Jump to content

The now-enacted will of (some of) the people


Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Obviously I'm as head-screwed-on-right, f*** Brexit and all who sail in her, sensible as they come.

But that being said...why exactly do Charles Michel and Ursula Von Der Leyen need to be here?

E3mzAtnWQAUG9xD?format=jpg&name=900x900

EU has taken part in the G7 meetings since before I was born. There are 450 million citizens of the EU, and half of them aren’t represented by Merkel, Draghi, or Macron. Of course they’re involved.

Mad what can happen when the Dutch, the Irish, the Swedes etc work as a union 😜

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Enda said:

EU has taken part in the G7 meetings since before I was born. There are 450 million citizens of the EU, and half of them aren’t represented by Merkel, Draghi, or Macron. Of course they’re involved.

I'm not sure I see the relevance of that point. There are over four billion people in Asia who aren't represented by Yoshihide Suga.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

I'm not sure I see the relevance of that point. There are over four billion people in Asia who aren't represented by Yoshihide Suga.

Right. Do they form a single economic union? Share a parliament?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Since first invited by the United Kingdom in 1977, the European Union has been represented by the president of the European Commission and the leader of the country that holds the presidency of the Council of the European Union;[10] the Council President now also regularly attends.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_of_Seven

Our fault.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For what its worth, India, South Korea, and Australia are also at the G7 summit.

There will have been a number of combinations of photos.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
On 10/06/2021 at 07:43, Genie said:

From what I remember with countries like Spain when they joined the Euro there was initially a big spike in inflation.

I think a path to potentially rejoining the EU at some point is possible, and people would go for it, but not with changing to the Euro. I think that will be a red line for a lot of “patriots”.

It's not just "patriots" against joining the Euro. I'm dead against it. Not for ideological reasons, but practical ones. When it was first talked about, way back, I was in favour, but realistically you'd need aligned tax systems and all the rest for it to work properly.

Where you have such a vast range of different economies - some in growth, some in recession, some flat-lining a single Central European Bank (ECB) only has one lever for interest rate and so on. This is essentially incompatible with the varying different needs of the different member states. One state may be crying out for interest rate rises, and another for interest rates to fall.

The second reason is that when it was introduced, and just before, I used to work in Italy quite a lot. An Italian colleague who was also a local politician kept saying "you guys should join the Euro" and so on, but then after it was introduced he was angry at the way all the prices had gone up overnight and everything was more expensive (and it really was). It hit their standard of living.

It really would have to be a European super state for the Euro to work effectively and bring about improvement. Governments would need to relinquish more control over their own economies and such like.

There are some pros as well as cons, but the Euro has a had a rocky, rocky ride at times and hasn't remotely brought about the benefits that were promised.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, blandy said:

It's not just "patriots" against joining the Euro. I'm dead against it. Not for ideological reasons, but practical ones. When it was first talked about, way back, I was in favour, but realistically you'd need aligned tax systems and all the rest for it to work properly.

Where you have such a vast range of different economies - some in growth, some in recession, some flat-lining a single Central European Bank (ECB) only has one lever for interest rate and so on. This is essentially incompatible with the varying different needs of the different member states. One state may be crying out for interest rate rises, and another for interest rates to fall.

The second reason is that when it was introduced, and just before, I used to work in Italy quite a lot. An Italian colleague who was also a local politician kept saying "you guys should join the Euro" and so on, but then after it was introduced he was angry at the way all the prices had gone up overnight and everything was more expensive (and it really was). It hit their standard of living.

It really would have to be a European super state for the Euro to work effectively and bring about improvement. Governments would need to relinquish more control over their own economies and such like.

There are some pros as well as cons, but the Euro has a had a rocky, rocky ride at times and hasn't remotely brought about the benefits that were promised.

Something very similar could be said for the Bank of England and Westminster deciding the monetary policies and interest rates and inflation targets to suit London, the South East, Lisburn and Inverness?

The country is currently ‘investing’ tens of billions in HS2, the economy of Aberystwyth is receiving a portion of the bill and there is every chance that if HS2 is a success, it will further set back the economy of Aberystwyth. They have no control over it, they desperately needed better transport connections. They will be paying for it.

Wherever you set that boundary, one size will not fit all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ml1dch said:

Obviously I'm as head-screwed-on-right, f*** Brexit and all who sail in her, sensible as they come.

