No more opt-outs. Either the United Kingdom should be in the European Union and within the eurozone, or it should not be in the European Union at all.
Prime Minister of Denmark Rasmussen is to give Danes a say 'in joining the euro and ending Denmark’s opt-outs from Brussels', because staying outside the single currency and retaining opt-outs on defence, justice and home affairs are damaging Denmark's relationship with the European Union.
The Danish referendum will be 'the sixth time that the country has held a popular vote on an EU issue since Denmark joined in 1973. Although Britain joined the same year, the British Government has held only one referendum, in 1975.', notes today's Sunday Times.
"It is the Government’s view that the people in this parliamentary term should have the opportunity to take a stance on the Danish EU opt-outs. We have always said that the Danish exemptions are a hindrance for Denmark. It is the right time to take a decision.” Mr Rasmussen said.
And well said, as we are bundled, hurly burly, into accepting the new European Union constitution; it is simply silly to go on pretending that there exists a whole-hearted support for the UK's membership of the European Union or, as a fallback, that UK reserve can be met by 'opt-outs' that suit the control freakery of the Labour Leader and his regime for micro-managing the United Kingdom in their own interest. And, insofar as referendums are only ever advisory under our dying constitution, an election is needed on the issue.
Scotland's prime minister may yet put this whole mess to the Scottish people, and there is no foregone conclusion; Scotland has excellent economic and institutional reasons to reject continued EU membership and adopt a Norwegian relationship with the EU.
That would be one in the eye for England's Scottish prime minister.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
'I saw the angel in the marble and carved until I set him free'
About Me
Posts
Heroes
- Axel Leijonhufvud
- E.E.Evans-Pritchard
- Edmund Leach
- Francois Couperin
- Joan Robinson
- John Maynard Keynes
- Louis de Soissons
- Mario Draghi
- Noam Chomsky
- Pablo Picasso
- Paul Klee
- Pietro Porcinai
- The Earl of Onslow
- Umberto Boccioni
- Wassily Kandinski
- Wilhelm von Humboldt
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(254)
-
▼
November
(22)
- Dangerous Moonlight
- Single Source of Truth
- Out
- Jonah
- Brown Government or Whited Sepulchre
- Who Are These People?
- Passport to Pimlico
- Sub-Prime Minister
- Cheap Food Policy
- Giovinezza, Giovinezza!
- Cri de Coeur
- Sinking Funds
- Driving Oil Prices
- Oil Shock Price Warning (or any other order you li...
- Chinese Boxes
- Visionary Leadership
- Economics 101
- Real Racism
- About the woodlands I will go...
- The Poet's Response to Taking Liberties
- Walking on Air
- Immigration, Immigration, Immigration
-
▼
November
(22)
Fallen Angels
- David Cameron (for risking the disorderly dissolution of the Euro)
- Giorgio Napolitano (for stance on Budapest 1956: Prague 1968: Italy 2013)
- Mervyn King (for bailing-out Northern Rock)
- Nicholas Kaldor (for inventing VAT)
12 comments:
"Either the United Kingdom should be in the European Union and within the eurozone, or it should not be in the European Union at all".
But to put the in/out question to the electorate either in a referendum or an election,would be short-sighted. Generally speaking, the British are quite keen to have some sort of relationship with our nearest neighbours and might vote against withdrawal without understanding the implications for democracy and sovereignty, which further integration would bring.
What's needed is a British government with the political will to renegotiate our relationship with the EU and which would claw back some of the powers they had no right to have in the first place .. CAP and CFP for starters.
We don't need to join the eurozone at all, neither do we need to go the whole hog and agree to the constitution. We just need a prime minister strong enough to stand up to Europe.
JO
I don't think we were invited in just to drink coffee. Either say it's a fair cop and go upstairs, or make your excuses and leave. I say leave.
So would I, S.
Jo we can't expect to finesse the electorate's choices. We can expect the electorate to have the choice. If the choice is to be in the EU then so be it; what is democratically crucial is taking the decision amongst us all, not this horrible slippery weaselling by Labour.
Don't wake up the people in Europe. Please keep silent about the vote online site www.FreeEurope.info.
It would also be one in the eye for Scotland's first minister - the SNP position on the EU is quite clear.
"That would be one in the eye for England's Scottish prime minister."
Steady on! Only one of them works...
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/business/ambrosevanspritchard/nov07/europe-exchange-control.htm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/11/22/bcnitaly122.xml
The current financial crisis may turn out to be the saviour of the UK from the EU
HG much as I worship the very ground upon whichyou walk I think Jo is right and you are wrong . Voting to get out is not the fair question
We were given a vote on a simple Common Market. We wanted that. WE should have a vote on whether to return to what we wanted not; either forget the country, or go it alone .Joe has the balance quite right in my view ,in fact I am so impressed I may replace you in the number one poltical comenting woamn spot with Joe. Oh yes its all Joe around here nowadays you know ....
Luuurve that Joe
XX
(Still await broadband at home grrrr)
'HG, much as I worship the very ground upon whichyou walk...'
Like this N?
Where'er you walk, cool gales shall fan the glade;
Trees, where you sit, shall crowd into a shade:
Where'er you tread, the blushing flow'rs shall rise; and all things flourish where'er you turn your eyes.
The EU isn't going back to be a Common Market, that was just a stop on the road, it was to be a United States of Europe always. The UK was fooled by both parties in the seventies, and paid a huge price to be there till Mrs Thatcher retrieved some of that, but the option of changing the EU and its goals is not available.
And the diversion of attention onto opt outs that are not either advantageous for many in the UK or effective in any case, is preventing the proper targetting of our objectives.
We cannot have the European relationships of quarter of a century ago. And as the globalised economy has wholly changed the nature of what is to our advantage, we should take our leave and keep our friends, in Europe and in the rest of the world.
Jon H, yes, self-denied restraint from obvious response here.
More this:
SHE walks in beauty, like the night
Of cloudless climes and starry skies;
And all that 's best of dark and bright
Meet in her aspect and her eyes:
But if you put it like that you will get avote to stay in and that will be mandate for the end of the country...Needs preparation to set the framework. I don`t deny what you say is right but what you advoctae is wrong poltically .Why do you think Ming and Huhne want the same thing ?
'you will get avote to stay in..'
Well if people prefer to be in the EU that is what they should have, N.
But they don't want to be in the EU, they want to be in something that doesn't exist and never will again.
If you believe there is a majorty for being in the EU then I would prefer to be in with all the bells and whistles, not to say considerable advantages that are being carefully removed from the menu by Labour to maintain their own power and privilege.
It is in or out N, we musn't let Labour bury our democracy inside a federal state designed for other political systems.
It's fine for Italy to be in (well, ok-ish there are a few corners) but continental european countries are on a completely different democratic base to the UK. Either we adopt that base, or we are defenceless against EU institutions and practices; we just don't have the machinery or the means. That's why this statist regime is so keen to sign up. A huge statist structure and no indigenous, local controls on its powers.
Post a Comment