The new Italian government is another nail in the EU coffin. The sooner we escape the sinking ship the better.
Have the Germans bankrupted the Italians yet ?
If they have they will soon start running out of customers to sell all those VW’s, Audi’s and Merc’s to.
Italian debts cannot be repaid, which is why the new Government wants them written off.
The eurozone debt:GDP ratio peaked in 2013/14 at 92%. It's now down to 87%. There is an international debate as to whether countries should try to pay down some of the debt or focus on growing their economies such that the debt is a smaller proportion. In 2017 the Eurozone grew by 2.5% and a reduction of debt:GDP by a very significant 2.3%.
For sure one of the partners in the Italian coalition was looking for some debt forgiveness but that isn't going to happen. For that would simply reward all of the populists and snake oil salesman who claim that solutions lie outside of the borders of a nation. Those who blame Brussels, immigrants and of course Islam for failures in their economies.
Funny how they want sovereignty but also want to bow before international markets and ask for forgiveness. Hopefully we are aware of the price for such a transaction.
No country wants nor needs to repay debts. For they roll over at low rates as long as you run your economy properly. Austerity when there are recessions is a con. Austerity for public services when the financial crisis was caused by a private sector balance sheet problems is simply conflation constructed for political reasons.
It is as yet unclear where Italian government policy will take the country but they've made remarkable progress since 2014. Reversing reforms to date is possible. A government which makes serious mistakes will quickly lose support. That's the gambit the Italian PD are playing, hoping to recover support.
Mind you, I might be inclined to wonder whether what is being recorded is an actual drop in the numbers here supporting Brexit, or the "don't knows/didn't votes" from the referendum firming up their views.
The new Italian government is another nail in the EU coffin. The sooner we escape the sinking ship the better.
Can you give us some analysis on this?
Plenty of it in the press. The Italians have lost faith in the EU. Remainers here still believe Leavers in the UK are a special case. Time for you guys to have a good look around Europe to see which way the wind is blowing.
Isn't that opinion rather than analysis. How is the new Italian govt. another nail in the EU coffin?
The new Italian government is another nail in the EU coffin. The sooner we escape the sinking ship the better.
Can you give us some analysis on this?
Plenty of it in the press. The Italians have lost faith in the EU. Remainers here still believe Leavers in the UK are a special case. Time for you guys to have a good look around Europe to see which way the wind is blowing.
Have you become an expert in Italian politics now? Or are you just regurgitating what you have read in your own choice of UK media?
I won't comment too much on Italy, a country I have always found perplexing. I would though lay claim to being (on this thread at least) a relative expert on Czech politics. As I am sure you have heard, opinion polls have shown that the Czechs are among the most Eurosceptic of all the EU27 peoples. Why that is, requires more time than most here will want to entertain. However, I do want to say that the most recent polls have shown a sharp, and entirely unexpected uptick in pro-EU sentiment. Why this might be (and whether it's a trend) is still unclear but it is notable that nearly all major politicians are in the "reform the EU" camp, not in the Czexit camp, which is populated with nutters that make Farage and Rees-Mogg look almost sane.
There may also be another factor. The Czechs generally like and admire the UK. As a result the Czech media takes a great interest in the Brexit process and faithfully reports every development, daily. No Czech with half a brain has the impression that it's all going swimmingly.
It will be indeed a great result for the EU if it can bring the UK establishment back on board-not that difficult as most of the people who run the UK never wanted to leave in the first place. This will once again show thathowever much you are against the EU and its supporters, or 'all major politicians' as you put it, that once you have joined the EU you can never leave, even if a majority of your people want to.
I am no expert on Italy, but the election result there reflected the opinion polls, that there is a profound anti-EU feeling there, particularly among young people. If you think I have misread this then do your own research and let me know where I am wrong.
And before you or anybody else accuses me of being pro Liga or Five Star, I am not. As with most of Europe, their rise reflects the loss of authority of the old pro EU parties, which is widespread.
It will be indeed a great result for the EU if it can bring the UK establishment back on board-not that difficult as most of the people who run the UK never wanted to leave in the first place. This will once again show thathowever much you are against the EU and its supporters, or 'all major politicians' as you put it, that once you have joined the EU you can never leave, even if a majority of your people want to.
I am no expert on Italy, but the election result there reflected the opinion polls, that there is a profound anti-EU feeling there, particularly among young people. If you think I have misread this then do your own research and let me know where I am wrong.
And before you or anybody else accuses me of being pro Liga or Five Star, I am not. As with most of Europe, their rise reflects the loss of authority of the old pro EU parties, which is widespread.
You want us to be swayed by the very foreigners many of your kind despise, while ignoring the feelings of the very people who will be most affected by this stupidity. And you talk to me about democracy? Why were people like you allowed to vote?
It will be indeed a great result for the EU if it can bring the UK establishment back on board-not that difficult as most of the people who run the UK never wanted to leave in the first place. This will once again show thathowever much you are against the EU and its supporters, or 'all major politicians' as you put it, that once you have joined the EU you can never leave, even if a majority of your people want to.
I am no expert on Italy, but the election result there reflected the opinion polls, that there is a profound anti-EU feeling there, particularly among young people. If you think I have misread this then do your own research and let me know where I am wrong.
And before you or anybody else accuses me of being pro Liga or Five Star, I am not. As with most of Europe, their rise reflects the loss of authority of the old pro EU parties, which is widespread.
I think you will find that if populist politicians place the blame for domestic ills squarely on the shoulders of Brussels and immigrants then it is possible to climb to 15% in the polls fairly quickly. From there some are able to climb to 30% plus and assume power in a coalition just as we saw in 1930s Germany!
