When will the UK rejoin the EU?

[1902 1,167]

Just now, littleyellowbirdie said:

When an EU army eventually happens, it will likely happen on the same basis that occurred with the Eurozone: That any member countries that objected would be given indefinite leave to not participate, and maybe other concessions elsewhere in order to gain unanimous approval. 

Ok, now we are into highly hypothetical situations about a future which is many years from now, not even 2016. Which is a fairly pointless debate.

My point was, Junker was not a significant figure in the decision that would have led to that, no commission president is. Even if he is 'a major figure', which on this subject he really isn't, it was not feasibly going to happen in any form of foreseeable timeframe due to the huge checks that exist that would have made it implausible.

The chance of the UK being dragged into an EU army, I suppose technically existed, but even a casual look at EU politics, the institutional setup and the legal frontiers that would need to be crossed would show that it was implausibly small. Even more so given the UKs hostility to the idea. I could easily argue its as large a risk today as it was then.

That's why I think it's disingenuous for a well informed poster to bring it up as a possibility based on the quote of Junker about something he had no influence over.

 

[1902 1,167]

8 minutes ago, Baracouda said:

Maybe we wont, maybe the EU would have gone in a different direction should 'remain' would have won. 

Personally, I thought 'remain' was going to win by a good 20-25 points, and whilst being a third party to other conversations in the office, it was clear many didn't really know what they were voting on. Personally, I thought the whole process was a joke, there was no real clear this is what you are voting on, and this is what your getting if you leave. But hey that's modern day Politicians. 

Bit like the first Scottish vote, but you get to keep the pound just with no fiscal or monetary controls on it. So all good then. 

Fair enough. Can't really argue with that.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

16 minutes ago, 1902 said:

Ok, now we are into highly hypothetical situations about a future which is many years from now, not even 2016. Which is a fairly pointless debate.

My point was, Junker was not a significant figure in the decision that would have led to that, no commission president is. Even if he is 'a major figure', which on this subject he really isn't, it was not feasibly going to happen in any form of foreseeable timeframe due to the huge checks that exist that would have made it implausible.

The chance of the UK being dragged into an EU army, I suppose technically existed, but even a casual look at EU politics, the institutional setup and the legal frontiers that would need to be crossed would show that it was implausibly small. Even more so given the UKs hostility to the idea. I could easily argue its as large a risk today as it was then.

That's why I think it's disingenuous for a well informed poster to bring it up as a possibility based on the quote of Junker about something he had no influence over.

 

I'm talking about ways it could come to fruition based on approaches the EU has taken towards introducing new big ideas in the past that have been raised as aspirations by leading figures from the EU commission and politicians from member states... such as the Euro, which was an aspiration that became a reality in spite of how unlikely it was (and stupid as it turns out). 

If Jean-Claude Juncker is making speeches on the subject then it means that he wants people to be talking about it and getting used to the idea that it could happen with a view to building support for the idea to make it happen. 

My basic point is that to dismiss the obvious existence of political will for the idea in the EU with 'it's a myth/speculation/it'll never happen' is itself unsupportable speculation and dishonest; it'd be far better to actually explore the idea, but then you inevitably come to the conclusion that to have a common EU you army, you also need an elected EU President, in which case the EU has become a federation. 

 

Edited July 5, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

@1902, just a couple more thoughts: 

• Biden's first response to appease france after the reaction to AUKUS was to give vocal support to the concept of an EU army, which is something that Macron is passionately in favour of. 
• The Russia/Ukraine war has put defence right at the top of the European agenda; both the EU and top member states are very clearly frustrated that the main running over, what is primarily a European defense concern, is being made by the US rather than the EU, which is because the main defence apparatus to collectively deter Russia is US-led. https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/03/20/is-an-eu-army-coming/

[Herman 9,765]

6 hours ago, Baracouda said:

Maybe we wont, maybe the EU would have gone in a different direction should 'remain' would have won. 

Personally, I thought 'remain' was going to win by a good 20-25 points, and whilst being a third party to other conversations in the office, it was clear many didn't really know what they were voting on. Personally, I thought the whole process was a joke, there was no real clear this is what you are voting on, and this is what your getting if you leave. But hey that's modern day Politicians. 