But that being said...why exactly do Charles Michel and Ursula Von Der Leyen need to be here?

E3mzAtnWQAUG9xD?format=jpg&name=900x900

Yeah it does feel a bit strange, especially given that Merkel and Macron are arguably the two most powerful people in the EU anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
54 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Wherever you set that boundary, one size will not fit all.

Maybe, arguably.

The extent of the misfitting is increased with scale. I perceive that within the UK there isn't the same scale of misfit as there is across Yurp - say Germany and Greece. One size fits all can work, sort of, where everyone is the same-is shape. But not when they're completely different.

HS2 doesn't benefit Wales, and the Nationalists are using it as a political football. That's fine. If I lived in Wales or Scotland I might well be in favour of Independence and make that sort of argument. It's got eff all to do with joining the Euro, mind. We can all nurture grievances about how this part gets more than that. Why do English taxpayers subsidise the Welsh or Scots? kind of thing. That's the same Faragey stuff that brought about Brexit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, blandy said:

Maybe, arguably.

The extent of the misfitting is increased with scale. I perceive that within the UK there isn't the same scale of misfit as there is across Yurp - say Germany and Greece. One size fits all can work, sort of, where everyone is the same-is shape. But not when they're completely different.

HS2 doesn't benefit Wales, and the Nationalists are using it as a political football. That's fine. If I lived in Wales or Scotland I might well be in favour of Independence and make that sort of argument. It's got eff all to do with joining the Euro, mind. We can all nurture grievances about how this part gets more than that. Why do English taxpayers subsidise the Welsh or Scots? kind of thing. That's the same Faragey stuff that brought about Brexit.

I was thinking more of how a hill farmer or small boat fisherman is helped by a monetary policy designed to keep the city of London ‘booming’ at just the right level of boom. I think there’s a strong Germany / Greece energy about the London / Northumberland relationship. That’s not really much about nationalism, I wasn’t really doing nationalism, its something that cuts both ways. UK out of EU is not some Goldilocks perfect size and fit. Nothing is a perfect size and fit. But I do know there was a lot of euro funding going in to deprived regions all over. Westminster isn’t replacing that (unless the local MP is an inner circle tory). So that big clunky EU lever, has been replaced with… no lever. I know that’s not strictly euro currency argument, but it shows we don’t automatically improve or finesse the system by being in a smaller system. In fact, that argument is possibly the reverse of what I think you were gently accusing me of.

How whole swathes of the country don’t have a decent north / south road or any sort of rail service, yet we spend 23 billion making it faster for people in Birmingham to get to London, when if speed was that critical, you’d imagine they’d use TEAMS, or travel up the night before. We’ve got people in Cornwall that can’t afford a place to live, whilst people in London are buying up property that they may or may not then let out on air bnb. 

None of that has been improved by avoiding the iniquity of the euro.

I’m not convinced I’m being Faragey here. Good chance its the opposite. I’m not seeing the benefit, the difference, the taking back of control.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
5 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

I do know there was a lot of euro funding going in to deprived regions all over. Westminster isn’t replacing that (unless the local MP is an inner circle tory). So that big clunky EU lever, has been replaced with… no lever. I know that’s not strictly euro currency argument, but it shows we don’t automatically improve or finesse the system by being in a smaller system. In fact, that argument is possibly the reverse of what I think you were gently accusing me of.

How whole swathes of the country don’t have a decent north / south road or any sort of rail service, yet we spend 23 billion making it faster for people in Birmingham to get to London, when if speed was that critical, you’d imagine they’d use TEAMS, or travel up the night before. We’ve got people in Cornwall that can’t afford a place to live, whilst people in London are buying up property that they may or may not then let out on air bnb. 

None of that has been improved by avoiding the iniquity of the euro.

I’m not convinced I’m being Faragey here. Good chance its the opposite. I’m not seeing the benefit, the difference, the taking back of control.

I largely agree with all of that. I don’t think the UK joining the Euro currency solves any of it. Leaving yurp was a bad thing to do, though I wasn’t a big fan of the EU governance, like I’m not of the UK governance.

The UK is a very unequal country and a fair part of that is due to the over centralisation, which is another reason not to be keen on financial currency centralisation to Brussels. Sure Brussels isn’t Tory, but with right wing parties growing and centrist and left ones declining, what’s it going to look like in 10, 15 years?

we left the EU. Having done so, I personally wouldn’t want to rejoin if it meant joining the Euro. Other opinions are available.

Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

Yeah it does feel a bit strange, especially given that Merkel and Macron are arguably the two most powerful people in the EU anyway.

They’re there to represent France and Germany, not the EU, though. A bit like Villa don’t necessarily agree with everything the FA want to do.

I’m being a bit pedantic I know, but I’m convinced not making the world leaders clearly separate from the EU itself was part of the reason Brexit happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Enda said:

They’re there to represent France and Germany, not the EU, though. A bit like Villa don’t necessarily agree with everything the FA want to do.

I’m being a bit pedantic I know, but I’m convinced not making the world leaders clearly separate from the EU itself was part of the reason Brexit happened.

Yeah, they're certainly there to represent their own countries. But if the G7 countries agree something and Merkel and Macron get on board with it, you can be fairly certain the EU is going to end up doing that thing. There's no harm the EU having a seat at the table, but I'm sure everyone in the room knows who the real European powerbrokers are.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Panto_Villan said:

Yeah, they're certainly there to represent their own countries. But if the G7 countries agree something and Merkel and Macron get on board with it, you can be fairly certain the EU is going to end up doing that thing. There's no harm the EU having a seat at the table, but I'm sure everyone in the room knows who the real European powerbrokers are.

Absolutely Merkel and Macron are the power brokers in Europe. But VDL is much more important in the European Union.

If the Commission doesn’t agree, you’ll only get 200m people backing it instead of 450m.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Enda said:

They’re there to represent France and Germany, not the EU, though. A bit like Villa don’t necessarily agree with everything the FA want to do.

They are there to represent two of the seven members of the G7. Like Johnson, Trudeau, Biden, Draghi and Suga are there to represent the other five members of the G7. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm far from complaining. The more EU influence on geopolitics and the less Johnson influence, the better the world will be as far as I'm concerned. 

It just seems a little incongruous.  A big "G7" banner, with the seven leaders of the G7 standing behind it. And then a couple of other people who are...also there. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Something very similar could be said for the Bank of England and Westminster deciding the monetary policies and interest rates and inflation targets to suit London, the South East, Lisburn and Inverness?

The country is currently ‘investing’ tens of billions in HS2, the economy of Aberystwyth is receiving a portion of the bill and there is every chance that if HS2 is a success, it will further set back the economy of Aberystwyth. They have no control over it, they desperately needed better transport connections. They will be paying for it.

Wherever you set that boundary, one size will not fit all.

Yeah, but Aberystwyth has Chipbox and Chipbox 4.

I'd swap them for HS2 any day. 

Edited by sidcow
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter
22 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Yeah, but Aberystwyth has Chipbox and Chipbox 4.

I'd swap them for HS2 any day. 

Opposite the Pier, 4 that is. Nice grub

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Enda said:

Absolutely Merkel and Macron are the power brokers in Europe. But VDL is much more important in the European Union.

If the Commission doesn’t agree, you’ll only get 200m people backing it instead of 450m.

I'm a bit surprised you say that. I think if you wanted to get anything major passed by the EU it'd be much more sensible to have Merkel and Macron onside than VDL and Michel. The EU bureaucracy ultimately answers to the national leaders, so if the two most powerful nations in the EU agree a common goal then you tend to find the smaller countries and the bureaucracy fall into line behind that (maybe after a little haggling).

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Panto_Villan said:

I'm a bit surprised you say that. I think if you wanted to get anything major passed by the EU it'd be much more sensible to have Merkel and Macron onside than VDL and Michel. The EU bureaucracy ultimately answers to the national leaders, so if the two most powerful nations in the EU agree a common goal then you tend to find the smaller countries and the bureaucracy fall into line behind that (maybe after a little haggling).

I see what you mean, but it depends on the area.

Somethings, where the member states have vetoes, the Commission doesn’t matter. But everything else? Screw Merkel and Macron, it’s QMV and the Commission really matters. And here the Commission answers to the Parliament, not the national leaders.

I think the view you espouse is completely reasonable but perhaps tainted by the media focusing on those crucial late night, down to the minute, Council meetings. But the day to day stuff? More boring and through the Commission. Take Brexit, for example. That was mostly the Commission handling that, not Merkel. Barnier answered to VDL. Michael Gove insisting German automakers would ride in to save the day showed (IMHO) he didn’t understand how the EU really works.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â