18,965,000 people know the Euro is not working

 

Imagine the howls of protest from the left if a pro free enterprise group had taken over the government of the EU and were presiding over mass unemployment on the current scale. Yet today, with the big government brigade in charge of the EU, it is apparently acceptable that 18,965,000 people of working age are unemployed in the Euro zone.

No-one in the EU government seems to get cross about it. They do not seem to do any of the obvious things you would do if you wanted to bring unemployment down. Instead of making it easier for business to generate jobs they think up new ways to  tax and regulate. Instead of mending the banks and easing money policy they prolong the agony brought about by broken banks and demand they lend less. Instead of creating an energy market with prices that match our leading world competitors, they happily pile on more and more cost and tax to energy to make us as uncompetitive as possible.

The prospects have been even worse for the young. Almost one quarter of people under the age of 25 are out of work in the Euro area. In places like Spain and Greece half the young generation are workless. Still no-one seems to wake up in the EU government and ask why, let alone propose doing something that might make a difference to this lamentable state of affairs.

The EU goes about its business of feather bedding the governing class and leaving the many to fend for themselves in  a malfunctioning economy and currency union that sensible people warned them could not work. When we hear from this elite that letting people vote and have their say, as in Switzerland on migration, is dangerous, it is no wonder so many people in the UK have had enough of their arrogance and incompetence.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

88 Comments

  1. Mike Stallard
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 6:07 am | Permalink

    It is time we left the EU before we, too, become Spain and Italy and Greece.

    http://www.eureferendum.com/documents/BrexitPamphlet001.pdf

    At last – a decent, understandable, well written pamphlet (100 pages) which tells how we can get out of the ghastly EU and what will happen once we are out. You needn’t even read the 100 pages – there is a digest at the front. And it is totally free too. For the richer members of our society, there is a £10.00 film as well.

    Tolle, lege.

    • Chris
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:33 am | Permalink

      The fuller version of this was entered for the Brexit prize and made it through the first round. It has not got through to the finalists, but what does that matter – it is a goldmine of material based on years of investigative work and in depth analysis which anyone seriously interested in how we could effect a workable/realistic exit from the EU should read.

      • Hope
        Posted April 7, 2014 at 8:25 am | Permalink

        JR, Clegg and Heseltine are not among your total I presume?

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 9:01 am | Permalink

      If Richard North wants to popularise the “Norway option” he’ll have to be much more vigorous in slapping down those who falsely claim that we’d still have to obey “all” or “almost all” the EU laws to which we’re now subject.

      • margaret brandreth-j
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 7:22 pm | Permalink

        Thanks to you Denis, Regulation , Directives, recommendations are clearly defined, but alas I now need to know what the’ Norway Option’ is.

        • Chris
          Posted April 6, 2014 at 10:07 pm | Permalink

          Look on Richard North’s site, eureferendum blog, and also on the Bruges Group website, where his booklet on the Norway option is available to read/purchase.

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted April 7, 2014 at 8:05 am | Permalink

          Norway is not in the EU, the best efforts of Norwegian politicians in that direction having been frustrated by the Norwegian people in two referendums. Instead Norway is in the EEA, which was devised as a slow route into the EU, and it is still in EFTA which the UK left when it joined the EEC. By virtue of EU membership the UK is also in the EEA. There are good arguments that on balance we would be much better off getting out of the EU while remaining in the EEA and rejoining EFTA, as explained and promoted in the paper by Richard North to which Mike Stallard has provided the link in his comment.

    • forthurst
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

      I would have thought that the right approach was to repeal the European Communities Act, and inform the EU that we will continue to trade with them on existing terms until we have notified them otherwise; failure to comply with this requirement by the EU would result immediately in a very long queue of lorries at Calais. Next P45s would need to be issued to Euro-troughers in various branches of government including all ‘Common Purpose’ graduates without exception. Then we need to conclude internal discussions with various industries that have been hamstrung by EU legislation, repeal existing adverse legislation, so identified, and set up bridging arrangement and replacements, where necessary.

      The problem with invoking Article 50 and trying to define exactly how to proceed in all respects is that until we are actually out of the EU, all discussions are to some extent hypothetical, making it difficult for some to apply the necessary level of focus, and it can also be subject to internal and external sabotage.

    • Posted April 6, 2014 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

      Euro periphery problems are caused by the Euro, not the fact of being in the EU.

      • sjb
        Posted April 7, 2014 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

        The result of Thursday’s ECB meeting has not got the coverage I expected in the UK press.

        “The Governing Council is unanimous in its commitment to using also unconventional instruments [e.g. QE] within its mandate in order to cope effectively with risks of a too prolonged period of low inflation.”[1]

        In the press conference, Draghi went on to explain how QE would work in the EU:

        “When the Fed buys assets or buys government bonds, it does change prices all across the spectrum of all assets, and this has an immediate or direct effect on credit, because most of the credit goes to the real economy via the capital markets. That is the big difference. In our case, all these effects go through the banks, so the final effect on the real economy depends, of course, on the demand for loans, but also on the state of health of the banking system. The euro area cannot really go back to serious growth if the banking system is impaired. A healthy banking system is more essential to the euro area than to other financial systems that are more market-based.” [2]

        [1] http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pressconf/2014/html/is140403.en.html
        [2] ibid.

  2. alan jutson
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 6:28 am | Permalink

    You are right John these are truly shocking figures, each one of which is a frustrated person.

    This is ONE of the very reasons why a certain Mr Farage said it may all end in tears with Social unrest.
    That is why we could have increasing crime.
    That is why we have people who have lost hope.
    That is why future generations may not have a work ethic.
    That is why some see no point in attending School.
    That is why some Politicians are no longer trusted.

    Rest assured theses people will eventually get their own back on Society, because they feel they have been abandoned by society, and politicians in particular.

    As a collective we reap what we sow.

    • Hope
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 9:04 am | Permalink

      Bureaucrats in the EU do not care because they are not accountable to the people directly it is left to spinners like Clegg and Cameron to deflect and pass the blame elsewhere.

      The EU is taxation without representation. The false notion that our voices will be heard through our own politicians. With the likes of Clegg and Cameron there is no voice and nothng can be achieved through the ballot box. This is why it will end unpleasantly because the EU has already shown its totalitarian and authoritian nature by the coups of Greece and Italy, failing to recognise the referendums in Denmark, Ireland, Netherlands and France and why in this country the Lisbon Treaty was signed in private by Brown and all promises to vote on it ignored by Tory, Lib Dem and Labour.