Bit like the first Scottish vote, but you get to keep the pound just with no fiscal or monetary controls on it. So all good then. 

The remain side was very poorly handled and none of the positives of EU membership was put front and centre. Although now proven mostly to be correct, putting a negative case for leaving as the main thrust was a conservative election tactic that failed miserably. It didn't help having universally disliked characters, Cameron and Osborn, heading said campaign. The jig was up when Johnson decided to put his career ahead of everything else and join the leave campaign.

[Herman 9,765]

6 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I'm talking about ways it could come to fruition based on approaches the EU has taken towards introducing new big ideas in the past that have been raised as aspirations by leading figures from the EU commission and politicians from member states... such as the Euro, which was an aspiration that became a reality in spite of how unlikely it was (and stupid as it turns out). 

If Jean-Claude Juncker is making speeches on the subject then it means that he wants people to be talking about it and getting used to the idea that it could happen with a view to building support for the idea to make it happen. 

My basic point is that to dismiss the obvious existence of political will for the idea in the EU with 'it's a myth/speculation/it'll never happen' is itself unsupportable speculation and dishonest; it'd be far better to actually explore the idea, but then you inevitably come to the conclusion that to have a common EU you army, you also need an elected EU President, in which case the EU has become a federation. 

 

What you are doing is making a case for leaving the EU 6 years after leaving the EU, using a dollop of hindsight and a smidge of what haves. What we are saying is that one of the reasons sold to the people for leaving was a complete nonsense, "project fear" so to speak.

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

9 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Quite! The sensible choice, given the paucity of talent, would be Hunt. But he doesn’t count as a true believer, and it would require a screeching u-turn for the hardline Brexiters/low-tax zealots to back him.

Exactly, seems incredible really when you think back to his stints at both Culture and then Health but I've thoughht for a good while now that he is actually the 'best' option they've got.

But as you say, given that the nutters amongst the Tory MPs seem to considerably outnumber those who have any common sense or integrity then his chances look slim.

[1902 1,167]

9 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I'm talking about ways it could come to fruition based on approaches the EU has taken towards introducing new big ideas in the past that have been raised as aspirations by leading figures from the EU commission and politicians from member states... such as the Euro, which was an aspiration that became a reality in spite of how unlikely it was (and stupid as it turns out). 

If Jean-Claude Juncker is making speeches on the subject then it means that he wants people to be talking about it and getting used to the idea that it could happen with a view to building support for the idea to make it happen. 

My basic point is that to dismiss the obvious existence of political will for the idea in the EU with 'it's a myth/speculation/it'll never happen' is itself unsupportable speculation and dishonest; it'd be far better to actually explore the idea, but then you inevitably come to the conclusion that to have a common EU you army, you also need an elected EU President, in which case the EU has become a federation. 

 

Fair enough, I suppose but I don't think that was the original Intention of your posta.

For example, in your original posts you made out that Junker was a very significant figure in this form of debate. He wasn't. He was always characterised as the voice of the EU in the British press because the EU is misunderstood and as a massive europhile/political moron (not saying those are linked, but in his case they are) he served their interests.

Totally agree about an EU army meaning a true EU executive, otherwise the whole idea doesn't even begin to function. Who would even be the commander in chief of such a force?

Macrons support for it is baffling really, but it's partly because he doesn't actually sum up what he means by that. It could mean, joint procurement and organised for the defense of the EU with a command structure based on it with a separate national force for exterior missions, or it could mean a proper integrated force. Despite this, it's still a non starter for the moment.

Edited July 6, 2022 by 1902

[Yellow Fever 3,785]

1 hour ago, 1902 said:

Fair enough, I suppose but I don't think that was the original Intention of your posta.

For example, in your original posts you made out that Junker was a very significant figure in this form of debate. He wasn't. He was always characterised as the voice of the EU in the British press because the EU is misunderstood and as a massive europhile/political moron (not saying those are linked, but in his case they are) he served their interests.

Totally agree about an EU army meaning a true EU executive, otherwise the whole idea doesn't even begin to function. Who would even be the commander in chief of such a force?

Macrons support for it is baffling really, but it's partly because he doesn't actually sum up what he means by that. It could mean, joint procurement and organised for the defense of the EU with a command structure based on it with a separate national force for exterior missions, or it could mean a proper integrated force. Despite this, it's still a non starter for the moment.

