It isnt even remotely possible that Merkozy could could exclude London from EUR capital markets.

It isn’t a matter of exclusion, but taxation and regulation. Some people can see the need for regulating the markets to prevent another meltdown in the future. The countries operating outside regulation will find it increasingly more difficult to operate within the regulated markets.
Switzerland has been very close to being blacklisted already, as has the IoM and Jersey, its only having bigger problems to deal with that is currently allowing them to continue operating as they currently do, but IMO the attention will turn back on them again sooner or later.

Blame it on France….

okay then!

germany wanted to UK to play nice, because merkel doesn’t want to be left just dealing with France, the problematic southern europeans and the liberal others (think sweden/denmark/poland)

germany sought after a full treaty change that took time and had all 27 up for it, france doesn’t – and was quite happy to go with the dirty, quick and easy route to change the treaty and strengthen the core 16 nations the most and marginalise a big european player i.e. the UK

my gripe is that is wasn’t done properly, with an negotiated solution for all 27 – it was dirty and quick with a threat to the small players like poland to sign up or you too will be out of the club

and the EU wonders why the UK is so hesitant about europe…

indeed i dont know but the city boys ™ on here are sounding rather arrogant

30 years ago dockland was derelict industry and ww2 bomb craters
now its a global financial hub things change, empires fall etc

x2 post

double post

You might well rather live in Barcelona. I would too to be honest. You’d have to more than want too, to convince an entire industry to relocate there though

I think all this talk of adding costs to banks is completely irrelevant really. One thing that the banks have proved consistently, is that they can run bloody rings round any legislature. As soon as new regulations are put in place, they’ve found a way round them. Normally in ways so mind-bogglingly complex that few understand them.

If Brussels think they’re going to change that, and impose rules that the collective lawyers of the main banks can’t get around… good luck with that.

I know who my money’s on

indeed i dont know but the city boys ™ on here are sounding rather arrogant

sorry not trying to be arrogant. feeling pretty exasperated though. if you dont know, why spout off?

Its such a smokescreen…..they need to sort out the Euro and fast. A few weeks (or days) from now all this could be academic if the bond markets get properly spooked again. Italy has to borrow EUR200bn next year, who the hell is going to lend it to them?

if you dont know, why spout off?

Perhaps you would like to answer your own question.

Regulation of a banking and trading is coming, we will now have no voice or influence over it and there is definitely pressure to stop London from profiting from trading in anything the eurozone can control or influence.

You really think there will not be massive payback for this?

You really think there will not be massive payback for this?

That’s the thing, NOBODY knows.
Anyone who claims to is just plain lying.

TJ – can you explain exactly where (in the context of a European Free Trade zone), the EU is going to be able to introduce legal binding rules that will restrict/inhibit GB’s ability to trade on the continent?

If by trading, you mean financial trading – I think that you will find that the EU will lag behind in terms of regulations. The swiss moved ahead first on much higher capital requirements, the Vickers report is actually far more onerous than anything coming out of EU…and meanwhile the EU politicians and institutions watch from the sidelines or hide behind superficial stress tests of their failed banks. Fudge, fudge and fudge again.

You really think there will not be massive payback for this?

Not really, no. I don’t think the EU has either the collective wherewithal, nor the inclination to start petty retribution at the moment.

No matter what vindictive little Sarkozy wants, you have to be in a position of strength to do that. And anyway, i suspect there are bigger fish to fry. We’ll just be ignored

One thing that the banks have proved consistently, is that they can run bloody rings round any legislature. As soon as new regulations are put in place, they’ve found a way round them. Normally in ways so mind-bogglingly complex that few understand them.

i thought normal practice was to load the new tax indirectly on to the customer

therefore is this scenario of the robin hood tax on large city transactions – basically its the pension funds that’ll end up paying for it – so in theory my pension gets used to pay some greek pension 😆

Well we can’t have them working into their 40’s now, can we? 😆

Can anybody explain what the EU summit actualy achieved (or even would have if DC had not vetoed). To me it seems like bugger all.

A little tinker here and a tweak there but hardly what was required to actually save the Euro?

To me it seems like bugger all

Absolutely correct. Sod all! Expect the next ‘Euro Crisis’ within the week. Followed by another summit, with more grandstanding and posturing, which actually achieves nob all! again!

Repeat until the Euro finally collapses. Even Sarkozy must be bored of this by now

binners – Member
I reckon they will already be lining up their next target. SO expect them to be calling for the repeal of EU Employment (and social chapter) law first, then Human Rights legislation.

The human rights bit is already happening.

Yes, that rabid europhobe frother Ken Clarke is leading the way on that one.

Frodo the main difference is the new fiscal rule:

General government budgets shall be balanced or in surplus; this principal shall be deemed to be respected if, as a rule, the annual structural deficit does not exceed 0.5 per cent of nominal GDP. Such a rule will also be introduced in member states’ national legal systems at constitutional or equivalent level. The rule will contain an automatic correction mechanism that shall be triggered in the event of deviation.