      The Lisbon Treaty is the EU constitution giving it the legal status of a country without any mandate from any ordinary citizen in any of the 27 nations. What part does Cameron Not understand as a PPE graduate from Oxford, had the best education money can buy and handed everything on a plate from his parents? Perhaps he believes in privilege for the few and entitlement for the rich?

      We ordinary plebs see the travesty and lack of morality from the Maria Miller disgusting expense travesty, after all the false promises by Cameron and Clegg to stop this in 2009. In my view their lack of intervention,and support from Cameron, shows they are condoning, if not aiding and abetting, this sort of inappropriate behaviour in Cabinet after promising to sort it out. Both are not fit for office.

    • uanime5
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

      That is why we could have increasing crime.

      Crime in the UK has been falling for years; though the bedroom tax and all the benefit sanctions may push more people into crime.

      That is why we have people who have lost hope.
      That is why we have people who have lost hope.
      That is why some see no point in attending School.

      Well the lack of jobs in the UK that pay a living wage and poor career prospects do cause problems.

      In conclusion the UK has its own problems with unemployment, which aren’t the fault of the EU.

      • alan jutson
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 5:40 pm | Permalink

        UNi5

        I agree the UK still has some problems but not as many as your beloved EU yet thank God.

        That is why we have to get out before it all goes toxic.

      • Edward2
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

        I presume that you feel that open borders, a major EU policy, which has resulted in several million new arrivals, has had no impact at all on unemployment levels in the UK Uni.

        • a-tracy
          Posted April 7, 2014 at 9:08 am | Permalink

          Oh you won’t get an answer to that excellent question from Uni5 Edward, s/he’s just an attack dog.

          John perhaps the right needs better attack dogs like Uni5 to get the truth out. Saying I told you so after the event when the message or rebuttal isn’t being clearly received is crazy.

          The left use social media much more effectively, they answer social commentators. Your party behaves as though it were twenty years ago.

          Reply I have kept up a consistent critique of the EU and the Euro for 20 years

          • a-tracy
            Posted April 8, 2014 at 11:24 am | Permalink

            I know I’ve read much of it, I was careful to say your party not ‘you’. They just don’t put you on tv sufficiently or give you the air time necessary. The Conservatives are also not consistent in their view swapping and changing their position depending on who is speaking.

  3. Mark B
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 6:32 am | Permalink

    John Redwood MP said;

    “No-one in the EU government seems to get cross about it.”

    Why should they ? Its not as if their jobs depend on it, like yours !

    In a democracy, as in business, you need checks and balances. You need a separation and a balance between the interests of the State and, the interests of the people. A Good example of this is, the United States, and its Constitution.

    The founding fathers of the USA, knew from bitter experience the need not to have a absolute ruler. A Government for the people, by the people.

    In Switzerland, they have gone one step further. The people accept they need a Government to manage their affairs but, they do not accept the need for them to be either full time or, all powerful. The Swiss people maintain ‘constant’ control over their elected representatives and power is devolved to the Cantons.

    We have something close to this, thanks to Eric Pickles MP. If Councils go above the 2% in their spending, this triggers an automatic referendum. I have only two issues with this:

    1) Most councils have been going up too 1.99% and avoiding the referendum. A referendum should mandatory irrespective of the increase.

    2) The Coalition Government and the MSM have been woeful in their coverage of this. A good idea left to gather dust in the bottom shelf of politics. Shame on you !

    • Backofanenvelope
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 10:18 am | Permalink

      Think how nice it would be if Mr Pickles lowered the trigger level to 1.8 per cent with immediate effect.

      • Mark B
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 7:57 pm | Permalink

        I refer you to the the last sentence on item 1.

    • Tad Davison
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 11:18 am | Permalink

      Again Mark, you raise several excellent points.

      I will add though, that according to information I have read, and videos that are freely available on YouTube, a lot of US presidents have gone against the constitution. I would venture that the EU has also gone well beyond its remit.

      I am not wholly surprised that the coalition government has left this to gather dust. The thing they are most anxious to avoid, is that little word which sets a precedent and gets into the nation’s psyche – ‘referendum’.

      Tad

  4. arschloch
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 6:34 am | Permalink

    “The EU goes about its business of feather bedding the governing class and leaving the many to fend for themselves in a malfunctioning economy” Yeah yeah and things a whole lot better here. There has been enough stuff printed here from your correspondents on how the UK political class feather beds itself at the tax payers expense without having to repeat it again. But John let me lead on a tour of the real world outside of the Westminster bubble. Anybody who has had to change jobs recently will more than likely have had to take a role that just does not pay the same benefits as the last one. If they are in the private sector the final salary scheme membership will definitely have gone. They will instead have been “auto enrolled” into the much inferior NEST which MPs turn their noses up to. Looking at the UKs employment statistics a bit more scientifically, why are so many people , especially if they are over fifty, working part-time? Presumably its because MPs think their constituents have so much more leisure time? Why are national average earnings in decline as are the number of hours worked if things are so rosy? But here is the piece de resistance of the UK v Euroland, youth unemployment. As always we will ignore how low its in Germany. All we have to offer teenagers is debt and more debt. Forget about being able to buy a house you would not be able to afford one anyway even if you did not have the student loan. Just sign up for a degree at university, quite a few of which were just colleges of further education a few years ago. As the FT has shown, there is a fifty percent chance that you will land a graduate job, but the wages that come with it have been in free fall for years, so just enjoy being strangled by your student loan. Its that or bankruptcy.

    • JoeSoap
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:40 am | Permalink

      Indeed.
      You see Euroland might have high youth unemployment, but here we shuffle them off into “University” with a massive loan, and tell them (au Clegg) that it’s not really a debt because they don’t have to repay it until they earn £x, where x is a mediocre and changeable number. So that delays the problem until it is no longer youth unemployment.

      • arschloch
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 10:01 am | Permalink

        Yes a van driver’s wages are sufficient for the loan repayments to start up. A load of debt, a crap job, what a future.

    • formula57
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 9:52 am | Permalink

      arschloch says, “..there is a fifty percent chance that you will land a graduate job, but the wages that come with it have been in free fall for years, so just enjoy being strangled by your student loan”.

      Oh for a politician who would “pledge to vote against any increase in fees in the next parliament and to pressure the government to introduce a fairer alternative” and not declare such pledge void if elected.

    • libertarian
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 10:58 am | Permalink

      Don’t know where you get your job info from Arschloch but its wrong.

      There aren’t more people working part time, those employees over 45 are actually in huge demand especially for full time roles, and average wages are RISING.

      Thankfully at last youth unemployment is falling in the UK this is due in large part to the SME creation of over 500,000 apprenticeship places in the last year

      Apart from that quite a good post.

