What did Cameron go there to do, and what did he come back with?
Current Affairs EU In or Out
- Thread starter micknick
- Start date
- Status
What did Cameron go there to do, and what did he come back with?
dholliday
deconstructed rep
This often gets drowned out by those Remainers who claim Brexiters only voted so because of fear of immigration, it's a useful tool for them in debate to paint their opposites as prejudiced simpletons.
The question of EU's sovereignty over Britain, its effectively-unelected myriad Presidents, and its inability to reform from within will be bigger subjects once, as you say, other countries begin to want to loosen ties.
Until then, everyone's kind of waiting to see how UK handle Brexit.
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
To cover his back, a flea in his ear.......
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
Which is why the EU are desperate for us to fail.....
Redstarrob
Player Valuation: £2.5m
Black sabbath
dholliday
deconstructed rep
Of course...I understand the reasons why a powerful united EU is important so as to stand toe-to-toe with the other superpowers of the world. And world wars weren't that long ago. But there's a way to go about it.
Brexit should've served the EU a humbling lesson, instead they doubled-down: I clearly remember the outrageously-arrogant comments from Schulz & Tusk on 24th June 2016. Doubly-disappointed as I supported Schröder's SPD back in late-90's/early-00's and thought Schulz was a natural successor to that. Schröder has advised caution & respect from both sides in the Brexit talks...something which isn't happening.
Readily available online, though one quick example while I'm on lunch...
Cameron wanted Britain to impose a ban on paying in-work benefits to EU migrants coming to the UK. He also wanted to stop the UK paying child benefit to those who weren't actually living in the UK.
Both were laughed at, which is what I meant by;
They needed to reform. Cameron tried the reforms, failed. Their arrogance/stubbornness played a huge part in Brexit and what we're now seeing in Italy etc.
Britain, who contributes an awful lot to the EUs budget - more than most countries combined - couldn't secure pretty basic reforms with a PM who was begging for reforms against a backdrop of Brexit.
Then Juncker rolled up...
Cameron was 100% right in opposing him, and again talked up the negative sentiment towards the way the EU works which is what prompted my comment on their arrogance/stubbornness.
The prime minister outlined his objections to Juncker when he said: "You stick to your convictions even if the odds are heavily stacked against you rather than go along with something that you believe is profoundly wrong. Today is one of those days.
"I will tell you why it is so important. The European elections showed that there is huge disquiet about the way the EU works and yet the response, I believe, is going to be wrong on two grounds. Wrong on the grounds of principle: it is not right for the elected heads of government of the European countries to give up their right to nominate the head of the European commission – the most important role in Europe. That is a bad principle.
"And it is the wrong person. Jean-Claude Juncker has been at the heart of the project to increase the power of Brussels and reduce the power of nation states for his entire working life. He is not the right person to take this organisation forward. So, I am very clear about the right thing to do."
Seriously, that line gets trotted out a whole lot, that Cameron came back with nothing etc. but from experience it's amazing how many people who use it have no idea what he was aiming for, what he came back with, or indeed what powers the UK government already has but doesn't use.
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
Neville Chamberlain actually got a signed piece of paper promising no more wars between Germany and the U.K.... Sometimes we are far too trusting.....
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
We get a lot of that in here....
I'm not sure what that graph is supposed to say? 50% of income tax comes from the top 1% of earners, but few would argue that this is wrong. Indeed, when you look at our contribution as a percentage of GDP, it's just 0.37%, which is lower than every single EU member except the Netherlands. If you break down the contribution per head of the population, we are the lowest spender by some distance, paying roughly half what France pay per capita. We're a big nation, so pay based upon that, but relatively speaking we pay peanuts.
As for the Cameron thing, which you frantically Googled after I asked you, I'd have much more sympathy if his government actually used the various powers that it already has, rather than not using them and crying out for more. He's made a pigs ear of explaining our relationship with Europe because he and a lot of governments before him have preferred instead to pin the blame for their own failings on the EU.
For real? We have a lot of powers that are baked into law, which we don't use. Not promises, legislation. But you knew that, I'm sure.
lollollol
I maintain The EU needed to reform. Cameron tried the reforms, failed. Their arrogance/stubbornness played a huge part in Brexit and what we're now seeing in Italy etc.
You're absolutely off your trolley if you don't think the EU is struggling.
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
Indeed, but they won’t be able to in the future, another reason why I voted to leave....
- Status