Cameron wins EU skirmish

[Drifterwood]

Well I agree that Welsh, Irish and Scots should not vote in England. But then you would exacerbate the gaping North South divide, because the Labour North would be effectively disenfranchised by the Tory South. In fact, I think that I am right in saying that a Labour Government would never have come to power without Scottish and Welsh votes.

The Brythonic and even Anglo Saxon regions persist in being the strongest personal definitions for the ironically called English (without even beginning the multiculturalism debate), because it became a "Nation" under the Norman yoke. We only stopped fighting over this when economic power took over. Now it is waning even further, we shall see how things develop with the potential of Euro representation on offer. The 90 million Germans are represented by 24 ish (sorry can't remember the exact number) federated republics. It's not impossible to see the 60 million in the UK being represented in Europe by at least 10 federated republics. In fact, IMO, this would be the best way to be represented in Europe.

P.S. I couldn't have more respect for QEII, and I really do like Charlie, but in my head, I am a Republican (not a US one ).

 

[dandelion]

The monarchy seems to be one element of the UK budget in long term decline. What is it, pay cuts for 20 years in a row?

 

[Jason]

Well I agree that Welsh, Irish and Scots should not vote in England.

The West Lothian Question hasn't been answered because there is no answer. There is no way of excluding Welsh, Scottish and NI MPs from voting on English affairs without creating enormous tensions. It is very easy to see a situation where the UK would have a Labour majority but England a Conservative majority (ie the last parliament) but with MPs excluded on many votes we would almost need a UK PM and an England PM - and both working through the same Westminster parliament. Madness!

A part solution is to make the number of MPs from W, S and NI reflect their populations (which certainly means less MPs for S and NI - not sure about Wales). And part of the solution is for the Conservatives to perform better in Scotland (NI has different parties, and the Welsh political map is not wildly different from England). We need a situation where S, W and NI voting on English matters simply doesn't matter because it so rarely makes any difference. We're left with a theoretical constitutional problem which with a bit of luck won't happen, and it just becomes another of the theoretical problems which exist within the UK constitution which we can forget about.

**********

As for a federal UK within the EU (as the German model) I just don't see it happening. The Anglo-French defence agreement has come from no-where and reflects quite a shift in both countries - for something this large it is amazing that we didn't know about it earlier. I think UK, France and Germany are working towards some new view of the EU and of co-operation between the three nations, and all will be revealed when they are ready.

 

[B_crackoff]

Well I agree that Welsh, Irish and Scots should not vote in England. But then you would exacerbate the gaping North South divide, because the Labour North would be effectively disenfranchised by the Tory South. In fact, I think that I am right in saying that a Labour Government would never have come to power without Scottish and Welsh votes.

No,they would just have had a majority in each country. Don't you think that the Tory south was effectively disenfranchised by the Scots,Welsh, & Labour North. ah ha!

It's not impossible to see the 60 million in the UK being represented in Europe by at least 10 federated republics. In fact, IMO, this would be the best way to be represented in Europe.

The major difference here being that they all existed independently 150 years ago. Think unification of Germany. It used to be 400 odd states!

A level question, "Was Bismarck a Prussian expansionist, or a German Nationalist - discuss". ( He was a bleeding Prussian opportunist!)

There isn't that same kind of historical divide in England, though the EU tries like hell to set up autonomous "regional" assemblies. The Gemanic divide also exists for the Spanish & Italians

It's a massive difference. The English had pretty identical customs, unlike the Bavarians ,Hannoverians& Prussians, Catalans, Castillion & Andalus, & Piedmont, Romans & Sicily.

P.S. I couldn't have more respect for QEII, and I really do like Charlie, but in my head, I am a Republican (not a US one )

I just can't bear the thought of all the equivalent expense on having another elected politician!:biggrin1:.

The monarchy seems to be one element of the UK budget in long term decline. What is it, pay cuts for 20 years in a row?

Those offshore windfarms will bring her in a tidy sum!

The West Lothian Question hasn't been answered because there is no answer. There is no way of excluding Welsh, Scottish and NI MPs from voting on English affairs without creating enormous tensions.

Yes there is. Just do it. They have no right to vote on purely English matters. If that causes a tension, dissove the devolvement! It certainly didn't use to be a problem for William Hague!

It is very easy to see a situation where the UK would have a Labour majority but England a Conservative majority (ie the last parliament) but with MPs excluded on many votes we would almost need a UK PM and an England PM - and both working through the same Westminster parliament. Madness!