There were thoughts as to an EU 'peacekeeping' or small expeditionary force if I recall to help with local European issues / flareups. That's a very long way from an EU army and in itself not bad idea. Some people already forget that we 'shared' a French aircraft carrier for a while (sacré bleu)! 

As to the rest totally agree with you - most of the anti EU stuff is ill informed what iffs and forgets our vetoes or agreement that would be needed as well as all the others to any major initiatives. People can of course always propose anything - I would like to remove the monarchy etc. I could easily make exactly the same kind of what-iffs as to LYB 'CPTTP' -  China has applied to join .... and so on. 

[Yellow Fever 3,785]

19 hours ago, ricardo said:

This is why having soveriegn control over your own currency matters and why in my opinion Brexit, despite the difficulties, was the only solution.

I know I'm in a minority on that score but I think this will eventually be the fundamental failure for the Euro. The only surprise is that they have been able to fudge it for this length of time.

Just came back to this - here's some reading for you as to why STG is weak. Part of it is the 'Brexit' policies and lack of growth. As I keep saying if you want the economy to improve stop digging elephant traps for it - and digging deeper & deeper Brexit holes is the first thing to stop doing all under our own control. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62053700

Pound slides to two-year low against the dollar.

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

14 hours ago, Baracouda said:

we did and left

Not the EU. We could veto talks when we were members. Now we can't do anything. Our influence, which was wishy washy after Thatcher, is now non existent.

[ricardo 7,395]

No Brexit reversal, no SM or CU and a boost to defence spending. You can now safely vote Labour and get Tory policies. Can't see the left being happy for long👍

[ricardo 7,395]

32 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Just came back to this - here's some reading for you as to why STG is weak. Part of it is the 'Brexit' policies and lack of growth. As I keep saying if you want the economy to improve stop digging elephant traps for it - and digging deeper & deeper Brexit holes is the first thing to stop doing all under our own control. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62053700

Pound slides to two-year low against the dollar.

 

Euro slides to twenty year low against the dollar

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-05/euro-falls-to-lowest-since-2002-against-the-us-dollar

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

3 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

There were thoughts as to an EU 'peacekeeping' or small expeditionary force if I recall to help with local European issues / flareups. That's a very long way from an EU army and in itself not bad idea. Some people already forget that we 'shared' a French aircraft carrier for a while (sacré bleu)! 

As to the rest totally agree with you - most of the anti EU stuff is ill informed what iffs and forgets our vetoes or agreement that would be needed as well as all the others to any major initiatives. People can of course always propose anything - I would like to remove the monarchy etc. I could easily make exactly the same kind of what-iffs as to LYB 'CPTTP' -  China has applied to join .... and so on. 

China has applied to join CPTPP, and personally I find the what ifs on that subject just as interesting as I do what ifs on the evolution of the EU. I guess that's the difference between being interested in open-minded discussion rather than narrow-minded tub-thumping .

[Yellow Fever 3,785]

12 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Euro slides to twenty year low against the dollar

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-05/euro-falls-to-lowest-since-2002-against-the-us-dollar

 

But we know the reasons why the Euro is currently struggling (hint over reliance on Russian gas - caused by domestic issues in Germany, Italy etc).

Whereas we certainly have many of these pressures we can't help but it seem shoot ourselves in the other foot as well for good measure. Simply we should be doing a lot lot better.

  

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

On 05/07/2022 at 13:44, ricardo said:

Continued wishful thinking. CU and SM membership won't  happen in any conceivable time frame.

Well that time frame has just shortened by at least two years with the removal of the first and major obstacle to the UK starting a sensible re-engagement with the EU.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

48 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Well that time frame has just shortened by at least two years with the removal of the first and major obstacle to the UK starting a sensible re-engagement with the EU.

I haven't checked for the last few hours but didn't the pound rise today on the news of Bojo the Charlatan's defenestration?

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

5 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I haven't checked for the last few hours but didn't the pound rise today on the news of Bojo the Charlatan's defenestration?

Funnily enough, it has strengthened considerably today against both the dollar and the Euro 😀

[Yellow Fever 3,785]

 

45 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I haven't checked for the last few hours but didn't the pound rise today on the news of Bojo the Charlatan's defenestration?

 

37 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Funnily enough, it has strengthened considerably today against both the dollar and the Euro 😀

 

Just think how high it would go if we defenestrated a Tory Brexiteer every day ....

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

On 05/07/2022 at 23:21, PurpleCanary said:

Quite! The sensible choice, given the paucity of talent, would be Hunt. But he doesn’t count as a true believer, and it would require a screeching u-turn for the hardline Brexiters/low-tax zealots to back him.

I'm sure most of us today are feeling a mixture of delight at Johnson's well deserved demise and disppointment that he won't, after all, be switching voters, including Tory loyalists, over to the opposition right up until the next GE.

However as you rightly point out, there is every chance that the Tories will elect another complete donkey who will carry on Johnson's work in switching off people from voting Tory.

Even if they do make a sensible choice of leader, as a party it is hard to see them producing any real answers to the multiple crises the country faces. This is just one example ( https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62079052 ) of an issue where any Tory leader is now going to struggle to get the whole party behind any attempt to dig themselves out the very deep electoral hole they now find themselves.

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

5 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

 

 

 

Just think how high it would go if we defenestrated a Tory Brexiteer every day ....

Quite, especially if we prioritised Brexiteers for defenestration who think it is both acceptable and a smart move to break international treaties - those should definitely go first and from the top floor!

[ricardo 7,395]

2 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Funnily enough, it has strengthened considerably today against both the dollar and the Euro 😀

Who would have guessed.

Edited July 7, 2022 by ricardo

[Indy 3,300]

3 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

I haven't checked for the last few hours but didn't the pound rise today on the news of Bojo the Charlatan's defenestration?

Defenestration……not heard that term for a long time! Czech origin, back in the 15th century, Prague old town hall…….lot of corrupt officials thrown out of the tower window by the baying mob…….

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

2 hours ago, Indy said:

Defenestration……not heard that term for a long time! Czech origin, back in the 15th century, Prague old town hall…….lot of corrupt officials thrown out of the tower window by the baying mob…….

In that case Indy then repeated in 1618 in Prague to set off the Thirty Years’ War! The victims landed on a dung heap…

[Herman 9,765]

2 hours ago, Indy said:

Defenestration……not heard that term for a long time! Czech origin, back in the 15th century, Prague old town hall…….lot of corrupt officials thrown out of the tower window by the baying mob…….

Now I know the literal meaning of the word I will get behind it even more. Downing Street only having three storeys is a minor problem though.

[KernowCanary 214]

Our GDP going down the toilet has nothing to do with leaving the EU, it’s Covid which harmed it and Boris doing such a sh*tshow of a job at recovering from it.

You don’t need to be in the EU to be a rich country, just look at Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. Just a few of the most well off countries in the world. Even if we remained, we would still be talking about all this negative stuff because Covid did it.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

7 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Funnily enough, it has strengthened considerably today against both the dollar and the Euro 😀

That's because the markets are expecting some 110% extra proof f**k the poor Conservativism for the next two or three years. Buckle up, folks. 

[Yellow Fever 3,785]

22 minutes ago, KernowCanary said:

Our GDP going down the toilet has nothing to do with leaving the EU, it’s Covid which harmed it and Boris doing such a sh*tshow of a job at recovering from it.

You don’t need to be in the EU to be a rich country, just look at Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. Just a few of the most well off countries in the world. Even if we remained, we would still be talking about all this negative stuff because Covid did it.

Norway is in effectively the SM

Switzerland is in effectivley the SM

Iceland is in the EEA and if I recall Shengen 

Yes we could be the same.

[Yellow Fever 3,785]

8 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

That's because the markets are expecting some 110% extra proof f**k the poor Conservativism for the next two or three years. Buckle up, folks. 

Perhaps the markets feel the chaos may end and we won't keep digging ever deeper holes.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

5 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Perhaps the markets feel the chaos may end and we won't keep digging ever deeper holes.

Nah. The only way this level of constant drip drip of negative press could be sustained was for those inside the Conservative party to be feeding it.

Boris was way out of step with the rest of the party regarding spending and that's why, apart from their own ambitions, those like Sunak were keen to get rid.