Diamond Dave thumps Jonny Foreigner

[Lizard]

"What do you think the UK would have been specifically committed to if they had "signed us up"?

Greater erosion of sovereignty, even more erosion of legal powers, more money passed to Brussels every year, and seeing that the UK is still a major financial power (60% of transactions happen in the city of London) some of that would be transferred to France or Germany, these are thing we would be commited to. Wheather these are good things depends on your politic's and how strongly you feel about more European intigration. Most polls show only about 14-16% of people would be happy with this, which leaves a large percentage of people who believe he did the right thing by not commiting to "signing us up" as you put it. So, tell the group what Nu-Labour would have done, only they seem very vocal about it without actually saying if they would have done the same thing....we await your reply with our breath bated..

[David Johnson]

"Greater erosion of sovereignty, "even more erosion of legal powers,, more money passed to Brussels every year, and seeing that the UK is still a major financial power (60% of transactions happen in the city of London) some of that would be transferred to France or Germany, these are thing we would be commited to. "

""Greater erosion of sovereignty," In what way?

"even more erosion of legal powers" In what way?

"more money passed to Brussels every year" In what way?

"seeing that the UK is still a major financial power (60% of transactions happen in the city of London) some of that would be transferred to France or Germany"


Again, what you provide is opinions, not facts. Nothing that happened last week has any impact on transactions in the City whatsoever. The UK had a veto on tax before the meeting. City regulations passed by a majority in the EU were valid before and after Cameron's meeting.

CHeers
D

[planeterotica]

David Johnson wrote:
> "
> Once again, no reply to the specifics. Please explain what
> "handed to him on a plate" specifically means! What would have
> happened?
>
> Cheers
> D

planeterotica wrote:

A bit like the Labour party then plenty of critisism but no specifics on what they would have done, to be honest dodgy Dave would have been damned whichever way he went but there is always the chance that the treaty will be altered so he can sign it and get a better deal for Britain than if he had signed in the first place...

[David Johnson]

"The Germans still being an industrial nation which the UK isnt know they will eventually lose ground to China, therefore they want a slice of the money that flows through the City of London and want it to flow through Berlin, Dodgy Dave was right to block this."

So in effect you have no idea what the above statement has to do with last week's meeting, given you have not mentioned anything at all which he has blocked which would have impacted on the City.

Labour spin was really prevalent and all-consuming but Cameron and his cronies produce masterpieces like "bulldog spirit", "batting for Britain" etc etc when in fact Cameron came away with absolutely nothing last week that he did not already have. And on this forum as with many voters in the country, people swallow this bullshit wholesale.

Cheers
D

[Sam Slater]

You're doing it again, David. Both planeterotica and Lizard have answered questions you've put forward but you haven't had the decency to answer theirs.

Your questions are good, but as I've told you on more than one occasion before, a discussion/argument is a two-way thing. Be fair.

The questions:

What would Labour have done?

What would you have Cameron do?

Labour have said, as have the Lib Dems, that they weren't happy about the agreement, and that France and Germany put Cameron in a very difficult position. Since no party was happy with the agreement, and since the agreement can go ahead with or without a veto, I've seen no party offer an alternative road to pursue.

As for my own political views, I'm all for the UK becoming more integrated with Europe and so do not agree with Cameron's veto either. Nevertheless, planeterotica and Lizard deserve answers after having answered yours.

[Gusset Sniffer]

Why aren't people informed? They don't want us to understand!!

The majority of countries in the EU have signalled their intent to accept a new 'Treaty', without even deciding what the alterations will include. The majority of Member States have been hijacked into changes which have not been laid out, nor placed before individual parliaments. People are largely being ignored. We are looking directly into the face of Dictatorship. Europe seems to becoming increasingly run by the Germans.

[Gusset Sniffer]

[img]http://gkdata.gr/wp-content/uploads/201 ... .jpg?w=300[/img]

[Lizard]

How does it help, it's written by a complete europhile belonging to the bbc who are also complete europhiles , you will have to try harder than that.
Whats new labours position ?

[Jonone]

Vatican City ?

[BeestonBoy]

Lizard wrote:


> Whats new labours position ?
>
>

David Cameron yesterday, took great pleasure in pointing out to Millipede that Labour (New or otherwise) do not have a position on the subject.

It's fair to say Gordon Brown would have bent over and took it right up his fat arse,mind.

Pip pip

BB