However, after two years in the cabinet Johnson, Gove and Fox have delivered zero value to the British people and zero solutions in terms of the type of Brexit we will see between 2019 and 2021. Well there has been some comedic value and they have inspired the younger generation to engage in the political process but no policies. In Italy they are at the start of their journey and we will all be able to see their policies in play after 100 days as well as the opinion polls. The markets are kicking off with an increasing spread on interest rates compared to Germany, and this will test the mettle of the coalition as well as their ability to select an approach which makes sense.
Here in the UK it is not about not leaving the EU - this is a red herring invented by extreme brexiteers who simply know that they are not going to get their way. We are in no state to participate in the EU and the MEP elections will be completely crazy if somehow we stay in - petrol and matches come to mind. Rather it is about the type of Brexit which the people want. This has never been debated in a democratic context and very few wish to leave the Customs Union. Should Parliament vote membership of the CU through, thus making Fox redundant then who knows what happens after that.
What is certain is that the polls in the UK and Italy will evolve on certain key questions - we will see if the populists retain voter share once they have demonstrated what they are about.
I rarely visit this thread but pop in occasionally to check the temperature, and see if the bile from Remainers is still as bitter.
The Brexit negotiations are a shambles, largely because of weak leadership. However, given the potential looming Euro crisis, and having read the Italian perspective, anti Euro anti austerity but as a net recipient of EU subsidies, pro EU. For a different view I looked at the EU perspective. Only 8 "Northern states" have signed a formal position on resolving the Euro problem, suggesting there is not unanimity of views, surprising given the emphasis on the EU being all about shared values. I copy extracts below, with my interpretation of the Eurospeak just so you have got something to direct your bile at.
If you think the UK lacks any idea on how to achieve Brexit, it is clear the EU hasn't got a clue how to address the problems of the Euro, just read the waffle below full of aims and objectives without knowing how they will be achieved, remind you of anything?
Finance ministers from Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Sweden underline their shared views and values in the discussion on the architecture of the EMU. .......European ministers of finance discussed the future of the EMU on several occasions over the last couple of months, while Leaders exchanged thoughts in December. Discussions on the future of the EMU will continue among finance ministers in the coming months and Leaders agreed to come back to the matter in March and June. HAVEN'T GOT A SCOOBY DOO WHAT TO DO BUT WILL KEEP PRETENDING THEY ARE WORKING SOMETHING OUT
We will take the opportunity over the coming months to give a clear voice to the values we generally share: THEY KEEP QUIET ABOUT WHAT THEY DON'T AGREE ON AND DENY IT IN PUBLIC
First, we believe discussions about the future of the EMU should take place in an inclusive format. European cooperation is based on strong shared values, among others the value of inclusiveness. Unity is a key asset for the remaining EU27 and must be safeguarded. The future of the EMU (fiscal, structural, financial, institutional issues etc.) is relevant to all and should therefore be discussed and decided by all. ANY THAT DON'T AGREE WITH THE MINORITY WHO CALL THE SHOTS WILL BE WATERBOARDED UNTIL THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT DEMOCRACY MEANS
Second, a stronger EMU requires first and foremost decisive actions at the national level and full compliance with our common rules. It starts with implementing structural reforms and respecting the Stability and Growth Pact, thereby building up fiscal buffers.....The EU should make use of the strengthened fiscal, economic and financial frameworks already in place, to deliver concrete results .... ITALY CAN GO FUCK ITSELF IF IT THINKS IT CAN BORROW OR BRING BACK THE LIRE INSTEAD OF AUSTERITY
Third, we should focus on initiatives that have public support in Member States. ...it is of the essence that we do our utmost to ... regain public trust. ....For that reason the discussion ..should find a consensus on ..., priority should be given to areas with the greatest convergence of views between Member States, notably the completion of the Banking Union, and the transformation of the ESM into a European Monetary Fund. The EMU strengthening should be complemented by ....pursuing an ambitious free trade agenda....the Banking Union, should have priority over far-reaching proposals. THE PUBLIC DON'T TRUST THE EU SO ONLY TALK IN PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT THEY THINK THEY HAVE VOTED FOR, LIKE AN EU FEDERATION WITH THE CENTRAL BANK CALLING THE SHOTS. WE TAKE A LEAF FROM BREXIT AND DIVERSIFY AWAY FROM THE SINGLE MARKET AND GO FOR MORE FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS
Fourth, we are all committed to the process of completing the Banking Union. .... A next step could be to add more precision as regards to the specific steps that have to be taken. ... GERMANY IS READY TO RUN THE BANK BUT ONLY WHEN IT CONTROLS THE FISCAL POLICIES OF EU STATES INCLUDING GREECE AND ITALY AND WAYS HAVE BEEN FOUND FOR THEM TO SWALLOW THEIR OWN TOXIC DEBT
Sixth and finally, ...Structural reforms are key for strengthening the resilience and potential growth of Member States and the EU as a whole. ..structural reform could support their implementation, while targeted investments financed by the EU budget could also complement the effects of structural reforms. Such measures would need to reflect the budgetary constraints of the future EU-budget. THE EU NEEDS TO PROVIDE MORE SUBSIDIES TO REPLACE DEBT, BUT DON'T KNOW WHERE THE MONEY WILL COME FROM
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
It will be indeed a great result for the EU if it can bring the UK establishment back on board-not that difficult as most of the people who run the UK never wanted to leave in the first place. This will once again show thathowever much you are against the EU and its supporters, or 'all major politicians' as you put it, that once you have joined the EU you can never leave, even if a majority of your people want to.