So what’s key:

1. It will be written into national legislation
2. It allows the European Commission to participate in the framing of national budgets

[In essence, the Growth and Stability Pact was meant to do much the same thing]. But note, there is no arithmetic formula here – it is left to the EC to determine compliance and they are given plenty of flexibility to take into account ‘special circumstances’ [the first fudge]. So it is not this firm solution that the communique tried to pretend. Its like the €1 trillion bazooka a few weeks ago -all talk and little substance when you go into the details.

And what’s missing:

1. A growth strategy (why are the Labour party so quiet about this in the EU context?!?)
2. Details of how macro economic imbalances will be corrected

{and that’s just for starters}

The Second World War didn’t happen! It was a decline into war after ten years of economic decline, and the subsequent political fall out. I’m not saying owt as drastic as that would happen, but I wouldn’t like to make a prediction of what state Europe will be in in ten years. But I doubt its going to be pretty!

That comment hit the nail on the head. Its still the same inbred central bankers who are calling all the shots as 70 years ago, only this time they already ‘own’ the world. What’s left for them but to sit back and enjoy it for themselves without all these hungry mouths to feed.

Europe will descend into economic and social chaos. Israel will nuke Iran, and possibly America whilst pretending it was actually an Iranian missile.

Net result, a much trimmer population that won’t cost the earth to control.

I can’t see the problem regardless – we’re part of the EU, whatever project the “17 plus” create on the side, they cannot restrict trade with the UK as that would be against the EU competition and free trade laws that they are charter bound to respect. They can’t throw us out of the EU, and according to the lawyers they cant use the EU mechanisms to police their 17 plus rules without our agreement.

This could be fantastic for the UK, we sit on the sidelines watching them drag each other into the void with ever higher taxes and impossible to meet regulations, and laugh whilst saying “told you so”!

mcboo – Member

We were promised a referendum on Lisbon but Brown dodged it. This is way overdue.

Contrary to common belief, a lie doesn’t become true just because you’ve repeated it enough.

The referendum plan is simple – why would Cameron offer a referendum now? Have you seen the latest polling?

He can offer a referendum just before the election, and overnight he wins 4 million UKIP votes, and decimates Labour with a landslide 😆

You’re a very cynical man Z-11!

Well… either that or you’re working at Tory Central Office in charge of strategy. I’m suspecting the latter 😉

Zulu-Eleven – Member

overnight he wins 4 million UKIP votes

Where do the extra 3 million UKIP voters come from?

DC on at 1530……I predict measured, determined statement, no triumphalism, EMili whines and moans but cant say what he would have done. DC swats him away.

and the EU wonders why the UK is so hesitant about europe…

Chunkypaul, Its still down to the UK to prove itself. We have always backpedalled on anything progressive in Europe, Last weekend was no different.

Where do the extra 3 million UKIP voters come from?

The home counties of course!

This could be fantastic for the UK, we sit on the sidelines watching them drag each other into the void with ever higher taxes and impossible to meet regulations, and laugh whilst saying “told you so”!

Who is the “we”? I am not a rich man, a city banker nor do I have a portfolio of banking investments.
Cameron might be hoping that your scenario works out to in the city’s favour, although even if it does winning in a damaged Europe will be worse for the UK, than being an also ran in a successful Europe, the tories would rather run 15 seconds in a 20 second race than 12 seconds in a 10 second race.

No Clegg

what Great Britain needs is a bloody big privet hedge all around the coast.

MrNutt – Member

what Great Britain needs is a bloody big privet hedge all around the coast. 😆

EM opens with a cheap shot and a lie! Good start – does he not understand the legal aspects of the treaty?

Really – what lie?

Cameron is justifying his decision in parliament now.

If nothing else he has highlighted the impossibility of running a democracy which demands unanimity. The 85% rule is a positive to come out of this.

I reckon the Euro will survive, the EU will survive and this will all blow over till the next time. Vested interests mean it won’t get beyond petty squabbles and posturing, unless there’s a referendum.

Edit: too slow, it’s a man in a red tie speaking now

oooooohhh that nadine dorries is a piece of work

and the tory backbenchers are queing up to give him a stroke

Call-me-Dave should be worried. When you’re being congratulated by right-wing fruit-loops like Nadine Dorries, John Redwood, and in this mornings papers; Norman Tebbit, you should wonder how that’s going to appeal to a population that aren’t foaming-at-the-mouth nut-jobs

Indeed binners – not an easy balance to achieve. Actually doing a good job now at knocking the anti-Lib comments on the head immediately. Nadine is frighteningly lightweight.

Regulation of a banking and trading is coming, we will now have no voice or influence over it and there is definitely pressure to stop London from profiting from trading in anything the eurozone can control or influence.

You really think there will not be massive payback for this?

Given the lack of evidence you have for a lot of your statements on this thread, one has to wonder whether it’s wishful thinking in your part – you actually want these doomsday scenarios to happen (to precipitate a break up of the coalition and CMD getting booted out?)

As mentioned by others, your assumptions about the way they can “get us back” fail for a variety of reasons, lack of will, no legal framework, the fact we are still in the EU etc. Not to mention that it’s actually trading within the group of 26 (23?) which will be being taxed.