      • arschloch
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 4:48 pm | Permalink
        • libertarian
          Posted April 7, 2014 at 7:50 am | Permalink

          The Daily Mail !!!! ha ha ha OK fella

          There are 30 million people in work in the UK the highest total ever. Yes there are more people in part time work but as a proportion its less than 5% of the workforce.

          If as the article states people in part time work are looking for full time jobs 1. How do they know? there is no way of recording this 2. Why don’t they just take full time jobs there’s plenty of them around

          Graduate employment is a problem I agree. The Politicians conned people into going to University. Graduates expectations of getting a highly paid job on the back of a degree are unrealistic. To a large extent a degree is not that useful any longer ( unless its a vocational degree such as medicine etc)

          Youth unemployment in UK is beginning to fall because of the apprenticeship route into work. Even graduates are now starting to undertake apprenticeships.

          Just so you know there are more job vacancies than there are unemployed people in the UK.

          Lots of people want part time and temporary work. I have 2 part time employees that I’ve repeatedly offered full time work too who prefer to stay part time.

          Just endlessly churning out myths about the employment market is typical of politics and the media. Google jobs and then come and tell me what you actually found

          • arschloch
            Posted April 7, 2014 at 10:38 am | Permalink

            You are doing well for someone with an HND

          • Libertarian
            Posted April 7, 2014 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

            Arschloch

            Ah but I don’t have an HND or any other qualifications for that matter. I left school at 14. Thats why I’m not brainwashed by the establishment. Although I don’t have an HND I do own 5 of the biggest specialist employment advertising publications in UK though if that helps.

        • a-tracy
          Posted April 7, 2014 at 9:15 am | Permalink

          Businesses were asked to create more part-time jobs by the last Labour government, you were encouraged to accept job shares and create more. See ACAS website http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3568
          “Nearly two-thirds of women working in senior roles would welcome the option of job sharing”.
          For every agreement of this nature then someone else can only have the other half a job not a full job.
          “we introduced the right to request flexible working to help parents and carers balance the responsibilities of work and family” said the Labour Party. You can’t have it both ways – for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

    • Tad Davison
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 11:22 am | Permalink

      Good points, well made.

      Tad

  5. Lifelogic
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 7:03 am | Permalink

    Indeed.

    I heard Cathy Ashton talking about the difficulties or her job during the largest recession ever as if the recession had been dropped from a space ship.

    She did not say the largest recession ever, one largely caused by the incompetence of EU bureaucrats, the drive for the EURO and the endless drive to every larger, more parasitic and antidemocratic governments. She is a exemplar to this policy.

    Clearly Clegg either does not have a clue about her EU centralisation of power plans or he was just a blatant liar in his Farage Debate.

    My company could easily double and employ 20 more people if they just brought in easy hire and fire, lowered and simplified taxes, got some function banks working and reduced the size of the government. Just leave us alone and let us get on with it.

    Get rid of Cameron’s and the EU’s economically illiterate gender neutral pensions and insurance for a goo start and some easy hire and fire.

    • arschloch
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 7:34 am | Permalink

      LL I do not know which planet you live on but you are now suggesting that the collapse of Lehman Bros somehow had the EU behind it? Why not move your business to China you will find all the Dickensian employment laws you desire there. You are not clinging to the UK because your business is sucking on the public teat perhaps?

      • Lifelogic
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 10:45 am | Permalink

        No we sell virtually nothing to the state sector.

        • Jennifer A
          Posted April 6, 2014 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

          Lifelogic – I think Arschloch is alluding to the ‘free’ (immigrant) labour market which the UK offers – subsidised by the welfare system.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 10:49 am | Permalink

        It is the EURO, mad regulations, expensive energy by religious decree, moronic employment laws and the huge size of the parasitic state sector & the now over regulation of banks that are the main problems that are killing new jobs.

    • Kenneth Morton
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

      For my sins I watched BBC Parliament on Saturday which showed Thursday’s debate on Security and External Affairs in the European Parliament. In reality it was the final annual report on Baroness Ashton and her External Action Service. She will be replaced later this year to enjoy her payoff and pension.

      Only UKIP MEP the Earl of Dartmouth voiced any real criticism of her performance since 2009 and then Dartmouth himself was denigrated for his short contribution. Andrew Brons ex BNP and Nick Griffin BNP leader were relatively muted in their comments which surprised me since they will be voted out of office next month and could have gone out with all guns blazing.

      Otherwise speakers from all nations and all political beliefs had very little to say and praise for Ashton was repeated. All luvvies in it together! If ever there was a argument to leave the EU this ‘debate’ would provide value evidence.

  6. Gary
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 7:05 am | Permalink

    in a crack up credit binge, businesses are created that are only viable as long as the credit keeps flowing. If the credit stops jobs are lost with those businesses. That is what is happening in Europe.

    What is happening here? Either we did not have a crack up credit boom, or we did and just kept the credit (debt) flowing ?

    It’s surely the latter, and we will one day beg Europe for employment. And then we will remember you.

    There’s no free lunch.

  7. Jim
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 7:13 am | Permalink

    All the things that the EU is guilty of are also repeated by national and regional government. All seek to tax and regulate their citizens. All seek to feather bed insiders and their cronies. Government is at it’s heart a corrupt and criminal enterprise so it is little wonder that attracts those who wish to take advantage of that. If you doubt that simply review the last 20 years history of inept, self defeating legislation, incessant expenses scandals, bail outs, fat pensions for the public sector, illegal wars to benefit arms companies and their “consultants”. The rise of the one law for us and another for everyone else state is clear proof of the hypocrisy and criminality at every level of government. After all a government minister can (questionably ed) claim £90k, pay back less than £6k, read a 30 second apology and get praised by Dave. A benefit claimant would be banged up for attempting ( a scam ed).
    The constant attempts to blame Brussels for things that all governments are just as guilty of is becoming a bit of a joke.

    Reply It is wrong to suggest Mrs Miller should not have claimed all the money for her second home – as the independent report shows they all agree she had two homes, and could claim money on whichever one was the second home, and that would have been a similar sum in each case. The Report also thought it was an arguable call on which was the second home, with the Committee deciding she had chosen the correct one. The Report reminds us all how unclear the rules for designation of second homes were prior to the reform of Expenses under IPSA.

    • JoeSoap
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:56 am | Permalink

      Reply to reply:
      You will never be able to defend this system of “second homes” being paid for unless and until the private sector system is equalised with that for MPs. On the one hand you could allow private sector businesses to claim against a second home. I would have a good case – I deal with important suppliers in another country and visit that country for 8 to 10 weeks a year. If I stay in an hotel, I can claim business expenses. If I own a flat/house there, HMRC would view any reclaim of expenses as invalid for reclaiming mortgage repayments or other expenses not wholly and exclusively on behalf of the business. So why not support a move in the direction of legislating for the revenue to allow such expenses to be reclaimed against private sector earnings?