I am no expert on Italy, but the election result there reflected the opinion polls, that there is a profound anti-EU feeling there, particularly among young people. If you think I have misread this then do your own research and let me know where I am wrong.
And before you or anybody else accuses me of being pro Liga or Five Star, I am not. As with most of Europe, their rise reflects the loss of authority of the old pro EU parties, which is widespread.
You want us to be swayed by the very foreigners many of your kind despise, while ignoring the feelings of the very people who will be most affected by this stupidity. And you talk to me about democracy? Why were people like you allowed to vote?
I do not expect you to be swayed by anything, given you are resistant to facts. Italians, including the youth there no longer like the EU apparently. This is not my opinion. Do your own research if you disbelieve me.
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Sadly for them the EU is irreformable, as Cameron discovered.
I rarely visit this thread but pop in occasionally to check the temperature, and see if the bile from Remainers is still as bitter.
The Brexit negotiations are a shambles, largely because of weak leadership. However, given the potential looming Euro crisis, and having read the Italian perspective, anti Euro anti austerity but as a net recipient of EU subsidies, pro EU. For a different view I looked at the EU perspective. Only 8 "Northern states" have signed a formal position on resolving the Euro problem, suggesting there is not unanimity of views, surprising given the emphasis on the EU being all about shared values. I copy extracts below, with my interpretation of the Eurospeak just so you have got something to direct your bile at.
If you think the UK lacks any idea on how to achieve Brexit, it is clear the EU hasn't got a clue how to address the problems of the Euro, just read the waffle below full of aims and objectives without knowing how they will be achieved, remind you of anything?
Finance ministers from Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Sweden underline their shared views and values in the discussion on the architecture of the EMU. .......European ministers of finance discussed the future of the EMU on several occasions over the last couple of months, while Leaders exchanged thoughts in December. Discussions on the future of the EMU will continue among finance ministers in the coming months and Leaders agreed to come back to the matter in March and June. HAVEN'T GOT A SCOOBY DOO WHAT TO DO BUT WILL KEEP PRETENDING THEY ARE WORKING SOMETHING OUT
We will take the opportunity over the coming months to give a clear voice to the values we generally share: THEY KEEP QUIET ABOUT WHAT THEY DON'T AGREE ON AND DENY IT IN PUBLIC
First, we believe discussions about the future of the EMU should take place in an inclusive format. European cooperation is based on strong shared values, among others the value of inclusiveness. Unity is a key asset for the remaining EU27 and must be safeguarded. The future of the EMU (fiscal, structural, financial, institutional issues etc.) is relevant to all and should therefore be discussed and decided by all. ANY THAT DON'T AGREE WITH THE MINORITY WHO CALL THE SHOTS WILL BE WATERBOARDED UNTIL THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT DEMOCRACY MEANS
Second, a stronger EMU requires first and foremost decisive actions at the national level and full compliance with our common rules. It starts with implementing structural reforms and respecting the Stability and Growth Pact, thereby building up fiscal buffers.....The EU should make use of the strengthened fiscal, economic and financial frameworks already in place, to deliver concrete results .... ITALY CAN GO FUCK ITSELF IF IT THINKS IT CAN BORROW OR BRING BACK THE LIRE INSTEAD OF AUSTERITY
Third, we should focus on initiatives that have public support in Member States. ...it is of the essence that we do our utmost to ... regain public trust. ....For that reason the discussion ..should find a consensus on ..., priority should be given to areas with the greatest convergence of views between Member States, notably the completion of the Banking Union, and the transformation of the ESM into a European Monetary Fund. The EMU strengthening should be complemented by ....pursuing an ambitious free trade agenda....the Banking Union, should have priority over far-reaching proposals. THE PUBLIC DON'T TRUST THE EU SO ONLY TALK IN PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT THEY THINK THEY HAVE VOTED FOR, LIKE AN EU FEDERATION WITH THE CENTRAL BANK CALLING THE SHOTS. WE TAKE A LEAF FROM BREXIT AND DIVERSIFY AWAY FROM THE SINGLE MARKET AND GO FOR MORE FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS
Fourth, we are all committed to the process of completing the Banking Union. .... A next step could be to add more precision as regards to the specific steps that have to be taken. ... GERMANY IS READY TO RUN THE BANK BUT ONLY WHEN IT CONTROLS THE FISCAL POLICIES OF EU STATES INCLUDING GREECE AND ITALY AND WAYS HAVE BEEN FOUND FOR THEM TO SWALLOW THEIR OWN TOXIC DEBT
Sixth and finally, ...Structural reforms are key for strengthening the resilience and potential growth of Member States and the EU as a whole. ..structural reform could support their implementation, while targeted investments financed by the EU budget could also complement the effects of structural reforms. Such measures would need to reflect the budgetary constraints of the future EU-budget. THE EU NEEDS TO PROVIDE MORE SUBSIDIES TO REPLACE DEBT, BUT DON'T KNOW WHERE THE MONEY WILL COME FROM
Very good Dippenhal, but it will have no impact on the EU fanboys. They will defend the EU while it sinks beneath their feet. Any critic is seen by them as wearing a Farage mask, despite the tens of millions across Europe voting for eurosceptic parties.
Surprised those of you who mainly gain your world view from one source havent mentioned this piece, broadly supporting Southbanks post.
