Dec 02 2009
The City and the Chancellor protest too much over the EU.
Both the City and the Chancellor have woken up to the threat of too much EU regulation of UK and world financial services based in London. They have done so because a Frenchman has been appointed Single Market Commissioner.
Where have they both been in recent years? Haven’t they seen the comprehensive system of regulation being unrolled by the EU? Were they both missing when many Directives went through? Did they fail to understand the importance of the doctrine of the acquis, which means once the EU puts through any kind of regulation about an area, that becomes an occupied field where the EU has established its judicial and legislative competence?
It’s no good Mr Darling telling us he will now fight them on the beaches to keep the City under British control. Mr Brown and Mr Darling surrendered much of that control over the last decade. If now someone has gained office who may use that power in ways they do not like, why should they be surprised, and why do they think they can stop him? That’s what some of us have been pointing out about the power grab by the EU for years. It’s no good shedding crocodile tears now. The City should have offered more support to Eurosceptics in the past, and the government should have stood up for British interests instead of signing Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon.
54 Responses to “The City and the Chancellor protest too much over the EU.”
John Redwood has been the Member of Parliament for Wokingham since 1987. First attending Kent College, Canterbury, he graduated from Magdalen College...
And an incoming Tory administration will do what exactly to roll this back? Is your conclusion that their hands will be tied in perpetuity by what past governments have signed away, and that this text could be written in the same way in five years time, after 5 years of Tory rule? Or is there a way out? If so, what is it?
Now that the Lisbon Treaty has come into effect, with the so called passerelle clauses allowing the commission to extend its areas of competence – or should I say incompetence – without asking member states, how will we go about wresting control of the City from the EU after the next election?
It is not Darling and Brown who should wake up but Cameron.
Well said John, but lets face it Darling is ‘politicking’ and appearing to be ’strong’ when both you, I and those who understand the EU know that he is ‘posturing’ to ‘look good’ in the pubic’s eye.
Stable doors and horses spring to mind!
It’s not just the City that need to be concerned about EU intervention in their niche. We should all be concerned about EU meddling affecting the economy as a whole.
Mr Brown has managed to do most damage to the UK finances so far, but it is entirely possible that Europe could hobble Mr Camerons plans for a post-election recovery.
Our patient host is now bracing himself for the usual “Vote UKIP” comments that will inevitably follow….
Of course the Tories could always promise an in/out referendum if they win the GE.
Do you support David Davis on climate change? Can we take it that if Cameron becomes PM you’ll join with Davis in a righwing coup.?
The EU is now unstoppable. Mr. Brown signed the Treaty. It is tempting to say that what is happening to the City is the law of unintended consequences. However, all three main parties are fully committed to the EU project and should, presumably, welcome this development. An argument is also often used that we are ‘at the centre of Europe’ deploying our influence in smoke filled rooms. We can therefore have an effect on what happens. Far better to be Norway and Switzerland – enjoying the benefit from the trading block but saying ‘thanks, but no thanks’ to the EU’s sovereign rights to run their countries.
There is now a political glass ceiling in the UK. As a voter I would like to see us out of the EU. I would also like to see a sane attitude towards the economy, timely cuts in public expenditure, children taught to read, write and add up, criminals facing justice, an end to the human rights and health and safety gravy trains, the curbing of the BBC, constitutional reform and control of the UK border. Who is offering this? Everything is decided by focus groups telling political parties what 35 year old voters in Milton Keynes will want to see.
I will vote conservative in May 2010 because I want an end to a contemptible Labour government. However, there are many like me who don’t like the way the country is going but see a political class unprepared to do much to help. How does the general public break through the political glass ceiling? Not, I think, by voting UKIP. But what else is on offer?
APL Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 2:54 pm
Simon D: “I will vote conservative in May 2010 because I want an end to a contemptible Labour government.”
Good choice Simon: replace the comtemptible puppet Labour government with the alternative blue Labour puppet government.
“I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a council chamber in Europe” Kenneth Clarke © 1996.
That cheeky chappie and ‘Tory’ Ken has got his wish. He must be jumping with joy at the success of this plot.
Freddy Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:40 am
“I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a council chamber in Europe” Kenneth Clarke © 1996.
Good Lord. Can you cite a source for that quote ?