Not at all. It's happened before- a lot.

Think about all those Lords who were PMs. They couldn't vote or speak in the Commons either. And those were the glory days!

If parties want devolvement they must take that concomitant risk!

You must stop thinking of England as being the UK. It's not like Clegg doesn't deputise in multiple ways including at question time for Cameron.

If we do something new, there will simply have to be new ways of doing things.
We're left with a theoretical constitutional problem which with a bit of luck won't happen, and it just becomes another of the theoretical problems which exist within the UK constitution which we can forget about.

We are left with a major consitutional problem if Irish, Scots Labour/Nationalists managed to provide a majority against any Government bill that only affects England & Wales.

If the Coalition broke down - this is a bloody likely scenario for the Tories, so they should act now. It is equitable after all. I'd like to think that there could be a gentleman's agreement, but we have none in Parliament these days.

As for a federal UK within the EU (as the German model) I just don't see it happening. The Anglo-French defence agreement has come from no-where and reflects quite a shift in both countries - for something this large it is amazing that we didn't know about it earlier. I think UK, France and Germany are working towards some new view of the EU and of co-operation between the three nations, and all will be revealed when they are ready.

I'm going to call this here & now. 2nd November 2010.

This is the start of the all new European Defence Force (or whatever title)

We aren't going to have our own forces too. This is Pan European integration, & again something we have not debated or voted on. An EU military. Goodbye "smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast", hello croissants mit bockwurst.

For us on our own "ze capacity to make war/defend, or deter independently, ees over!"

Goodbye nationality, signed away with disregard for our citizens.

 

[Jason]

I'm going to call this here & now. 2nd November 2010.

This is the start of the all new European Defence Force (or whatever title)

We aren't going to have our own forces too. This is Pan European integration, & again something we have not debated or voted on. An EU military. Goodbye "smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast", hello croissants mit bockwurst.

For us on our own "ze capacity to make war/defend, or deter independently, ees over!"

Goodbye nationality, signed away with disregard for our citizens.

The EU is in a very bad mess. I know the Europhiles feel it is just a bit of turbulence but I don't agree - I think the whole project came close to failure in the spring (Merkel's "if the euro fails, Europe fails") and is little or no better now - and crucially I think all the national leaders know this. The key characteristic of the Anglo-French agreement is specifically that it is not an EU agreement but rather a bilateral agreement between two nations. In contrast with Crackoff's view I suggest this is the day when another crack appears in the EU.

Cameron, Sarkozy and Merkel have in my view all asked themselves "what if the EU fails?" and their answer is nation-state agreements. This between the UK and France on defense is one. The fiscal harmonisation between France and Germany (in advance of anyone else in the EU and as a bilateral agreement) is in my view France and Germany setting themselves up for a solution for their nations when/if the euro fails. I think we will start to see more bilateral agreements between EU states.

 

[dandelion]

Those offshore windfarms will bring her in a tidy sum!

Since the money will be going to the government, no, I dont think it will.

The West Lothian Question hasn't been answered because there is no answer.
Yes there is. Just do it. They have no right to vote on purely English matters. If that causes a tension, dissove the devolvement!

The reason the scots have an overrepresentation is that it was part of the original merger deal. They are overrepresented to ensure they have a minimum weight in parliament. Its tough luck if they customarily all vote one way. That was what england wanted. So we should make Scotland properly independant (which would certainly involve giving them back their oil). Scotland is quite comfortable within the UK now because of its independance. If you start taking that away then certainly the scots nats and calls for independence would rise again.

I'm going to call this here & now. 2nd November 2010.
This is the start of the all new European Defence Force

I think the French are just as possesive about their military as the brits. Neither of us plans to share with the rest of Europe, except perhaps for Germany. The big three, which is what anti-europeans seem to miss. the UK is a big player within the EU if it chooses to take part.

For us on our own "ze capacity to make war/defend, or deter independently, ees over!"

like it isnt already?

The key characteristic of the Anglo-French agreement is specifically that it is not an EU agreement but rather a bilateral agreement between two nations.

I agree, but must point out so was the EU.

 

[B_crackoff]

I think we will start to see more bilateral agreements between EU states.

Probably - but what's the point of the EU as a political rather than trading block then? If the major players are going to kick out the weak links from the Euro, that's a major backward step from integration.

I don't even see how they can do it without a majority consent of Euro countries. If that's not illegal, there must be loopholes a plenty. And all loopholes are put in for a reason.