Grauniad March 11th As one EU headache subsides in Germany, another starts in Italy
While the Germans have a government at last, Italy’s right turn will add to the EU’s problems
It took barely 12 hours for a collective sigh of relief to turn into a collective intake of breath; less than a day for smiles of European satisfaction to be transformed into frowns of European concern.
At 10.30am on Sunday in Berlin, Germany’s centre-left SPD announced that on a turnout of 72%, more than two in three of its members had voted to approve a fresh GroKo, or grand coalition, with the centre-right CDU and its Bavarian CSU sister party. Their decision ended five months of political uncertainty in Berlin, clearing the way for chancellor Angela Merkel to form her fourth government and move forward on a range of fronts – including ambitious plans for EU and eurozone reform pushed by France’s pro-European president, Emmanuel Macron.
But shortly after 10pm in Rome, early exit polls from Italy’s general election suggested that just as one big EU member state and major eurozone economy was emerging from political stalemate, another was about to enter it.
In delivering a horrendously hung parliament, Italy’s voters had also turned their back on their mainstream ruling parties, with a majority backing populist, anti-establishment, hard-right and broadly EU-critical candidates.
Show The poor showing by Silvio Berlusconi’s centre-right Forza Italia and Matteo Renzi’s Democratic party may be no surprise given Italy’s two decades of stagnation (its economy remains 6% smaller than in 2008, with unemployment stuck at 11%) and the migration crisis: more than 600,000 irregular migrants have arrived since 2014.
But the fact that the insurgent Five Star Movement finished as the country’s biggest party by far, and the anti-immigration La Lega as the strongest force on the right, raises questions not just about Italy’s capacity to pursue domestic reforms, but also its inclination to play any part in planned closer EU and eurozone integration.
Italy’s angry, fed-up voters rejected the path of economic modernisation and broad eurozone compliance followed by successive Italian governments since the financial and economic crisis, opting instead for parties whose generous campaign promises – a flat tax rate, a universal income, early retirement – would set them on a collision course with Europe’s budget constraints.
Germany and France may choose to push ahead without Italy’s support, or they may decide the new environment makes that untenable. “An unstable, Eurosceptic Italy could well put the brakes on Franco-German plans,” said Charles Grant, co-founder of thinktank the Centre for European Reform.
But Sunday’s two votes are also a reminder, after a year of electoral scares in the Netherlands, France and Austria, that the challenge to the EU’s centre-right and centre-left establishment parties from populists on both the far right and the far left is far from over.
Following its worst electoral performance since 1949, Germany’s SPD – which has lost more than half its voters in the past 15 years – agonised over whether to support another GroKo. Many members felt it risked strengthening the far right AfD, which now becomes the country’s largest opposition party.
In the end, the fear of an even worse defeat in the event of a snap election produced a strong majority for a new coalition. But many members of Merkel’s far-from-flourishing CDU have reservations too, worried the concessions she has had to make weaken her authority and alienate centre-right voters.
As the centre retreats and politics fragment across the EU, the birth pains of Germany’s new coalition and Italy’s messy election show that unless mainstream parties can regain voters’ trust by responding to their real concerns – immigration, identity, economic inequality, unemployment, out-of-touch elites – the joint European project they built faces an increasingly rough ride.
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Sadly for them the EU is irreformable, as Cameron discovered.
I try to avoid this thread like the plague. But if it was possible to reform the EU from within then surely when Cameron was negotiating they would have offered him something rather than run the risk of us leaving. The fact that they gave him fuck all shows just how hard it is to reform from within.
It will be indeed a great result for the EU if it can bring the UK establishment back on board-not that difficult as most of the people who run the UK never wanted to leave in the first place. This will once again show thathowever much you are against the EU and its supporters, or 'all major politicians' as you put it, that once you have joined the EU you can never leave, even if a majority of your people want to.
I am no expert on Italy, but the election result there reflected the opinion polls, that there is a profound anti-EU feeling there, particularly among young people. If you think I have misread this then do your own research and let me know where I am wrong.
And before you or anybody else accuses me of being pro Liga or Five Star, I am not. As with most of Europe, their rise reflects the loss of authority of the old pro EU parties, which is widespread.
You want us to be swayed by the very foreigners many of your kind despise, while ignoring the feelings of the very people who will be most affected by this stupidity. And you talk to me about democracy? Why were people like you allowed to vote?
I do not expect you to be swayed by anything, given you are resistant to facts. Italians, including the youth there no longer like the EU apparently. This is not my opinion. Do your own research if you disbelieve me.
How can you say 'apparently' and then call it a 'fact' and say it is not an opinion?
All I can think to say to the leavers is OK, leave, the vote is done and over. You can spend forever going on about the Euro and Italy, but that is all the past now. Explain the future. Simply tell us the solution to the Irish land border, and any other ideas you have might have greater credibility. I am all ears for the good bits.
I expect there will be some reform and it is clear there are many people in countries who are not happy with the EU, or possibly it's that there are political parties who are able to get people to channel their anger about things in their lives towards the EU.
That is very different to the EU itself being on the verge of imminent collapse though: having lived and worked in two EU countries as well as having friends living in various EU countries I can say it is so embedded into everyday life that people can't really imagine or would want to be out of it. Certainly here at least, Brexit has actually caused most people to become more pro-EU as they react against the perceived isolationism of the British vote which is seen as part of the bigger picture of Trump/Le Pen etc which the EU can easily position itself against.
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Sadly for them the EU is irreformable, as Cameron discovered.
I try to avoid this thread like the plague. But if it was possible to reform the EU from within then surely when Cameron was negotiating they would have offered him something rather than run the risk of us leaving. The fact that they gave him fuck all shows just how hard it is to reform from within.