APL Reply:
December 4th, 2009 at 8:06 am
International Currency Review, Vol. 23, No. 4, Autumn 1996.
It’s quite easy to Google actually.
Norman Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 7:02 pm
I agree with everything Simon D writes. My hope is that the Conservatives, having been trounced thrice by Labour whilst pursuing a more right wing policy than today, moderated their policies to ‘become electable’ (I personally don’t agree but I’m hoping this is the case) but that after they are elected politicians of the calibre of Messrs Redwood, Davis, Hague et al will have a positive influence on policy and that things will improve for the better.
David Cameron’s ‘policies’ are a long way from the revolution Margaret Thatcher brought us but we must have faith and at least give the Conservatives a chance. If they do enter government and do nothing to halt the madness then we truly will be in trouble.
I refuse to be too cynical towards politicians despite Labour’s best efforts over the last 12 years.
Hear! Hear!
So why did the politicians fail to see what was obvious to everybody else? Why did they fail to see that they have manacled us to a totalitarian superstate?
On the basis of that performance, MPs should be paying us to allow them their pretence of grandiosity and importance.
Where is the leadership (verb not noun) on correcting this appalling error?
Tony E Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 8:59 pm
They did not fail to see it, they merely protested to us that ‘we got 99% of what we wanted’, because they knew that the public would lynch them if the truth was known.
Well said John but what would/will your party do about it if you win the election?
I do hate to keep alluding to the same point but Conservative
Governments should have stood up for British interests before signing the Acts of Accession, the Single European Act, the Treaty on European Union, (Maastricht)
All NuLabour did was continue along the lines predetermined by those acts and increase the powers of the EU as laid out in those previous acts.
Sorry Mr Redwood but it will not wash to now try to blame the whole thing on this last government, when they came to power they were faced with a situation where a great deal of the levers of government had already been passed to EU level and they were faced with the problems of the doctrine of the acquis! So Conservative administrations also failed to understand the importance of the treaties they were blithely signing.
But more to the point now the Conservatives do understand the problems of the Aquis! What exactly are they promising to do about it if they become the government of this country? Effectively nothing as far as I can see, Mr Cameron is talking about holding talks with his EU superiors in Brussels and asking them nicely for the odd power to be handed back, perhaps you should have a word with him as it seems although you do, he obviously still does not understand the problems with the Aquis.
Mike Stallard Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Be fair to the Conservatives. Mr Hague spotted this immediately and said so at the time in parliament. Baroness Ashton was a pawn to take the city under Michel Barrymaure of the EU. But what could be done?
We gave the labour that majority. three times.
Ken Adams Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:04 am
Well Mike I feel I am being fair to the Conservatives after all I would like to vote Conservative at the next election. It is certainly true that Labour have been in power for the past 3 times, but before that we had how many Conservative administrations and how much power did they cede to the EU with the Single European Act and Maastricht NuLab have only been moving in the same direction set by those treaties if Conservatives wanted to put a stop to the constant drift of power to the EU level, they had it within their power to do so at the time.
Were they considering the effects of what they were signing? I do not think so. The whole Conservative argument of a different kind of EU is based on a false premis that it is possible to unravel the Aqucis and return power to the member state, it has not happened yet and nothing in the present Conservative leadership gives any confidence that they will archive anything meaningful if we give them another chance just the opposite in fact.
The move from a referendum on the Lisbon treaty with a conservative government promoting a No vote to the present position is massive. Even more so when you consider the powers transfered to the EU with the treaty, we have move a very large step closer to the Federalists dream and all Mr Cameron is talking about is trying to get back some small insignificant powers in the field of employment, as first announced by Ken Clarke in June.
Up to now the City has always cosidered the EU to be an advantage. The City was all in favour of joining the Euro and warnd of the terrible consequences of not doing so.
You reap what you sow, they have no-one to blame but themselves!
Donating sovereignty to the EU Empire does not prevent you from staying in the Non-Con party though does it John ?
getting Cameron into no 10 is everything is it not ? All your so called eurosceptics have gone deafeningly silent on the EU takeover. Party before country is now the shared motto for the LiblabConGreen alliance. When are you leaving the Party ?
The same time as Dan Hannan ? LOL.
…and where have our dear opposition been? Fine words have been spoken but nothing more.
We are where we are because we have effectively no opposition, or perhaps the convictions of our opposition carry no more weight than a posting on this site.
