George Parker, writing for the Financial Times makes mention of Cameron's team being nervous of whipping up Eurosceptic fervour - an article that makes no attempt to dent the accusations about the lack of journalistic ability within our media.
To write about something which just does not exist is, methinks, a tad disingenuous - where, exactly, has any Tory Eurosceptic fervour been exhibited when considering the voting record of the majority of Tory MPs? Cameron may well talk about this repatriation of powers, but George P seems to forget that in this particular coalition of parties the Tory dog has a tail that tends to dictate the direction the dog's BO11LUX body wishes to pursue. Or perhaps he has forgotten this and this? In any event it would seem obvious that Cameron's main intention when considering this nation's relationship with the EU was best summed up by his Foreign Secretary on 29th October last year!
Update: In the contest for the best journalistic poodle, this chap is obviously 'in it to win it'!
9 comments:
Yes they are already spinning like mad and setting the ground for our usual acquiescence, according to the Mail at least: "Cameron-rules-vote-creation-EU-superstate-96billion-bailout."
There is no doubt this proposal can only end in fiscal union which will effectively create the Federated States of Europe, yet Cameron will weasel out of it claiming it only effects Euro members.
On the other hand, the EU axis really have no idea of what they have agreed to, apart from continuing to drip feed Greece, nor do they know if they can actually get it through their parliaments, especially Merkel, which is why there are to be no details until September. I can see the surge of optimism post announcement fading within days so it may never actually be implemented anyway.
That surge of optimism in itself is very telling. It was obvious to anyone even listening with half an ear while crossing Niagara on a tightrope and holding six cats that this was yet another 'can kicking' exercise in the almost certainly vain hope the German electorate, never mind the constitutional court, would at the end of the day agree to fiscal union with the effectively bankrupt PIIGS and whose debts they would largely become responsible for. That this should have been received with any optimism at all shows just how hysterically desperate and unconnected from reality the financial markets have become.
Did Osborne have a nice lunch with Rupert in NYC ?
Osborne has some tough times ahead as we pay for gas and electricity with eating money
PC: Agree with your findings totally.
TT: Just read that in the DT! I think you are correct that Osborne has some tough questions to answer and not just on the economy!
The Tories have too much 'previous' on this to be remotely credible. They always talk tough on Europe and then go along with it. If nothing else, their reaction to the bailouts and the back-door bailout via the IMF shows them for what they are. Maybe there'll be some talk passed off as 'tough negotiations' for our consumption, with some token concessions, worthless in the scheme of things. There certainly won't be a referendum, no fear.
The top of the Conservative Party is signed up to the EU Project and that's what they are doing come Hell or high water, but they have to put up a show to placate their supporters.
PC.
The EU knew what it wanted to achieve, a central monetary authority leading to a strong central political authority. It knew the way things would pan out eventually in somewhere like Greece. It couldn't predict the exact set of circumstances and maybe not that Portugal, Ireland etc would be in a similar mess at the same time. It was a bridge they'd cross when they came to it.
It was always a gamble that the EU would be turned to for salvation from the problems it had created. They have no choice but to double their bets or see Le Projet fall apart.
Both the EU and Cameron are acting with utter predictability. The former are using the 'beneficial crisis' of the Euro zone to further ever closer union. The latter is pretending to oppose something he in fact supports.
The unfortunate thing is that many gullible morons will actually believe Dave - amazing as that is.
Libya
Just to brighten your day and explain a few features of EU policy a reference found posted on Cranmer....
No wonder the Serfs don't get to have a say in Empire Building !
"The top of the Conservative Party is signed up to the EU Project and that's what they are doing come Hell or high water, ...."
Very true, it is impossible to misunderstand where the ethos and history of the EU is inevitably leading even with the most cursory look or failing that simply asking any French or Belgian national, "what is the Plan?" It is therefore inconceivable that the mainstream parties do not know or do not know that 'change from within', 'in Europe but not ruled by Europe', 'we can and will repatriate powers' etc. are fantasies. While I do not doubt the capacity of politicians for hubris, or denial of reality, not even they could be so arrogant as to think they can unilaterally change The Plan, or even affect it in any way.
Thus we must conclude that they are perpetrating a deliberate deception and are whole-heartedly behind the project. Cameron and Clegg I am sure both get up in the morning, look in the mirror and instead of reality they see a Great Statesman with David Cameron, or Nick Clegg, President of Europe! emblazoned over their head, just as Tony Blair did and I suspect still does.
PC
I think Clegg is a True Believer in the EU. He has financial and career incentives also. His ambition is likely to be an EU Commissioner. There and again I don't really understand the LibDems or why anyone would take them seriously.
Cameron and Hague, and people in a similar position such as Major, Blair and Brown have somewhat different motivations.
1. It's quite comfy having a Big Brother in the form of the EU to do the work and take the decisions. They've come to use Big Brother as a front to do things they daren't on their own. Riding herd over the UK when Big Brother was dumped would cause huge problems they don't want. They would have to take responsibility, not just pretend to take responsibility. They would have to stand or fall by their powers of leadership. They would need an idea of where they were leading us to, which they were prepared to suffer for, and they don't
Without being glib about it, or talk about trade wars, parting from the EU would create problems and they have no personal desire to reach what lies beyond solving the problems. Part of the strategy of the EU seems to be to create a complicated mess of co-dependency which is daunting. Alexander the Great wasn't daunted by such a problem but he's not what we have in Westminster.
2. Being seen as responsible for, or even motioning toward, severance with Big Brother, would create an enormous backlash from all those who receive or hope to receive, funds, salaries, pensions, support from the EU. That's a fair army.
3. They also look for later positions in the EU or other trans-national bodies. Being seen as instrumental in messing up the EU would not be a credential.
4. Big business and big money, at least in the form of Conservative Party donors, wouldn't like severance from the EU. People like Heseltine and Clarke have always been keen on the EU. Cameron himself sort of fits that slot. Clegg and maybe Huhne too.
I don't think it's too hard to see why the Conservatives have done their 'In Europe but not run by Europe' balancing act or why Brown and Blair were happy to ramrod through the LT, or why Cameron has behaved the way he has. It's also a mistake to believe that politicians' motives are what we think they ought to be and are not venal, trivial or stupid.
c, CP & PC: You all make valid points and we are all obviously in agreement re the Tory heirachy.
Post a Comment