This is a little bit like deja vu all over again.
The EU constantly reforms itself, major reforms require Treaty change (hence Maastricht, Lisbon, etc.). The changes that many Leavers complained of, give the lie to the idea that it cannot be changed.
The problem with Cameron is that he set out to achieve major reform, of the four freedoms that underpin the EU, without Treaty change. He wanted to gain such change on a nod and wink, and in an unreasonably short time frame.
The other members did offer him something, but, hubris being what it is, Cameron had set himself up for failure by ignorance (IMHO wilful) of the fundamental principles of the EU.
He might as well have promised that he would receive a Lamborghini for each of us after a little after dinner chat with EU 27 leaders. (it may even have been more achievable, although it would have meant a tractor each).
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Sadly for them the EU is irreformable, as Cameron discovered.
I try to avoid this thread like the plague. But if it was possible to reform the EU from within then surely when Cameron was negotiating they would have offered him something rather than run the risk of us leaving. The fact that they gave him fuck all shows just how hard it is to reform from within.
This is a little bit like deja vu all over again.
The EU constantly reforms itself, major reforms require Treaty change (hence Maastricht, Lisbon, etc.). The changes that many Leavers complained of, give the lie to the idea that it cannot be changed.
The problem with Cameron is that he set out to achieve major reform, of the four freedoms that underpin the EU, without Treaty change. He wanted to gain such change on a nod and wink, and in am unreasonably short time frame.
The other members did offer him something, but, hubris being what it is, Cameron had set himself up for failure by ignorance (IMHO wilful) of the fundamental principles of the EU.
He might as well have promised that he would receive a Lamborghini for each of us after a little after dinner chat with EU 27 leaders. (it may even have been more achievable, although it would have meant a tractor each).
You mention the four freedoms. Without changing them there really isn't any reform. And the EU refuses to change them. In other words no reform.
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Sadly for them the EU is irreformable, as Cameron discovered.
I try to avoid this thread like the plague. But if it was possible to reform the EU from within then surely when Cameron was negotiating they would have offered him something rather than run the risk of us leaving. The fact that they gave him fuck all shows just how hard it is to reform from within.
This is a little bit like deja vu all over again.
The EU constantly reforms itself, major reforms require Treaty change (hence Maastricht, Lisbon, etc.). The changes that many Leavers complained of, give the lie to the idea that it cannot be changed.
The problem with Cameron is that he set out to achieve major reform, of the four freedoms that underpin the EU, without Treaty change. He wanted to gain such change on a nod and wink, and in am unreasonably short time frame.
The other members did offer him something, but, hubris being what it is, Cameron had set himself up for failure by ignorance (IMHO wilful) of the fundamental principles of the EU.
He might as well have promised that he would receive a Lamborghini for each of us after a little after dinner chat with EU 27 leaders. (it may even have been more achievable, although it would have meant a tractor each).
You mention the four freedoms. Without changing them there really isn't any reform. And the EU refuses to change them. In other words no reform.
There have been, are, and will be lots of reforms in the EU (such as the fact that it is the EU, and has moved on from the original Treaty of Rome).
Every new Treaty amends/changes what went before.
As the EU is a rules-based organisation, for which agreement on the rules is crucial, the only way to amend the rules is to work together and agree something that will be of benefit to all members.
We don't know what the other member states would or would not have been willing to negotiate in terms of Treaty change, because the UK didn't even try.
Instead, we had a Prime Minister who tried to (in diplomatic terms) peremptorily change the terms of membership for the UK alone, with no real concern beyond his own short-term calculations.
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Sadly for them the EU is irreformable, as Cameron discovered.
I try to avoid this thread like the plague. But if it was possible to reform the EU from within then surely when Cameron was negotiating they would have offered him something rather than run the risk of us leaving. The fact that they gave him fuck all shows just how hard it is to reform from within.
This is a little bit like deja vu all over again.
The EU constantly reforms itself, major reforms require Treaty change (hence Maastricht, Lisbon, etc.). The changes that many Leavers complained of, give the lie to the idea that it cannot be changed.
The problem with Cameron is that he set out to achieve major reform, of the four freedoms that underpin the EU, without Treaty change. He wanted to gain such change on a nod and wink, and in am unreasonably short time frame.
The other members did offer him something, but, hubris being what it is, Cameron had set himself up for failure by ignorance (IMHO wilful) of the fundamental principles of the EU.
He might as well have promised that he would receive a Lamborghini for each of us after a little after dinner chat with EU 27 leaders. (it may even have been more achievable, although it would have meant a tractor each).
You mention the four freedoms. Without changing them there really isn't any reform. And the EU refuses to change them. In other words no reform.
There have been, are, and will be lots of reforms in the EU (such as the fact that it is the EU, and has moved on from the original Treaty of Rome).
Every new Treaty amends/changes what went before.
As the EU is a rules-based organisation, for which agreement on the rules is crucial, Tue only way to amend the rules is to work together and agree something that will be of benefit to all members.
We don't know what the other member states would or would not have been willing to negotiate in terms of Treaty change, because the UK didn't even try.
Instead, we had a Prime Minister who tried to (in diplomatic terms) peremptorily change the terms of membership for the UK alone, with no real concern beyond his own short-term calculations.
And, even those were, frankly, delusional.
Sorry but I just can't agree.
If the EU had of offered the UK the option to leave the freedom of movement we would have voted remain. Not talking about myself I voted leave on a number of reasons. But there was a sizeable amount of voters who voted leave for this reason alone. The stupid thing about this is if and when we leave the amount of people coming to this country will probably be the same as if we had remained. But a large percentage of people who voted leave did so because of this.