      Reply MPs cannot claim mortgage expenses any more either.

    • Jagman 84
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

      Reply to reply: Was it not against the pre-2010 rules to claim for a second house that was also the residence of family members (parents)? I think that is why there is such a fuss about her claims. I believe that a Labour MP was reprimanded for a similar case.

      Reply I suggest you read the Report if you are interested, as they go into what the pre 2010 rules said where an MP has caring responsibilities.

      • ian wragg
        Posted April 7, 2014 at 9:44 am | Permalink

        The woman’s (conduct is unacceptable ed) and no way would any member of the public be able to claim for a second home as do politicians. Lots of us work away from home and after 4000 miles my mileage allowance drops to 27p why isn that John.

  8. Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:06 am | Permalink

    Time and again it has been proved that socialist policies are a disaster and end up making the rich richer and the poor poorer.

    Sadly MSM is even worse on the continent than our dreaded BBC. Socialists still largely control the propaganda so the picture remains bleak for those without jobs.

    Even in this country, despite the misery they caused last time around, people are still willing to vote Labour, a suicidal choice.

    • uanime5
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 4:08 pm | Permalink

      Time and again it has been proved that socialist policies are a disaster and end up making the rich richer and the poor poorer.

      Care to explain how minimum wage, the welfare state, and the NHS made the rich richer and the poor poorer.

      Socialists still largely control the propaganda so the picture remains bleak for those without jobs.

      Why? Socialists support welfare so things aren’t as bad for people without jobs. It’s the capitalists who oppose welfare that make things bad for the unemployed.

      • Anonymous
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

        Uni – Tories support welfare too. (£35k welfare cap ???)

        It enables privatisation and outsourcing to go ahead without having to take full responsibility for it by softening full social impact.

        I fail to see how a subsidised underclass is better than a subsidised working class – not that we should have either.

        We should have had – by now – a more dynamic and skilled home-grown society than we do, rather than a signicant proportion of the next generation consigned to the abortion room bucket for use as hospital fuel.

      • libertarian
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 6:03 pm | Permalink

        Uanime5

        Ever seen the average salary of a GP paid by the NHS ? Any idea how much their income has risen since the socialist leader Blair introduced new GP contracts?

        The minimum wage destroys jobs AND fixes wage thresholds too low thereby hurting the poor. The NMW is a device that benefits employers NOT employees.

        Socialists support welfare as long as someone else pays for it. I don’t know any capitalists that are opposed to all welfare.

        Of course the bottom line is that the worst people are the fit and healthy such as yourself who refuse to work thereby taking resources from the old, sick and those unable to work through no fault of their own.

        If you like the welfare system as it stands, get a job and pay your 45% tax

  9. oldtimer
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:35 am | Permalink

    The EUrocracy get away with it (so far) because there is little or no effective accountability. The same applies in the UK as more and more laws and regulations are surrendered by Parliament to the EU bureaucracy and those (often big businesses and single issue groups) that know how to work the system.

  10. Denis Cooper
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:45 am | Permalink

    Of course some people will retort that it’s nothing whatsoever to do with the euro, and cite all kinds of other causes; and there will be something in what they say, because it is not ALL down to the euro.

    However the most important point is that the eurofanatics have won and opponents of the euro have lost.

    For years it was being predicted that at some point there would be a crisis and the euro would break up; and the crisis did come, and the euro did come close to breaking up, but as some of us anticipated it was decided to break the EU treaties rather than allow the euro to break up; now we are in a much worse position than before because the eurofanatics have been able to exploit the crisis to greatly further integration, the classic “beneficial crisis” from their point of view, while nothing has been done to limit the expansion of the eurozone until eventually it engulfs all EU member states including the UK.

    Yet we still have the pretence that the future will be one of a “two-speed” EU, or in another image there will be a core of highly integrated eurozone states to be led by the Germans and an outer circle of non-euro states to be led by the UK; when Clegg said that he thought that the EU would be much the same in ten years’ time as now he was clearly wrong in many ways, but in particular because the eurozone core will have expanded to take in more countries while the population of the outer circle will have either grown or shrunk, depending on the difference between the rate at which new countries join the EU and the rate at which existing member states succumb to gravity and drop into the eurozone core.

    Confident reassurances from Tory activists that we need not worry about the euro because it would inevitably break up have now proved utterly false, and shockingly the Tory element in the UK government have forgotten about Keep the Pound and instead played their part in the Save the Euro campaign.

    • Lindsay McDougall
      Posted April 7, 2014 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

      You’re right about one thing: The continued existence of the Euro is not in the UK’s interest and the more Member States that leave the Euro zone the better. There definitely needs to be an inner Federal EU core, as small possible, and an outer non-federal free trade ring. To establish the latter, we do not need a referendum, we can just get on with it. We can make it attractive to other European countries by negotiating with other trading blocs right now.

      And by implication, sod the EU Treaties, sod EU law, and damn the consequences.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted April 7, 2014 at 5:31 pm | Permalink

        Because the euro is supposed to be forever the EU treaties intentionally provide no mechanism for a country to change its mind and revert to a national currency, therefore leaving the euro means leaving the EU; back in late 2010 when Cameron had a good opportunity to demand a treaty change so that a country could make an orderly withdrawal from the euro without having to leave the EU altogether he didn’t ask for that treaty change, or indeed for any other treaty change, and later when the Dutch Prime Minister went public saying that there should be such a mechanism Cameron remained silent and failed to support him.

  11. Douglas Carter
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:47 am | Permalink

    Perhaps it’s the EU equivalent of ‘the great leap forward’?

    In consideration of a one-time humorous nickname once attributed to you Mr. Redwood, I’m reminded of a phrase from one of the Star Trek cinema outings. …’If there is to be a Brave New World, it will be this generation which will have the hardest time living in it.’…

    I think that neatly sums up the blithe disinterest the high priests of the EU religion apply to the current phenomena. There seems every evidence that today’s inequities and incoherence of the project ‘is a price worth paying’ for the utopia which will – apparently – arrive.