I think your point about the sudden military announcement was correct. It must have been planned for a long time.

Put it this way - we can afford the extra billions for the military - no question - we just don't desire it.

The only rational explanations are: the first pernicious step to an integrated EU military, or they know something we don't that makes the military expense redundant in the foreseeable longer term.

NB
Spending on Afghan war to rise to £5 billion a year - Telegraph

Pulling out of there would save 5 billion. The no.1 priority of any Govt is meant to be defence of the realm - Afghanistan doesn't fit that.

 

[798686]

^ In terms of wind farms, is there some clause agreed by foreign-owned power companies, that states all electricity generated in UK waters must be earmarked for Britain? Otherwise, if/when a smartgrid is in place, and the North Sea one linking UK, Germany, France, Netherlands and Norway is up and running, you might get the situation where the electricity generated in UK waters (by foreign companies such as E.on and NPower/RWE) is sent elsewhere, and doesn't benefit the UK at all.

On another wind farm issue - I see the UK will at some point in the next few years be generating more electricity from windfarms than the rest of the world combined. Sounds ridiculous, but the figures were in The Times a week or so ago. Currently we have 1GW of wind farm generated capacity, soon going up to 9GW with plans eventually for 50GW.

This might sound like good news environmentally (sort of, if u dont give a shit about the coastline), but new windfarms such as Dogger Bank (which is set to be 100m wide) are displacing UK fishing fleets from the few remaining areas of actually sustainable fishing grounds around the UK. What's the point of saving the environment in one way, if it stuffs things up in another?

 

[B_crackoff]

What's the point of saving the environment in one way, if it stuffs things up in another?

Don't start being sensible & thinking holistically Joll - it'll never catch on!

 

[798686]

Don't start being sensible & thinking holistically Joll - it'll never catch on!

LOL! :biggrin1:

 

[dandelion]

^ In terms of wind farms, is there some clause agreed by foreign-owned power companies, that states all electricity generated in UK waters must be earmarked for Britain?

The objections to windfarms are usually that theres no electricity when the wind does not blow, so you cannot rely on them for too much of your electricity. its a bit premature to be arguing about who gets the electricity until we run out of places to put them.

Otherwise, if/when a smartgrid is in place, and the North Sea one linking UK, Germany, France, Netherlands and Norway is up and running, you might get the situation where the electricity generated in UK waters (by foreign companies such as E.on and NPower/RWE) is sent elsewhere,

But we may want that supergrid to bring us solar power from the Sahara to supplement our intermittent wind.

new windfarms such as Dogger Bank (which is set to be 100m wide) are displacing UK fishing fleets from the few remaining areas of actually sustainable fishing grounds around the UK.

Are you sure they are sustainable? Environmentally speaking, Im sure the remaining fish will be grateful for somewhere to hide from the boats. Might save them from extinction which is how its going now.

 

[Drifterwood]

As for a federal UK within the EU (as the German model) I just don't see it happening. The Anglo-French defence agreement has come from no-where and reflects quite a shift in both countries - for something this large it is amazing that we didn't know about it earlier. I think UK, France and Germany are working towards some new view of the EU and of co-operation between the three nations, and all will be revealed when they are ready.

I was talking about this when we were engrossed in the Greece question. I.e. France UK and Germany getting their acts together and sorting the job out. You, Jase have been going on about a Franco/German economic pact. Still might happen.

 

[Drifterwood]

Someone from Kent has as much in common with someone from Manchester as they do with someone from Melbourne. And don't give me your silly flag waving, bad football team tosh. How much do people even know about the UK? I bet more Londonners have been on holiday to the Med than they have to the North East.

No single European country can fund a globally significant military. We either work together to have a serious European capability or you kiss ass like Blair was so well disposed to do.

 

[798686]

The objections to windfarms are usually that theres no electricity when the wind does not blow, so you cannot rely on them for too much of your electricity. its a bit premature to be arguing about who gets the electricity until we run out of places to put them.

Not really, would we ignore who gets the electricity from future UK-sited powerplants, just because we haven't run out of space to build them?

All I'm saying is, if we're sacrificing UK environment to build wind farms - the UK should at least have the option of using it. Otherwise, it would be like a German utility building a coal-fired powerstation here, and using the electricity to supply Germany, with the UK having no say in the matter.

I have no problem with selling excess energy capacity to other countries (via a supergrid, or the gas interconnector, or whatever), and buying in return when needed, but that's not really what I was talking about.

But we may want that supergrid to bring us solar power from the Sahara to supplement our intermittent wind.