We are members of a not very well thought out European experiment with no exit strategy.
With the success or failure of our economy effectively subjugated to foreigners whose interests are often not honourable and whose decisions are frequently not without a conflict of interest we really do have a problem.
What can the Conservatives actually do other than stand on the sidelines taunting “we told you so”?
Nothing? Or is there a cunning plan?
Spot on John.
Very true, Mr Redwood, but where do we go from here? I fully understand the case for continued support of Mr Cameron, but as the nasty realities of the post-Lisbon world become plain, the Conservative party should be ready for drastic action once it gains power. Withdrawal from the thieves’ kitchen of Brussels should be actively considered.
Sally C. Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Completely agree. We are not tied in by the currency. None of us have voted for the Lisbon treaty or any European officials. Consequently, the new ’so-called’ President and his aides have no legitimacy in the UK and the legitimacy of any new EU rulings is also highly questionable. New EU rulings should be treated as proposals for discussion by Parliament and not automatically be treated as law. We need to forge a new relationship with the EU, which may also appeal to some of the new member states like Poland and the Czech Republic.
james harries Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:40 pm
I agree, Sally. Look at the record of Michelle Barnier, Sarko’s bag carrier and new EU finance chief.
Ex minister of agriculture, he backed down to the wine makers, the milk men, the fishermen (these last blockading ports to demand lower fuel prices when they already pay no tax on their fuel!)… in fact, one whiff of burning tyres and he rolls over and asks you to rub his tummy.
Eau de pneu flambé, anyone?
Cameron however has only said he wants to return powers over employment and social policy to Westminster, while leaving this power with Brussels, and indeed all the powers transferred to Brussels by the treaties of Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon. So Conservatives also protest too much.
Indeed the official Conservative policy on europe is always to protest changes but then to accept them. When the Conservatives are as interested in restoring these lost powers as they are in exercising the ones that still remain at Westminster then they might be worth a vote. But that has never been the case so far.
That is why i didn’t vote Conservative in 1992, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and won’t be voting Conservative in 2010. My perception of the Conservatives approach to Europe was actually vindicated by Cameron’s recent speech. Indeed the only change of significance in the last 5 years is that Brown can no longer claim to be a euro-sceptic. He kept us out of the euro, which was worth saluting for a while. But now he has marched his MPs into the lobby to vote against his manifesto promises which is unforgivable. So none of the main parties is worth voting for anymore.
thedarknight Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Yes, there is a problem with the fact that to say ‘never again’ is to say nothing much given that the consequences of the Lisbon Treaty are only beginning to be felt. We need a serious reversal,and we need it fast. The question is, which course of action will push the Tories into a withdrawalist position fastest – a victory now with a mildly eurosceptic policy,or a defeat and a failure to win until they adopt a withdrawalist position?
I think the large numbers of the population who are anti EU are seeing their forecasts materialise within days of Lisbon being effective. The whole post war European project has been hyjacked by political empire builders, dreamers and bureaucrats. I can only see the mess increasing and how any organisation with unapproved accounts year after year can be taken seriously continues to be beyond me.
SJB Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 9:25 pm
“[T]he Court [of Auditors] gives an unqualified opinion on the accounts for the second year running.”
http://eca.europa.eu/portal/pls/portal/docs/1/3442300.PDF
I am still of the opinion that were Cameron to want a vote winner, all he has to say is that he will hold a Referendum on our continuing membership of the EU. That’s all. I don’t think he or any of his advisers have any feeling for how great the strength of opinion is against the great EU juggernaut.
And Maastricht….
So what a surprise the chickens are coming home to roost.
Until it all collapsed around their ears, the city was said to be the Golden Goose that laid the golden egg of profit and taxes, which was regarded by Gordon as the best financial institution in the World.
Then he meddled with Regulation, and it failed !!!!!
Now he regards its staff as the most greedy in the World, and wants to meddle again.
Will it now be able to recover with the addition of the EU overseeing it ??????
The fault is with successive Governments of all colours, who have sleep walked us into ever increasing regulation, laws and possible eventual chaos.
It will soon dawn upon those who are awake, that it is not just the Banking system that is under threat from Europe.
Laughable isnt it.
Its all posturing though.
Like everything with Labour, fake.
You can tell an election is coming.
“…and the government should have stood up for British interests instead of signing Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon.” Yes indeed, if the socialist liars in government had given us the promised referendum on the ‘Lisbon Constitution’, then we – and they – would not now be in this situation. They will get no sympathy from me.
We desperately need a referendum on continued membership of the EU without one their is no point in voting for any of the main parties as whoever wins will only be a Gauleiter for the new European Reich.My fathers generation certainly didn’t fight for this,we have been betrayed.
If we were in the Euro then the Govt wouldnt be running a deficit of £200bn a year paid for by printing money.
Our fellow Europeans dont give £1600 per week benefit to people who just turn up at their borders.
The EU is not the source of all our problems, we do well enough on our own.
Paul S Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 8:16 pm
Ian – damn right. A phased withdrawal from Europe and the Great Repeal Act. Please lets have a strong Conservative government with the balls to try and reverse the socialist stranglehold.
OK, so we have now lost the City, just as we lost our fishing fleets (1976)and our beef industry (Foot and Mouth etc etc) to Europe (France and Spain). We lost our heavy industry to the Unions (1960s) and most of our manufacturing to the Far East (e.g. Dyson).
We have got to reinvent ourselves pretty fast methinks.
By throwing everything over the side – our prosperity, our religion, our constitution, our education system, (yes), our race, our colonies – we are now as naked as the day we were born.
YUK!
Some of us have been saying what would happen for years and have been derided. The “conservative party” is as guilty as labour or lib-dims and you cannot escape that, added to which we now know that Cameron is not going to do anything about it. He has bought into the EU and all things green without question and will not listen to any opposing view and he is not going to change now. Ian Jones is also correct, whilst the EU is a major problem our own governments have been far too officious at applying EU law. Because of our system this means that all Westminster politicians are at fault, Heath knew what was going to happen and lied and kept on lying and on and on.
So let me return to an earlier question:
“What do Eurosceptics do now?”
The first essential is to pile up as big a Conservative majority as possible at the next election. The minimum number of Conservative MPs needed is 361, in order to overcome the 10% of Euro-federalists within our party; 400 would be better. Besides our obvious stronghold south-east of the Severn to Wash line, we should target seats elsewhere, including the installation of Unionist MPs in Northern Ireland, Glasgow and south west Scotland.
The second action is to identify all potential Eurosceptic allies in other UK parties and EU countries.
The third action is to finalise out renegoting position, which should be a return to the status quo ante Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice & Lisbon.
Other actions are hypothetical. The fourth action is for John Redwood to mount a leadership challenge in the Autumn of 2011 if he is dissatisfied with the Conservative leadership’s line.
If all this fails, then people like me are faced with a decision. Do I live under Lisbon and a European federation, do I follow the UKIP trail, do I emigrate, or do I get the guns out? Let us hope that this is a nightmare that won’t happen.
JimF Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 5:02 pm
You really are a patient soul! Surely better for us all to drag the Tory leadership kicking and screaming into a referendum right now!
Lindsay McDougall Reply:
December 5th, 2009 at 12:17 am
JimF: By what mechanism can we all drag the Tory leadership kicking and screaming into a referendum right now? We live in a parliamentary democracy, and it is only Tory MPs who can do this. I suppose that if the next opinion poll were to show a 20% transfer in voting intentions from the Conservatives to UKIP, the leadership might react. But it hasn’t happened.
I can’t help feeling that Brown knew that UK Ltd. was going to blow up financially, and that what he thinks he has really done is to hand that poisoned chalice to a) the Tories, and b) the EU.
By getting the EU to regulate the City, he prevents a return to sensible regulation, and thus he can snipe from his retirement about Tory failure to revive the City. Meantime, the City has now but one bear hour to live as the Faustian pact to create enormous financial bubbles of economic illusion in return for large bonuses reaches payback time.
Yeah but they got one up on the Tories.
Smart arses the bloody lot of them……stupid one’s at that.
PS.
Now can we have our referendum?
Please!
We know that the EU has been a disaster for our fishing industry, our agricultural sector, and now it’s going for the hat-trick by wiping out the City of London as a world financial centre.
So Mr Redwood, why do the Conservatives insist that we stay members of this organisation? Why does your party insist that membership is good for British business, despite the mounting evidence to the contrary?
Could you explain to us what benefits will be attained by our continued membership of this pan-European government, why these benefits cannot be attained outside the EU, and by how much these benefits outweigh all of the obvious disadvantages? And, if you cannot or will not explain any of this because you secretly agree with me, then why don’t you say so?
There’s no point in complaining about the EU if you regard membership as sacrosanct, as David Cameron obviously does. But then again, he’s also a cheerleader for the Anthropologic Global Warming creed, which in the light of ClimateGate, only goes to show that he is immune to logic and reason. Your party is seeking government next year. It’s up to you to sort this mess out, not sit back and blame your predecessors. Give us a positive reason to vote for you.
Reply: Don’t blame me – I voted “No” in 1975. I thought then membership of the EEC would be an expensive mistake for the UK. The British people told me I was wrong, and since then I have worked for membership of a single market which is what I think they wanted.
David Hannah Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 8:10 pm
I’m not blaming you Mr Redwood, I’m blaming your party, or more specifically, your party’s leadership. You must know that the Common Market for which the people voted for is no longer on offer. Thus, one must have a credible position: either one is in favour of EU membership (and one must accept its conditions however damaging) or one is not in favour of membership under these conditions. Never mind 1975. Where do you stand now? Do you think we would be better off out?
It simply won’t do to be in favour of European Union that doesn’t exist, and is not on offer.
Well, if the City are finally unhappy about the EU then maybe we’ll get some strong lobbying for an In/Out referendum. Lisbon has been in force for two days and already Brussels is taking away our sovereign rights. How many will they have taken by the time of the election?
I’m all for the ‘repatriation of powers’ idea from the Conservatives, but I can tell you now it won’t work. Brussels didn’t fight tooth and nail to force Lisbon through only to give away it’s hard won powers. No no, thanks to Labour we are going to have to do this the hard way.
The only legal way out is through the route laid out in Lisbon. The only question is, how long until we get to decide?
I thought the EU may have waited until after the election to start the power grab. Wouldn’t want to frighten the voters into the arms of UKIP or the BNP would they? It’s only day 2 and they’ve started already. Let’s hope we see some even more high profile interference from the EU before the election so voters may be warned of the true nature of the beast.
Given that the EU costs us billions every year to subsidize foreign farmers, fishermen and bureaucrats plus uncounted billions more in complying with all it’s ridiculous laws can anyone give me any good reason to belong to it?
SJB Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Here are fifty reasons.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/so-what-has-europe-ever-done-for-us-apart-from-441138.html
Northern Ireland costs us (on the mainland) £8 billion a year. What benefits do we received from that subsidy?
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2008/03/owen-paterson-m.html
(see 18th March entry)
Mark Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 8:04 pm
What is interesting about that list – published in 2007 before the financial crisis hit – is how many of the reasons now are reasons NOT to be in Europe, with many others now being of dubious value. Things change, and will again.
Well, I’ve read through all 50 of them and where should I start. Virtually all of the improvements that affect the UK could have been done quicker, cheaper and more efficiently by an autonomous UK government.
Some are changes to legislation that we wouldn’t have been inflicted with in the first place if we were not in the EU.
Some are good for other countries but paid for by us.
As for the usual PR of making war unthinkable, utter drivel. Does anyone think we would be at war with France or Germany if it wasn’t for the EU? If they mean smaller countries fighting they’ve glossed over the Balkans.
Another good one is “a counterweight to the US and China- oh yes they’ve certainly kept them in their place haven’t they? Washington and Bejing probably lose loads of sleep worrying what a bunch of squabbling eurocrats and euro politicians are going to say about them.
As for the laughable “British restaurants are more cosmoplitan because of European influence” I’m really put in my place. Well worth the destruction of the UK fishing fleet, ruination of UK farming, loss of sovereignty and hundreds of billions of pounds paid out to subsidize foreign industries.
Sorry if that’s the 50 best reasons to be in the EU I’d sooner live in Belize- oh and before anyone says it I can’t leave the UK because 1. my money went up in smoke in Gordons property bubble, 2. my family is here. However if someone wants to donate a wedge of cash to get me started I’ll sort problem no 2.
We don’t own our Banking Industry anyway, the misleadingly named Bank of England is a Private Company, just like the US Federal Reserve.
Reply: It is 100% owned by the Treasury for taxpayers.