    I’m reminded of the point at which Greece joined the Euro. Whilst a small number of figures in the UK were warning quite correctly that Greece had joined on openly falsified grounds, the UK Government and their willing disciples in the press (…Andrew Marr, take a step forward please….) used the matter as a tool by which to attack opponents of the EU. ‘Look – even GREECE can join the Euro’…. (as opposed to, ‘actually, this is a bit worrying…’)

    Predictably, those warning against were – once again – dismissed as xenophobic little Englanders. The truth is there was never an actual economic debate about the Euro. (In the UK, that remains the case to this day – it’s persistent proponents have even yet never attempted to engage in a proper discourse about it). Its inception was planned in from the beginning of the project which eventually coalesced into the EU but its existence was an article of religious dogma in the manner in which it was prepared. Each electorate presented the currency as a done-deal, without once explaining the mechanism behind it. One of the greatest abrogations of financial competence and accountability of the entire post-war era.

    George Osborne may well testily quip ‘Told you so’ … ‘Isn’t an economic policy’ but that rather sidesteps the point. The point is, why would anyone in their right mind listen to the people who got it wrong in the first instance? Perhaps it’s time to give Nick Clegg a very small amount of credit for something he raised in his first debating outing. Perhaps if the people of the EU were given the ‘small print’ in advance of the inception of the single currency, they might have been given the chance to avoid catastrophe. I’m gratified that Clegg has – by clear implication – promised to issue the small print to each and every aspect of his coming manifesto in advance of the election.

    The EU should do similar. No further power issued to them nor sovereignty surrendered to Brussels unless every dot and comma of the small print is clarified with unambiguous discipline in advance of signing up.

    Reply I published “Our Currency Our Country” prior to the Euro launch, and pointed out in that book that only Luxembourg qualified for Euro entry under the economic criteria, with some countries – not just Greece – miles off meeting the criteria.

    • Mark B
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

      Douglas

      The Euro was created with a KNOWN design fault. Namely, money transfers. Helmut Kohl insisted that there be no transfers of monies between nation states. He was concerned, quite rightly, that Germany would be used as the lender of last resort and, that other nations would use that to sun up huge debts.

      Of course, the next big treaty may indeed agrees this but, for that to happen, there must be POLITICAL UNION.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted April 7, 2014 at 8:38 am | Permalink

      My understanding is that all of the EU member states had to agree on which countries would be in the first wave of the euro, and Greece was not allowed to join it at that time, but subsequent decisions on admitting additional countries to the eurozone are taken just by the countries that are already in the eurozone and the non-euro countries have no veto.

      From Article 140 TFEU:

      http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2010.083.01.0001.01.ENG#C_2010083EN.01004701

      “3. If it is decided, in accordance with the procedure set out in paragraph 2, to abrogate a derogation, the Council shall, acting with the unanimity of the Member States whose currency is the euro and the Member State concerned, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Central Bank, irrevocably fix the rate at which the euro shall be substituted for the currency of the Member State concerned, and take the other measures necessary for the introduction of the euro as the single currency in the Member State concerned.”

      Therefore even if the UK government had been concerned about Greece being allowed to join the euro it no longer had the legal power to stop that happening.

  12. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 9:00 am | Permalink

    Didn’t you know that the EU is a splendid organisation? The main reason we should be forced to stay in and be governed by the EU is ‘jobs’, so say Clegg, Cameron and a majority of Conservative MPs.
    What is it about these people that they are so obsessed with allowing an anti-democratic foreign organisation to govern us when we elected them to perform that role?

    • Mark B
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

      Because they can blame people for things they wanted done and not have to carry the can themselves.

  13. David Lonsdale
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 9:22 am | Permalink

    When I read your opening comment, Mr Redwood, I was struck by the similarities between your target (EU) and the UK. The issue around Ms Millers’ expenses claim is symptomatic of how our own elite protects its own while those at the bottom get roundly pilloried and penalised for any transgression involving tax payers money. Being publicly accountable doesn’t seem to have any effect; whoever you vote for becomes one of “them” with very few honourable exceptions. I read that 2% of the population are landlords compared to 25% of MPs. Many MP’s have incomes in addition to their parliamentary salaries yet pontificate on how the masses should be thrifty and aspire to home ownership (a hope fast disappearing for half the population). OK, the EU is corrupt and has a frequently (but not always) negative influence on UK affairs. Trouble is, I have little faith it would be noticeably better for most of us outside it.

  14. Tad Davison
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 11:01 am | Permalink

    This is all very interesting. I agree with every word, but why then have the Tories done as much as anyone else to give us all this underhanded EU crap?

    We, on the correct side of the argument, were warning about the dangers all along. For anyone not to see where it was headed, proves beyond all reasonable doubt that they were either incompetent, or part of some plot to subsume the UK into the grand political project for the very worst of reasons. Either way, they were, and still are, unfit to hold office.

    Thus, my advice is to treat anyone who says they are in favour of the EU, with the very gravest suspicion.

    Yet to be fair, there are a lot of people on the left who do not want any part of the EU. I subscribe to lots of internet newsletters to see what others of a different persuasion are saying, and the recent events in the Ukraine have been a wake-up call. The left are against neo-Nazis, and it would therefore be quite irreconcilable for them to support the EU’s regime-change agenda. They also roundly condemn the EU’s ways of working that has delivered so much debt and misery on such a huge scale, although their solution seems to me to be unworkable.

    Sorry John, but as I see it, if we want to sort out the EU mess, at least as far as the UK is concerned, there is only one party to vote for, and that is UKIP.

    Tad Davison

    Cambridge

  15. Edward2
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 11:19 am | Permalink

    If only they had stuck to the original idea of a common market or left it as an economic community, perhaps many of these impoverished millions would now be economically active rather than unemployed.
    The hijack of the Common Market by European socialists who have changed its direction towards a United States of Europe is leading us to being ruled by a new elite, who are more driven by creating a socialist super state than the prosperity of its citizens or a respect for democracy.

    • uanime5
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 4:12 pm | Permalink

      If only they had stuck to the original idea of a common market or left it as an economic community, perhaps many of these impoverished millions would now be economically active rather than unemployed.

      Care to explain how this would work? There was still unemployment when the EU was the ECSC and EEC.

      The hijack of the Common Market by European socialists who have changed its direction towards a United States of Europe is leading us to being ruled by a new elite, who are more driven by creating a socialist super state than the prosperity of its citizens or a respect for democracy.

      It’s clear from the Treaty of Rome, which in the 1950’s created the ECSC, that ever closer union was always the goal of the EU. Also the capital state that is the US hasn’t improved the prosperity of many of its citizens. That’s why the US has such high crime and homelessness levels.

      • Edward2
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

        Unemployment is outrageously high in the EU and it is the way your favoured new rich socialist elite are mismanaging the economy which is to blame.

        Ever closer union was mentioned in the fine print, back before you were born, but a centralised socialist superstate which is ruining the livelihoods of millions of it citizens was never mentioned Uni.

