities: a true one, consisting of human stories and testimonies, and one “hyper reality”, twisted and manipulated, but increasingly dominant.

    No good deed, no objectively positive event could bring optimism and joy to the people of our planet, if it is against the interests of the Empire. The propaganda media would simply bathe it in filth and nihilism, as well as dark sarcasm.

    Images of a group of refugees at the Syrian-Turkish border, with a perfectly tailored propaganda narrative repeated again and again by the BBC announcer, are so tailored as to convince the world that the Syrian and Russian initiatives have not been saving Aleppo, the most populous Syrian city, but on the contrary, they have been destroying it!

    After two minutes of watching the “news” on the BBC, I began to feel unwell.

    The contrast between Reality as I have witnessed it with my own eyes, and the farce, was too great.

    I wondered, how those journalists and reporters who serve the Empire, can face themselves in the morning, looking into the mirror.”

    alpha state – a brief explanation

    http://appliedneurotec.com/neuroscience/effects-of-tv-on-your-brain/

    Tony

  • Geoffrey

    If you believe that the UK is an evil Neo-con state why would you want it to remain in the EU ? Especially as I assume you believe that the UK leaving would increase the chances of Scottish devolution ?
    Surely, what you really want is the UK to remain and be a pimple in Brussels ?

  • MJ

    “I look forward to ever closer union becoming a reality, and the day when the EU encompasses all of Europe, including Russia”

    You could try sending Russia the appropriate application forms but I doubt they’d be returned. Can’t imagine why Russia would have the slightest interest in joining the EU. It’s far more likely that European nations will eventually join up with BRICS and the proposed new financial system, which will see the end of pillaging zombie banks altogether.

    Russian’s are genuinely independent-minded people – Scots would have a lot to learn from them.

  • glenn_uk

    I read in Red Pepper that Dutch finance minister and Eurogroup president Jeroen Dijsselbloem said to Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis, “You either sign the memorandum that the others have signed too, or your economy is going to collapse”.

    “How?” Varoufakis asked.

    The Eurogroup President replied, “We are going to collapse your banks”.

    Varoufakis later said, “I didn’t denounce that then, because I was hoping that reason would prevail in the negotiations with all of the Eurogroup”.

    This blackmail was to insist that Greece accept a “deal” that was substantially worse than the previous offering. This was to bail out the banks and investors, not the Greek people themselves – no, they had to accept great hardship.

    With this – IMHO – the EU lost its soul, any sense of purpose of which it might once have shown signs of promise. I no longer wish my country to be in such an organisation.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.