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Sadly for them the EU is irreformable, as Cameron discovered.
I try to avoid this thread like the plague. But if it was possible to reform the EU from within then surely when Cameron was negotiating they would have offered him something rather than run the risk of us leaving. The fact that they gave him fuck all shows just how hard it is to reform from within.
You are not alone amongst the Leavers who now avoid this thread. It must be very painful watching this government trying to implement the fanciful notion of the Brexit you and the rest of the morons who fell for the Leave campaign's lies and nonsense, voted for, and then have to read the commentary of the unfolding disaster, entirely predicted by Remainers, on this thread.
Its painful watching you lot keep belly aching. Some of you need to grow a pair... Same old shit different day. Keep it up though, its better than live at the apollo.
You are right about the current attitude of Italian youth towards the EU. The poll you had read about is mentioned - in passing - in this article by the Centre for European Reform's Italian specialist. Happy to help mate, and I am not going to make a cheap joke about broken clocks, either :-)
However it's the only country I am aware of where the young are more eurosceptic than the old, which should tell you that Italy is a very specific case. The article reminds us of some current factors which make it special; youth unemployment especially in the South remains stubbornly high, and the migration crisis is unquestionably a factor as over 600,000 migrants arrived directly on Italian shores, and the rest of us did sod all to help them (and Greece) out. On the other hand the same article points out that 59% of Italians still favour membership of the euro and that both the Lega and 5-start rowed back their anti-euro rhetoric during the campaign (the article was written a few days before the election). Like I said, Italy perplexes me so I am not going to go out on a limb commenting on it from a position of ignorance, but feel free to carry on. This is all the help you are getting from me for a while :-)
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Sadly for them the EU is irreformable, as Cameron discovered.
I try to avoid this thread like the plague. But if it was possible to reform the EU from within then surely when Cameron was negotiating they would have offered him something rather than run the risk of us leaving. The fact that they gave him fuck all shows just how hard it is to reform from within.
This is a little bit like deja vu all over again.
The EU constantly reforms itself, major reforms require Treaty change (hence Maastricht, Lisbon, etc.). The changes that many Leavers complained of, give the lie to the idea that it cannot be changed.
The problem with Cameron is that he set out to achieve major reform, of the four freedoms that underpin the EU, without Treaty change. He wanted to gain such change on a nod and wink, and in am unreasonably short time frame.
The other members did offer him something, but, hubris being what it is, Cameron had set himself up for failure by ignorance (IMHO wilful) of the fundamental principles of the EU.
He might as well have promised that he would receive a Lamborghini for each of us after a little after dinner chat with EU 27 leaders. (it may even have been more achievable, although it would have meant a tractor each).
You mention the four freedoms. Without changing them there really isn't any reform. And the EU refuses to change them. In other words no reform.
There have been, are, and will be lots of reforms in the EU (such as the fact that it is the EU, and has moved on from the original Treaty of Rome).
Every new Treaty amends/changes what went before.
As the EU is a rules-based organisation, for which agreement on the rules is crucial, Tue only way to amend the rules is to work together and agree something that will be of benefit to all members.
We don't know what the other member states would or would not have been willing to negotiate in terms of Treaty change, because the UK didn't even try.
Instead, we had a Prime Minister who tried to (in diplomatic terms) peremptorily change the terms of membership for the UK alone, with no real concern beyond his own short-term calculations.
And, even those were, frankly, delusional.
Sorry but I just can't agree.
If the EU had of offered the UK the option to leave the freedom of movement we would have voted remain. Not talking about myself I voted leave on a number of reasons. But there was a sizeable amount of voters who voted leave for this reason alone. The stupid thing about this is if and when we leave the amount of people coming to this country will probably be the same as if we had remained. But a large percentage of people who voted leave did so because of this.
We won't agree on Brexit (which is fair enough); but I do hope that we can agree that Cameron is a dick.
All I am saying really, and it's an attack on Cameron, is that he never tried to seriously address the four freedoms.
Simply put - if they are central elements of the founding Treaty, you cannot amend them without Treaty change. And, you cannot achieve Treaty change in the period Cameron allowed.
He was dishonest with the people in claiming that he could get the deal that he said he wanted in the manner and timeframe that he chose.
I don't believe that the four freedoms would have been torn up, but it might have been possible to agree mechanisms for specific crisis situations. We won't know, because he never tried to find out.
In any event, his chances of achieving change were not helped, also, by the UK's failure to make use of the tools that were already allowed to reduce immigration pressures.
Personally speaking, if immigrants in Northern Ireland can dilute the fuckwittery of what passes for politics and society here, I'm delighted. Please feel free to take the fragrant and lovely Arlene (and her colleagues) to your hearts, and keep her there; no need to hurry about returning them...
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Sadly for them the EU is irreformable, as Cameron discovered.
I try to avoid this thread like the plague. But if it was possible to reform the EU from within then surely when Cameron was negotiating they would have offered him something rather than run the risk of us leaving. The fact that they gave him fuck all shows just how hard it is to reform from within.
This is a little bit like deja vu all over again.
The EU constantly reforms itself, major reforms require Treaty change (hence Maastricht, Lisbon, etc.). The changes that many Leavers complained of, give the lie to the idea that it cannot be changed.
The problem with Cameron is that he set out to achieve major reform, of the four freedoms that underpin the EU, without Treaty change. He wanted to gain such change on a nod and wink, and in am unreasonably short time frame.