        • Mark B
          Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:46 pm | Permalink

          Edward2

          I am sorry, but U5 does indeed have a point with regard, to ever closer UNION. And it was never in the ‘fine print’. I do not remember at what point it is mentioned but, it is very early on and is a ‘founding principle’ of the EU.

          Look up the word UNION to see what it means.

          Here is a link – see item 5:

          http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/union

          I am afraid you, and many, many others, have been deceived.

          • Edward2
            Posted April 7, 2014 at 7:31 am | Permalink

            Indeed Mark we have been lied to by many Euro enthusisasts since the 1970’s before, during and after joining what was then called a Common Market.
            The same “reassurances” that Clegg now uses, are nothing to the deception that was used on the public back then.

            Yes I know the definition of union, thanks.
            It could have been for the overall good of the citizens of Europe.
            High standards of living for all, low unemployment and a devolved democratic organisation led by people with compassion and vision.
            Instead it reminds me of a giant version of some awful, inefficient left wing London council from the 70’s.
            I am more against it for its outcomes, performance and its refusal to reform than against it in principle.

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted April 7, 2014 at 8:45 am | Permalink

            It was in the very first line of the preamble to the 1957 Treaty of Rome:

            http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf

            But that doesn’t mean that everybody knew about it at the time; hardly anybody actually read the treaty, most people went by what they picked up through the media.

      • Chris S
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 6:09 pm | Permalink

        It is the Euro that is causing all the problems and particularly the uncompetitiveness that’s at the route of the employment in Club Med countries.

        The only solutions are massive subsidies from the North ( ie Germany ) or leaving the Euro and devaluation.

        German taxpayers will not provide any further funds to bail out Greece and Merkel would never be able to raise the necessary cash to keep Spain, Italy and shortly France afloat. The numbers are just far too big.

        Something will have to give – eventually. Unfortunately without an orderly break up of the Euro it will be messy and, the longer the delay, fearsomely expensive.

      • libertarian
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 6:17 pm | Permalink

        Uanime5

        Ha ha wrong as normal.

        The USA has 1.37 million homeless people, The EU has 3 million ( 1million of which are in the socialist utopia that is France)

        The US last year had 12 million crimes, the EU had 21 million ( the single worst country in EU was Germany with 6.5 million )

        The standard of living according to W.H.O.

        1. Switzerland
        2. USA
        3. Germany

        So 100% wrong as normal Uanime5 but then thats socialism for you why let the facts stand in the way of a good sound bite

      • Lindsay McDougall
        Posted April 7, 2014 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

        In 1972, when the original European Communities Bill was going through the Commons, Enoch Powell lead the rebellion and forced no fewer than 104 divisions against his own Government. He was defeated because the Labour Party of the time contained 60 pro-European MPs.

        The British people were told in good time – and often – that the Treaty of Rome was profoundly political. Therefore, in the 1975 Referendum they were wilfully stupid. When Mrs Thatcher signed up to the Single European Act, she did so because she wanted the Single Market and thought that the political clauses could be ignored. That was both naive and stupid.

        Happily, with a new electorate, we have a chance to correct our collective stupidity.

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted April 7, 2014 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

          I don’t remember being “wilfully stupid” at the time of the 1975 referendum, I remember being very busy and not having the time and energy to do more that accept at face value what I was being told by duplicitous politicians through the mass media.

  16. Posted April 6, 2014 at 12:42 pm | Permalink

    “The EU goes about its business of feather bedding the governing class . . . . . .”
    And Westminster doesn’t? No one outside Westminster is likely to be able to collect the wide range of expenses open to MPs. They have, what is effectively, a five year contract and if it isn’t renewed by the electors, they collect a golden handshake. They have what is probably the best pension scheme in the country and, judging by the television coverage of parliament, rarely turn up to work. Not as good as the EU parliament, admittedly, where they actually get extra for turning up, and even more if they take part in a vote. But no doubt Westminster will reach that point in due course.
    As regards to Mrs Miller, she has been cleared of wrongdoing by a group of MPs who have a far from impeccable record themselves, and in so doing they over-ruled the advice of the parliamentary watchdog. It’s not surprising that the reputation of our politicians at large is an all time low.

    Reply MPs may not be in the chamber when you tune in, but they may well be in committee, having a meeting with constituents, answering emails etc. The MPs pension scheme is not as good as the best non contributory public sector schemes.

  17. Trevor Butler
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

    Could the ‘peasants’ be starting to revolt? – Should we be preparing gallows at traitors gate?
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597945/Get-ready-quit-EU-Davis-tells-Tories-tears-Cameron-predicts-UKIP-triumph-Euro-elections.html

    • Tad Davison
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

      You wouldn’t tease an old man like me would you Trevor? Ah, what a beautiful dream that would be.

      Tad

      • Trevor Butler
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 10:02 pm | Permalink

        Fat chance! We haven’t got a hope of truth and justice in our limited lifetimes – The system is too stacked against the people

        • alan jutson
          Posted April 7, 2014 at 10:46 am | Permalink

          Tad/Trevor

          We can but live in hope !

          It may take many years, but someone will eventually be the figurehead that will act to take us out.

          You know the old saying “Cometh the Hour, Cometh (the man, woman, Party, people)”

  18. Posted April 6, 2014 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

    The Euro authorities, and indeed bank regulators elsewhere in the world are quite right to change the rules governing banks with the result, as JR points out, that banks “lend less”.
    The existing banking system is heavily subsidised, and I’m surprised that JR, an advocate of free markets, wants that system to continue.
    First banks enjoy the luxury of “lender of last resort” facilities – not available to other industries.
    Second, there is the “Too Big to Fail” subsidy.
    Third, deposits (up to £85,000) are guaranteed by the taxpayer. And that guarantee has cost the taxpayer billions and possibly trillions recently. But there is a very simple way to stop all that. It’s called “full reserve” banking, a system advocated by Milton Friedman and several other leading economists.
    The reduced amount of lending that that involves is easily countered by standard stimulatory measures, monetary or fiscal.

  19. Posted April 6, 2014 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    Yes that’s a good point. Or nearly 19 million good points!

    Unemployment is high everywhere in the Eurozone. 11% and rising in France. Unemployment among their under 25 year olds is 25%, so why is the EU now fussing about its budget deficit? For some strange reason the EU-powers-that-be have decreed that 3% is the limit and no more.

    The economics isn’t that difficult. If everyone spends what they earn, that includes all profits, and exports are equal to imports, in the same economy in which it is earned in then everything clears. If 3% (GDP) of those earnings is (net) spent on imports then that shortfall has to be made up by government running a deficit for everything to clear.