We may do - which is why I'm in favour of the supergrid. Selling excess capacity to other countries due to different power peak times would seem like a sensible and efficient idea.

Are you sure they are sustainable? Environmentally speaking, Im sure the remaining fish will be grateful for somewhere to hide from the boats. Might save them from extinction which is how its going now.

That's one of the few North Sea areas that is currently sustainable (according to the article I read), it's a low throw-back area too - where they don't pick up too many other species of fish (it's a herring area, I think) which exceed quotas. So, the boats will be forced into less sustainable areas, with higher throw-back.

 

[Jason]

I was talking about this when we were engrossed in the Greece question. I.e. France UK and Germany getting their acts together and sorting the job out. You, Jase have been going on about a Franco/German economic pact. Still might happen.

Your idea Drifterwood of UK, France and Germany "getting their acts together and sorting the job out" is an interesting one and might even be right. There is undoubtedly a major mess to sort out. But I cannot see it happening within the EU as presently structured - I just don't see that the framework permits it.

IMO there has to be a solution for the euro - nothing works unless that currency is stable. The proposed permanent bailout will spook the markets (as it has done in Ireland and Portugal in the last 24 hrs). It won't work and shouldn't even be considered. The only logical solution is to revalue the northern economies out of the Euro, and I think this is the implicit end of the present Franco-German fiscal harmonisation.

IMO the relative economic strengths of the EU countries (not their populations) have to determine their clout - this needs to be formalised rather than done in back room deals. There is a real split between Club Med/Eastern Europe and the North. We need a variable geometry that reflects this, ie we need something more sophisticated than a single, EU-wide way of doing things.

IMO we also need a variable geometry to reflect different national aspirations. Greece certainly needs to leave the present one-size-fits-all EU but to remain within the EU. Ditto the UK. And probably Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Czech Republic, maybe more.

IMO the Anglo-French agreement makes these two countries together the only serious military force in Europe. This agreement is bilateral but changes the geometry of Europe.

 

[dandelion]

Your idea Drifterwood of UK, France and Germany "getting their acts together and sorting the job out" is an interesting one and might even be right. There is undoubtedly a major mess to sort out. But I cannot see it happening within the EU as presently structured

I agree it would be difficult to see how we could sort out the euro when not even members. Do you thing Cameron will be bold enough to take us in? Nowthat might get me to vote for him.

IMO the Anglo-French agreement makes these two countries together the only serious military force in Europe. This agreement is bilateral but changes the geometry of Europe.

Its perfectly true the French and British have not cooperated well in the past, but it just might be they have come to this same conclusion, that the only possible viable military force in europe is a joint one.

That's one of the few North Sea areas that is currently sustainable (according to the article I read), it's a low throw-back area too - where they don't pick up too many other species of fish (it's a herring area, I think) which exceed quotas. So, the boats will be forced into less sustainable areas, with higher throw-back.

Forced into less sustainable areas? Is that a contradiction in sustainability? I'm afraid I have heard reports of how fishing is now sustainable for ?30 years, but all that happens is that catches decline. All lies so far.

 

[B_crackoff]

Someone from Kent has as much in common with someone from Manchester as they do with someone from Melbourne. And don't give me your silly flag waving, bad football team tosh. How much do people even know about the UK? I bet more Londonners have been on holiday to the Med than they have to the North East.

I had to laugh when I read that being as my Mum was from Kent, Moved to Manchester, my eldest brother was born there, &moved back down to Kent!

So I call complete bullshit on your reasoning! The only difference my mother noticed back then was that it was certainly more sexist in the North West & Wales. But that's all gone now.

It's pretty much the same culture, drinks, foods, identical customs, & same sense of cultural identity, which was fostered by 900+ years of unity, & the same laws & monarchs, all homogenized.

Anyone who thinks they can't move around England & fit right in as they would anywhere in their current region is mental - or living in a bizarre past.

Possibly you haven't been to London. It's jam packed with Mancs, Scouse, Scots, Irish etc. Bloody hell, I've lived in the North East & West - I didn't have a problem!

I'm surprised you even want further integration into the EU if you think that England is so disparate.:smile:

No single European country can fund a globally significant military. We either work together to have a serious European capability or you kiss ass like Blair was so well disposed to do.

We don't have to fund a globally significant miltary.

1 - we should leave every other country alone to organically restructure themselves.
2 - we only need to defend ourselves, & a few wee islands.
3 - We're in F8CKING NATO!:wink: