Britain ruled by banks? (Discuss)

Soary Stars said:
Oh, yes they were!
If they hadn't been, the EU would have been killed off by CdeG ... history but veritude lies there.
Click to expand...

If the writer is prepared to go back that far he might as well have mentioned Agincourt and the Field of The Cloth of Gold.

Seriously, perceptions in the UK about the CAP are out of date by at least ten years but this guy's are even more outdated. Export refunds have almost finished, there are no wine lakes or butter mountains, the incentives to maximise production at the expense of the environment have been removed, and the bulk of the money now goes directly into the pockets of farmers rather than being used to subsidise agro-industry. And the rules are the same for every Member State, as they always have been.

VVO, I work in Brussels as a pen pusher in the European Commission, auditing CAP expenditure, but the views I express here are entirely my own. I am no mouthpiece for Barroso, who is another joyless neoliberal. And as for Van Rompuy, I don't know any more more about him than most of us on here, in other words nothing.
 
It seems very easy for the struggling EU leaders (both elected and appointed) to use 'Cameron's demands that the British are treated specially' as a diversion from their own travails (both continentally and at home). And equally easy for the anti-Cameron press elements to jump on the bandwagon.

From what I have seen of his requirements, they were changes to policy that affected all members in such a way that the British weren't disadvantaged, rather than any requirement for special treatment. To me it is no less than any EU citizen from any country would expect of their elected representative.

It's like Ferguson blaming the referee after his players have put in a poor performance. Diversionary. The fact is that the bureaucrats once again failed to leave the summit which anything like a solution to the problem (or an acceptance that it is a problem that cannot be solved in it's current format). The markets this week have made that abundantly clear.

In truth did anyone expect anything but "more regulation" to be the EU response to any problem?
 
Grey said:
I am no mouthpiece for Barroso, who is another joyless neoliberal. And as for Van Rompuy, I don't know any more more about him than most of us on here, in other words nothing.
Click to expand...

Agree, charisma free zones both. Like someone said about another nobody, Baroness (why?) Ashton, she's gone from being unknown in her own country to being unknown right across Europe.

Know a bit about the CAP (less than you, obviously), having administered export restitution claims for a food manufacturer in the 80s/ 90s and, whilst you're right about reforms, they have taken an unconscionably long time to arrive (e.g. on sugar) and this is a consequence of the scheme's original (very pro French) architecture, which has been a massive problem for Britain over the past few decades.

Dairy is a case in point - the UK rationalised it's bloated processing facilities, a legacy of the old Milk Marketing Board, in the 80s. The French kept most/ all of theirs open through a network of subsidies for a lot longer. I recently travelled to visit a creamery in France and drove past it twice, even though it looked plausibly like one, as there was no sign anywhere of the company name. Turned out that one of the stipulations in the deal for its takeover from a farmer co-op by one of France's leading plc dairy companies was that the farmers would only continue to deliver their milk there if the company's brand was not visible. I thought this said a lot about how the French are still fairly heavily rooted in the protectionist era.
 
Last edited:
Simon Jenkins was right. The French were exempted for as long as it suited them. Thats the point he was making and it is ironic that they (as well as others) are squealing about the Uk wanting the same. Agincourt had nothing to do with the EU as it happens.

Fannie Wet and Freddie fuck or whatever they are called will long be given as an example of the dangers of socailly engineering certain markets but whilst the credit agencies were incompetent and working in an unethical Arthur Anderson manner, no bank has swallow their ratings. Just as when I conduct a credit assessment of a business, I do not automatically follow Duna nd Bradstreet's assesment (and certainly not certain otehr agencies who are clueless).

The banks were still to blame and worth remebering that far from every bank called it wrong. HSBC and to a lesser extent Barclays (correct me if im wrong) were relatively unaffected
 
Last edited:
VVO. You dont need to know the detail to know that it was a disgrace . For some posters the UK (and no one else) "acting in self interest" will always be a problem of course but perhaps we ought to move the debate onto those countries that brought about this mess, who did ratehr more than "act in self interest".

Firstly i think that Greece will exit the Eurozone next year. the numbers are simply too horrific. Who will be after that?
 
Last edited:
Oh really? So you know the full detail of all the UK's requirements last week

No you dont but you are (as ever when it come to the brits in the EU) quick enough to slag it off arent you?
 
Last edited:
You're very quick to make accusations. You smell Brit haters under every bed.

I actually thought you were replying to my question, which I will repeat. What on earth are you talking about when say "the French were exempted for as long as it suited them"?
 
Clive, you have lots of rhetoric but very little to back it up - surely it's not asking too much to leave the soundbites aside and provide some detail?
 
Why? Look it up yourself if you are unaware of the history and shambles of the CAP. it is hardly news to most. VVO's post gave details anyway

What next? A link to prove that the second world war happened or something?
 
clivex said:
Why? Look it up yourself if you are unaware of the history and shambles of the CAP. it is hardly news to most. VVO's post gave details anyway

What next? A link to prove that the second world war happened or something?
Click to expand...

You are being badly exposed here.

Either you should back up what you say, which should be quite easy, or leave the bluster alone - I don't think you're fooling anyone.
 
So you are seriously telling us that you had no idea about the overproduction of wine, butter and so on (by France especially), which was heavily subsidised by other EU nations?

and how this came about?

Thats amazing... Ok it was redressed a few years back but was hardly out of the news and a very big EU issue (the biggest for many years)

mind you can you imagine the reactions here if the UK was being subsidised massively by ireland and france say to produce huge mountains of foodstuff to be chucked away
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure what you are asking - that I am unaware of the CAP and how much it subsidised each country?!
 
Saying the French "were exempted for as long as it suited them" is one thing. Exempted from what, and by whom?

Saying French agriculture has done well out of the CAP is a different thing. Not a very surprising thing, mind you, because agriculture everywhere in EU-15 has generally done well out of it.
 
Is there no criticism from you about the massive wasteful overproduction Grey? none at all? The biggest EU scandal of them all prior to the imminent collapse of the stupidly managed euro?

Yes. In am sure that belgium and slovakia would benefit from changes to certain rules governing financial services but it is hardly as significant to them as the city is to the uk is it?

And that was the point about France and the CAP of course. Come off it. You must surely know that?

Just imagine the uk was france here and vice versa and think again eh?
 
Right so you at last acknowledge that the overproduction existed and was geared substantially to the benefit of the French. Got there. You can even mutter the words "French self interest" now ?

Because that happened does not excuse interests being skewed towwards any one nation now but no one can be under any illusion that nations are acting and have acted with strong self interest within the EU (not least the PIGS) and that any sneering at the UK (which was very xenpophobic at the start of this thread) must be seen in context as to how others have and will act
 
clivex said:
Right so you at last acknowledge that the overproduction existed and was geared substantially to the benefit of the French. Got there. You can even mutter the words "French self interest" now ?

Because that happened does not excuse interests being skewed towwards any one nation now but no one can be under any illusion that nations are acting and have acted with strong self interest within the EU (not least the PIGS) and that any sneering at the UK (which was very xenpophobic at the start of this thread) must be seen in context as to how others have and will act
Click to expand...

Don't go putting words in my mouth. Only a fool would deny there was overproduction, but it is no more. That didn't happen by accident, either. The situation was recognised and by degrees steps were taken to address it, starting more than twenty years ago. You are talking about history as if it was still current.

French agriculture has done well out of the CAP, so has agriculture in other Member States. The French were not exempted from anything by anybody, like you claimed.

Of course Member States act out of self interest. The difference here, though, is that Cameron is not committed to the future of Europe, only to a trading zone. He announced beforehand that he was going to the summit with a set of demands but nothing to give.

Taking the Conservative MEPs out of the mainstream right wing group in the Parliament and joining instead a motley group of eurosceptics, nutters and anti-semites was not a clever move, it showed that at heart he has disdain for the EU. As Angela Merkel put it, she didn't think Cameron was ever at the table.
 
You simply canlot bring yourself to acknowledge that the CAP was skewed largely to the benefit of the French can you? Something they barely hid themselves if i recall rightly? Wasnt there some boasting about it?

As i have said before (and this is easy to understand) EVERY country will be affected by financial regulation but in Slovakia it will not be quite as significant as in the City will it? Thus the same goes for the old CAP of course

And you simply cannot understand that someone had to pay for the disasterous overproduction caused by the CAP? Good for agriculture and crap for every other sector that was taxed to subsidise a pointless exercise which was geared to appease an extremely strong lobby within a strong member state

France ruled by farmers?

Lets face it, you are not going to have a pop at France for anything past or present are you? As for the Uk....


And why should Cameron be committed to anything more than a trading zone? I think quite a few of us (left or right) are quite happy not to be committed to a failed currency and a political union that couldnt manage or sort out a crap country that represented all of 2% of the EU GDP, let alone keep half an eye on the other failed states
 
Last edited:
Back
Top