    Similarly if 5% of GDP is saved then government needs to borrow that from the savers and spend it back in to the economy too. Both the trade balance and the level of savings are outside of government control, especially for a country within the EU using the Euro.

    So, 3% + 5% (These are the figures which are much closer to reality for economies like France, Spain and the UK) = 8%. This is the minimum deficit governments need to run to stop their economies spiralling into depression at the present time.

    So for the rulers of the EU, or the Troika, to impose a 3% GDP limit on government deficits within the Eurozone is criminally insane. They understand all this very well! They understand that Eurozone countries cannot impose trade restrictions. They understand National governments can’t stop the population saving and they understand that’s what people and companies do when the economic future looks bleak.

    The EU powers-that-be have been smart enough, in many European countries, to seduce the centre-left into thinking that the EU is both progressive and democratic. That joining in the EU wholeheartedly is an easier option than taking on reactionary forces directly in their home countries.

    Well it isn’t. The EU reactionaries are just as bad, if not worse. That’s not just an unfounded assertion. It is the 25% + figures for unemployment in Spain and Greece, and high unemployment figures everywhere in the Eurozone which is the real evidence for the truth of that. No amount of social legislation on conditions at work can compensate for not having a decent well paying job.

    • uanime5
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

      For some strange reason the EU-powers-that-be have decreed that 3% is the limit and no more.

      Well overborrowing did cause problems in some countries, such as Greece, when they couldn’t pay this money back.

      If 3% (GDP) of those earnings is (net) spent on imports then that shortfall has to be made up by government running a deficit for everything to clear.

      Or the government can raise taxes to make up the shortfall.

      Similarly if 5% of GDP is saved then government needs to borrow that from the savers and spend it back in to the economy too.

      Unless they put this money in a bank and the bank loans this money to people. Then this money doesn’t need to be borrowed by the government.

      So, 3% + 5% (These are the figures which are much closer to reality for economies like France, Spain and the UK) = 8%. This is the minimum deficit governments need to run to stop their economies spiralling into depression at the present time.

      Your 3% figure for imports and 5% figure for savings are both arbitrary figures, so your claim that each EU country need a deficit of 8% isn’t based on any evidence. Especially when it’s unlikely that all eurozone countries are net importers.

      It is the 25% + figures for unemployment in Spain and Greece, and high unemployment figures everywhere in the Eurozone which is the real evidence for the truth of that

      How are problems caused by poor economic performance in 2 eurozone countries the fault of the eurozone? Also some eurozone countries have lower levels of unemployment that the UK so your claims that there’s “high unemployment figures everywhere in the Eurozone” is clearly false.

      No amount of social legislation on conditions at work can compensate for not having a decent well paying job.

      Well except for minimum wage laws. Also many people would prefer a safe but low paying job to a less safe but slightly better paying job because if they’re less likely to be injured they’ll be able to work for longer.

      • Edward2
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

        Uni,
        You support Keynsian economics and criticise what you describe as austerity policies in the UK, yet here you are blindly supporting the EU when it implements policies which are bringing great hardship onto ordinary working people throughout the EU.
        No Keynsian stimulous in the EU
        Just austerity year after year.
        Presumably socialism is a price worth paying.

      • Mark B
        Posted April 6, 2014 at 8:59 pm | Permalink

        It was not just high borrowing that caused the problem’s. It was also rampant corruption and an inefficient Government. To somehow pretend that a country like Greece, which has defaulted so many times, and a people that do not like to pay taxes yet, like to have nice things on tick, then not pay, use the same currency as the German’s, is bloody mad.

        We had a go with the ERM, and got burned. What the hell made people think it could ever work with a country like Greece. And let us not forget, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Malta, Cyprus, Ireland and France. All suffering because of the Euro and its inbuilt problems.

      • Posted April 6, 2014 at 9:58 pm | Permalink

        uanime5,

        Greece and Spain are in depression because they are users of the Euro. Not issuers of their own currency. If they were, those currencies would have depreciated in the aftermath of the 2008 crisis. Spain and Greece would now be well on the road to recovery. Just like Iceland is now doing well after facing severe problems in 2008.

        Setting up a common currency is just about the same as creating a single country. Its no co-incidence that, with a few other exceptions, each country has its own currency. New Zealand has a separate dollar from the Australian dollar for example. So if there is a single currency there is also a single country.

        In every country there has to a system which ensures there is a transfer of surpluses from wealthier regions to poorer ones. Northern Ireland benefits in this way in the UK. It would be heartless and cruel in the extreme for the UK government to insist that the Stormont government was entirely responsible for the NI economy and had to balance its accounts within some arbitrary margin.

        If it did, Northern Ireland would have similar economic problems to present day Greece. Right thinking people everywhere would be appalled that Northern Ireland could be treated so callously by a London based government. You yourself would be on protest marches I dare say! And rightly too.

        We might all have differences with the Conservative Party but I’d trust them never to behave in the same way towards the regions of the UK, as the EU do towards the regions of the Eurozone.

        The Euro works reasonably well for net exporters. Germany has a trade surplus of 7%. Their private sector save at almost the same rate. So their budget is balanced – just about. But all countries can’t be net exporters to the level of 7%. Germany effectively exports its unemployment to Greece, Spain, Italy and France.

        It’s an appalling situation that just won’t last. It can’t do. The danger is the Eurozone could disintegrate in a wave of violence in next few years if the EU powers-that-be don’t change their ways.

      • Posted April 6, 2014 at 11:53 pm | Permalink

        Unanime5,

        Just in addition to what I was saying previously: You are quite right to suggest that you cannot set a budget deficit on the simple basis I described. That’s just a starting point.

        You can’t measure some parameters in the economy then change a few others and expect all the others to stay the same. In practice what needs to happen in Spain, Greece, and the UK too, is for government t announce they will pursue a more aggressive fiscal policy. So that means spending more and taxing less.

        So does that mean the deficit will worsen? Not necessarily. Taxes often bring in more revenue when the rate of taxation is reduced, as Mr Redwood argues. Increased spending will in turn generate more tax revenues. As the economy picks up there is a tendency for companies to save less and invest , or spend more. Individuals will feel more confident too, and they will spend on that new bathroom or whatever it is they like to spend some money on.

        As industry grows the needs of the local population can be met with less reliance on imports. Possibly! They may decide to spend more on imports too so everything does need to be continually monitored and revised.

        So, perhaps counter-intuitively, the way to get a 3% budget deficit , if that’s really important to you, is to pretend that you don’t care what that deficit is! Don’t try to lower it by cutting spending and raising taxes! Everything can just end up worse than it was.

  20. uanime5
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 4:43 pm | Permalink

    Yet today, with the big government brigade in charge of the EU, it is apparently acceptable that 18,965,000 people of working age are unemployed in the Euro zone.

    How exactly is it the EU’s fault that 2 out of 18 eurozone countries have high unemployment? The UK has 2.38 million unemployed people and 3 million underemployed people, so does that mean the pound doesn’t work?

    Instead of making it easier for business to generate jobs they think up new ways to tax and regulate.

    Remind me again what the Conservatives are doing to make it easier for business to generate paying jobs. As many large companies are sitting on hundreds of billions of pounds tax cuts won’t be accepted because many large employers already have enough money to hire more employees. Nor will generating jobs that don’t pay at least minimum wage.

    Instead of mending the banks and easing money policy they prolong the agony brought about by broken banks and demand they lend less.

    Given the current crash was caused by banks giving people easy access to credit that they couldn’t afford, then selling these risky loans as safe loans; and banks not having enough capital it’s no surprise that the EU wants less risky lending and banks to hold more capital.

    Instead of creating an energy market with prices that match our leading world competitors, they happily pile on more and more cost and tax to energy to make us as uncompetitive as possible.

    The EU cannot keep pumping out more and more CO2 because it will make global warming even worse. We need to move to a more carbon neutral economy.

    Almost one quarter of people under the age of 25 are out of work in the Euro area.

    There’s 1 million unemployed under 25’s in the UK, many of whom are forced to do unpaid “traineeships” for 6 months in private companies even though being given free employees makes companies less likely to hire paid employees.

    In places like Spain and Greece half the young generation are workless. Still no-one seems to wake up in the EU government and ask why, let alone propose doing something that might make a difference to this lamentable state of affairs.

    Well if the problem’s only occurring in 2 out of 28 EU countries then the problem is more likely to be caused by local economic problems, rather than the EU.

    The EU goes about its business of feather bedding the governing class and leaving the many to fend for themselves in a malfunctioning economy and currency union that sensible people warned them could not work.

    The same can be said of the MPs who approved an 11% pay rise for themselves. The current Maria Miller scandal also shows that some MP’s are busy feathering their own nests.

    Also 3 year long benefit sanctions effectively remove the welfare safety net and leave people to fend for themselves in an economy that is malfunctioning due to years of austerity.

    When we hear from this elite that letting people vote and have their say, as in Switzerland on migration, is dangerous, it is no wonder so many people in the UK have had enough of their arrogance and incompetence.

    Does this mean that MPs are going to let the people of the UK vote on issues like in Switzerland? Thought not.

    Reply MPs have not taken or approved an 11% pay rise.

    • Edward2
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

      Uni
      Your endless and increasingly desperate defence of the EU in spite of its obvious failings, makes even Mr Clegg appear an optimistic supporter of its aims.

    • Mark B
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 9:08 pm | Permalink

      U5 said;

      “The EU cannot keep pumping out more and more CO2 because it will make global warming even worse. We need to move to a more carbon neutral economy.”

      What do you mean by Carbon neutral ? Are you proposing getting rid of cars and lorries ? What about the goods we buy from Countries like China and India where, they are building a new coal fired power station every week. Or the US where, they are using shale gas to drive their economy forward.

      Do we stop importing from these countries or put high tariff’s on their goods ? If so, would they not retaliate ?

      We are descending into the world of madmen, and believing that a gas that makes up a tiny fraction (0.03%) of the air we breath, and have no control over its output elsewhere, can some how save the world by going back to the stone age.

  21. Chris
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

    It seems as though David Davis believes there are far greater economic opportunities, as well as many other advantages, if we are outside the EU, and has made it clear to David Cameron, apparently. See Mail and Express. Good to see that Davis takes the threat of UKIP very seriously and is not contemptuous of them or their leader:
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/468962/A-new-future-for-Britain-Senior-Tory-urges-David-Cameron-to-leave-EU-as-Ukip-rise-again

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597945/Get-ready-quit-EU-Davis-tells-Tories-tears-Cameron-predicts-UKIP-triumph-Euro-elections.html

    • Mark B
      Posted April 6, 2014 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

      Another Europlastic lining himself up post 2015.

      Move along please, nothing to see here.

  22. John Chaytor
    Posted April 6, 2014 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    I have yet to hear any UK politician come on TV and say something as basic as this to get his/her point across to demonstrate how ludicrous the UK and EU CO2 tariffs are.

    We, both the UK and EU, voluntarily raise our energy prices to try and bring down CO2 emissions.

    The reaction from business is to move jobs to areas of the world which are exempt from Carbon tariffs.

    We lose jobs.

    Other countries gain jobs.

    YET, THE SAME AMOUNT OF CO2 IS GENERATED.

    The Earth, being big and all we have, does not care about where the CO2 is generated.

    UTTER MADNESS.

    • Edward2
      Posted April 7, 2014 at 7:40 am | Permalink

      I agree John
      But to make matters worse, the export of our manufacturing to countries such as China and India is actually increasing world CO2 levels because their technolologies are far more inefficient than ours.
      Even if the UK reduced its CO2 to zero, China would take up that reduction in just one year.
      Madness indeed.

  23. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted April 7, 2014 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

    The problem is that when the ECB proposes to do “whatever it takes” to save the Euro, it has in mind easy money and QE. There are two motives. The first is to prop up a considerable number of fundamentally broke zombie banks in France, Spain and Italy. The second is to use the ECB to buy bonds of dodgy Member States who will probably be unable to pay back; they are irredeemably on a banker’s ramp (see Liam Halligan’s article in the Sunday Telegraph). Because of the likelihood of default, these are transfer payments – and Germany knows it.

    There have already been sovereign defaults within the Euro zone. When Cyprus banks confiscated bank deposits in excess of €100,000, that was a default. When Greece imposed a 75% haircut on private sector creditors (including some French banks!), that was a default. When Greece received loans at below market rates from the EU and from the IMF, that was a backdoor default. And it is unlikely to stop at Cyprus and Greece; Spain and Italy are in deep dodo.

    Italy keeps bleating about the fact that it is in ‘primary surplus’ on its fiscal account. That is not the key point. Adding in its debt interest, Italy is still running a fiscal deficit, at a time when its debt is already well over 100% of GDP.

    These countries should leave the Euro zone. Then they might have a future.

  • About John Redwood

    John Redwood has been the Member of Parliament for Wokingham since 1987. First attending Kent College, Canterbury, he graduated from Magdalen College, and has a DPhil from All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has been a director of NM Rothschild merchant bank and chairman of a quoted industrial PLC.
    Published and promoted by Thomas Puddy for John Redwood, both of 30 Rose Street Wokingham RG40 1XU
  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page