The other members did offer him something, but, hubris being what it is, Cameron had set himself up for failure by ignorance (IMHO wilful) of the fundamental principles of the EU.
He might as well have promised that he would receive a Lamborghini for each of us after a little after dinner chat with EU 27 leaders. (it may even have been more achievable, although it would have meant a tractor each).
You mention the four freedoms. Without changing them there really isn't any reform. And the EU refuses to change them. In other words no reform.
There have been, are, and will be lots of reforms in the EU (such as the fact that it is the EU, and has moved on from the original Treaty of Rome).
Every new Treaty amends/changes what went before.
As the EU is a rules-based organisation, for which agreement on the rules is crucial, Tue only way to amend the rules is to work together and agree something that will be of benefit to all members.
We don't know what the other member states would or would not have been willing to negotiate in terms of Treaty change, because the UK didn't even try.
Instead, we had a Prime Minister who tried to (in diplomatic terms) peremptorily change the terms of membership for the UK alone, with no real concern beyond his own short-term calculations.
And, even those were, frankly, delusional.
Sorry but I just can't agree.
If the EU had of offered the UK the option to leave the freedom of movement we would have voted remain. Not talking about myself I voted leave on a number of reasons. But there was a sizeable amount of voters who voted leave for this reason alone. The stupid thing about this is if and when we leave the amount of people coming to this country will probably be the same as if we had remained. But a large percentage of people who voted leave did so because of this.
We won't agree on Brexit (which is fair enough); but I do hope that we can agree that Cameron is a dick.
All I am saying really, and it's an attack on Cameron, is that he never tried to seriously address the four freedoms.
Simply put - if they are central elements of the founding Treaty, you cannot amend them without Treaty change. And, you cannot achieve Treaty change in the period Cameron allowed.
He was dishonest with the people in claiming that he could get the deal that he said he wanted in the manner and timeframe that he chose.
I don't believe that the four freedoms would have been torn up, but it might have been possible to agree mechanisms for specific crisis situations. We won't know, because he never tried to find out.
In any event, his chances of achieving change were not helped, also, by the UK's failure to make use of the tools that were already allowed to reduce immigration pressures.
Personally speaking, if immigrants in Northern Ireland can dilute the fuckwittery of what passes for politics and society here, I'm delighted. Please feel free to take the fragrant and lovely Arlene (and her colleagues) to your hearts, and keep her there; no need to hurry about returning them...
I agree with you regarding Cameron he is an absolute plum. I think the main reason he came back with nothing is that he wanted nothing. Anyway I'm watching the cricket now ,have a nice evening mate.
It is worth noting that the situation and electoral result in Italy isn't quite as simple as a referendum on the EU.
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Sadly for them the EU is irreformable, as Cameron discovered.
I try to avoid this thread like the plague. But if it was possible to reform the EU from within then surely when Cameron was negotiating they would have offered him something rather than run the risk of us leaving. The fact that they gave him fuck all shows just how hard it is to reform from within.
This is a little bit like deja vu all over again.
The EU constantly reforms itself, major reforms require Treaty change (hence Maastricht, Lisbon, etc.). The changes that many Leavers complained of, give the lie to the idea that it cannot be changed.
The problem with Cameron is that he set out to achieve major reform, of the four freedoms that underpin the EU, without Treaty change. He wanted to gain such change on a nod and wink, and in am unreasonably short time frame.
The other members did offer him something, but, hubris being what it is, Cameron had set himself up for failure by ignorance (IMHO wilful) of the fundamental principles of the EU.
He might as well have promised that he would receive a Lamborghini for each of us after a little after dinner chat with EU 27 leaders. (it may even have been more achievable, although it would have meant a tractor each).
You mention the four freedoms. Without changing them there really isn't any reform. And the EU refuses to change them. In other words no reform.
There have been, are, and will be lots of reforms in the EU (such as the fact that it is the EU, and has moved on from the original Treaty of Rome).
Every new Treaty amends/changes what went before.
As the EU is a rules-based organisation, for which agreement on the rules is crucial, Tue only way to amend the rules is to work together and agree something that will be of benefit to all members.
We don't know what the other member states would or would not have been willing to negotiate in terms of Treaty change, because the UK didn't even try.
Instead, we had a Prime Minister who tried to (in diplomatic terms) peremptorily change the terms of membership for the UK alone, with no real concern beyond his own short-term calculations.
And, even those were, frankly, delusional.
Sorry but I just can't agree.
If the EU had of offered the UK the option to leave the freedom of movement we would have voted remain. Not talking about myself I voted leave on a number of reasons. But there was a sizeable amount of voters who voted leave for this reason alone. The stupid thing about this is if and when we leave the amount of people coming to this country will probably be the same as if we had remained. But a large percentage of people who voted leave did so because of this.
Isn't the problem though that freedom of movement will happen whether the UK leaves or remains as you say? There are more land crossing points to 'move' through between the Republic of Ireland (EU) and the now post EU United Kingdom, than the number of crossing points between the whole of the EU and it's Eastern frontier. Granted that if fences and walls and security people and whatever infrastructure was paid for and sustained along the land border with the ROI, the movement would be restricted, but that would be costly financially, and go against an international treaty that the UK signed. The Royal Wedding at the weekend brought out a lot of people saying what a great country this is, but if the country breaks it's word on an international treaty it wouldn't be able to call itself great any more, would the population go for that? Or would the population go for the 'fuggit' option, you know, say fuggit to it's obligations and do whatever it wanted from moment to moment. If control of the borders, and dealing with freedom of movement was or is a central plank of brexit, then how is it going to happen in purely practical terms?
