• Facebook
  • Facebook
  • Facebook
  • Facebook

Search This Blog

Loading...
Visit our new website.

Thursday, October 07, 2010

EU Treaty Change: back with a vengeance

It's back!

The discussion about Treaty change, that is. As we've noted before, Germany continues to push for treaty change to allow for a permanent crisis resolution mechanism/orderly default procedure in the eurozone. Unable to stomach the prospect of another round of ad hoc bailouts in a few years time, which exposes its taxpayers to yet more unacceptable risks, Germany will next month publish the details of its proposal. The German government might seek to insert the new provisions into the Croation Accession Treaty, set for 2012. The FT has more.

Now, the question that we've posed before is: does the German drive for a Treaty change constitute a threat or an opportunity for the UK's coalition government?

It certainly isn't uncomplicated, but we would tend argue for the latter as any Treaty change at the level of all 27 member states would give the UK the leverage (i.e. a veto) it has lacked ever since it signed up to the Lisbon Treaty.

Although we suspect that this isn't the prevailing thinking in Coalition circles at this point, it would be very foolish for the Coalition not to explore possibilities to get something in return for allowing the eurozone to restructure.

10 comments:

Ken Worthy said...

I saw no evidence at the Conference that the Coalition has any intention of doing anything at all to regain power from the EU, or indeed to resist further transfers of powers to the EU, despite its much-vaunted "Referendum Lock". By retaining for Parliament the right to define which transfers of power are "significant", they have effectively neutered the lock. Parliament will do as the whips tell it - after all, it supported Gordon Brown in asserting that the Lisbon Treaty was quite different from the EU Constitution, and therefore didn't need a Referendum.
The Government ducked its first test, on the regulation of hedge funds, and this was probably wise - who would want to make this a test case for British liberty? But it also failed the next big one - granting foreign jurisdictions the right to require the British police to provide any evidence they may require, even with regard to something which is not a crime in Britain. This craven surrender showed clearly which way the wind is blowing. With all the problems he has at present, Cameron will do nothing to upset the Lib Dems.

Anonymous said...

As far as I am concerned the damage has already been done to the UK's freedom to make its own laws, manage its own economy and carve out an independent world role for itself.
Very few UK politicians really want to leave the EU. After all it was a political vision, shaped by politicians and for politicians.
Our party leaders are only mouthpieces for Brussels.
The whole thing is now a farce which benefits only the politicians
The EU is not about freedom. It is about control; but our politicians are happy to watch freedom and liberty be replaced by conformity and consumer apathy.
It can't last. The internal economic tensions are too great.
But politicians and their egos are adept at denying the obvious. They will go on supporting this terminally ill creation with the last drop of your sweat and taxes....

greenie said...

Well said. This undemocratic, financially irresponsible mess must be reigned in. The sooner we are free of it the better.

David Barneby said...

I sympathise with Germany having to bear the brunt of bailing out indebted Eurozone countries . Like Anonymous , I think Britain has committed herself too much already . It is possible that some areas of EU control might be repatriated . Perhaps Britain holding out and refusing to sign the treaty(s)might be more effective . It is certainly an opportunity for a referendun , that would show British public opinion . Leaving the status quo regarding bailouts would put pressure on the German government and people and a further share of illfeeling towards the EU .
I really want to see the EU fail by its own ineptness . I do not think it is a benefit to Britain or any of the membeer states in its present form of all embracing , intrusive , ever closer union .

David Barneby said...

Refering to a following article ;
The British Government should repeal the 1972 European Communities Act , if as said it will end British obligation to adhere to EU directives .

Anonymous said...

Reform the common fishery programme to allow control by local fishermen and use of wider meshes : reduce the French size of the CAP and the complications of regulations, accepting the reduction in agricultural secretaries and ear-tags for hill sheep : remove the common foriegn ministry and so-called army, second. Halve the salaries of MEPs, and EU functionaries, quarter expenses.

Anonymous said...

There is no reason for us to be in the EU, it's just for politicians to feather their own nests at the expense of the rest of us. Let's have a referendum and leave the corrupt mess entirely. I'm sure such a move would have overwhelming national support.

Anonymous said...

I cannot see why we are in this corrupt and undemocratic forum for failures. I don't believe we'll get any powers repatriated. I don't believe anything any of our discredited, distant and completely out of touch political classes tell us.

Anonymous said...

As much as anything else, the EU is a gravy train for national politicians past their sell-by date. Why would any of them want us to pull out? Yes, we should use our threat of a veto to repatriate powers, but we probably won't. The argument of being the odd man out, a minority of one, etc. will not wash. Did de Gaulle ever worry about being the odd man out?

This is why I want AV: so that we can all vote for any minor party that will guarantee to take us out or drastically renegotiate, without wasting our votes if our first choice doesn't get in. Come the referendum!

Anonymous said...

As much as anything else, the EU is a gravy train for national politicians past their sell-by date. Why would any of them want us to pull out? Yes, we should use our threat of a veto to repatriate powers, but we probably won't. The argument of being the odd man out, a minority of one, etc. will not wash. Did de Gaulle ever worry about being the odd man out?

This is why I want AV: so that we can all vote for any minor party that will guarantee to take us out or drastically renegotiate, without wasting our votes if our first choice doesn't get in. Come the referendum!