All I can think to say to the leavers is OK, leave, the vote is done and over. You can spend forever going on about the Euro and Italy, but that is all the past now. Explain the future. Simply tell us the solution to the Irish land border, and any other ideas you have might have greater credibility. I am all ears for the good bits.
Solutions simple Seth - a single united Ireland - both sides ought to realise they have more in common than divides them. They’d fiogotten there used to be a border that the EU now wants enforced.
My father in law was a Catholic from Clonmel in the Republic and fought as a Commando in the British army with distinction. He married the daughter of an RUC officer from Omagh who pulled a pistol on him before they eloped. Neither being safe living in their own country they ended setting up home and raising their family in Charlton,
That was a different time and a different generation and Ireland has moved on, except Brexit is now being accused of liable to bring those days back. The people of Ireland should be grown up enough to take responsibility for sorting out their own back yard. Blaming the U.K. for the fact that an intellectually challenged minority would rather kill one another than live together as a result of Brexit is a denial of where the problem sits and who holds the key to a resolution - the people of Ireland.
When the U.K. or any other nation allows its foreign policies to to be dictated by speculation on what excuses it might give criminals to commit violence we might as well hand over the reins to them.
Alternatively you are simply buying another line of Project Fear and there is not a risk of Ireland allowing itself to descend into open warfare because an invisible border is enforced invisibly at the behest of the EU.
Comments
For sure one of the partners in the Italian coalition was looking for some debt forgiveness but that isn't going to happen. For that would simply reward all of the populists and snake oil salesman who claim that solutions lie outside of the borders of a nation. Those who blame Brussels, immigrants and of course Islam for failures in their economies.
Funny how they want sovereignty but also want to bow before international markets and ask for forgiveness. Hopefully we are aware of the price for such a transaction.
No country wants nor needs to repay debts. For they roll over at low rates as long as you run your economy properly. Austerity when there are recessions is a con. Austerity for public services when the financial crisis was caused by a private sector balance sheet problems is simply conflation constructed for political reasons.
It is as yet unclear where Italian government policy will take the country but they've made remarkable progress since 2014. Reversing reforms to date is possible. A government which makes serious mistakes will quickly lose support. That's the gambit the Italian PD are playing, hoping to recover support.
Mind you, I might be inclined to wonder whether what is being recorded is an actual drop in the numbers here supporting Brexit, or the "don't knows/didn't votes" from the referendum firming up their views.
Edit.
And, from The Irish Times, another Chris Johns article: https://irishtimes.com/business/economy/trust-eroded-by-uk-s-half-baked-brexit-ideas-for-the-border-1.3501924. If he is right, things could become very difficult.
I won't comment too much on Italy, a country I have always found perplexing. I would though lay claim to being (on this thread at least) a relative expert on Czech politics. As I am sure you have heard, opinion polls have shown that the Czechs are among the most Eurosceptic of all the EU27 peoples. Why that is, requires more time than most here will want to entertain. However, I do want to say that the most recent polls have shown a sharp, and entirely unexpected uptick in pro-EU sentiment. Why this might be (and whether it's a trend) is still unclear but it is notable that nearly all major politicians are in the "reform the EU" camp, not in the Czexit camp, which is populated with nutters that make Farage and Rees-Mogg look almost sane.
There may also be another factor. The Czechs generally like and admire the UK. As a result the Czech media takes a great interest in the Brexit process and faithfully reports every development, daily. No Czech with half a brain has the impression that it's all going swimmingly.
I am no expert on Italy, but the election result there reflected the opinion polls, that there is a profound anti-EU feeling there, particularly among young people. If you think I have misread this then do your own research and let me know where I am wrong.
And before you or anybody else accuses me of being pro Liga or Five Star, I am not. As with most of Europe, their rise reflects the loss of authority of the old pro EU parties, which is widespread.
You want us to be swayed by the very foreigners many of your kind despise, while ignoring the feelings of the very people who will be most affected by this stupidity. And you talk to me about democracy? Why were people like you allowed to vote?
However, after two years in the cabinet Johnson, Gove and Fox have delivered zero value to the British people and zero solutions in terms of the type of Brexit we will see between 2019 and 2021. Well there has been some comedic value and they have inspired the younger generation to engage in the political process but no policies. In Italy they are at the start of their journey and we will all be able to see their policies in play after 100 days as well as the opinion polls. The markets are kicking off with an increasing spread on interest rates compared to Germany, and this will test the mettle of the coalition as well as their ability to select an approach which makes sense.
Here in the UK it is not about not leaving the EU - this is a red herring invented by extreme brexiteers who simply know that they are not going to get their way. We are in no state to participate in the EU and the MEP elections will be completely crazy if somehow we stay in - petrol and matches come to mind. Rather it is about the type of Brexit which the people want. This has never been debated in a democratic context and very few wish to leave the Customs Union. Should Parliament vote membership of the CU through, thus making Fox redundant then who knows what happens after that.
What is certain is that the polls in the UK and Italy will evolve on certain key questions - we will see if the populists retain voter share once they have demonstrated what they are about.
The Brexit negotiations are a shambles, largely because of weak leadership. However, given the potential looming Euro crisis, and having read the Italian perspective, anti Euro anti austerity but as a net recipient of EU subsidies, pro EU. For a different view I looked at the EU perspective. Only 8 "Northern states" have signed a formal position on resolving the Euro problem, suggesting there is not unanimity of views, surprising given the emphasis on the EU being all about shared values. I copy extracts below, with my interpretation of the Eurospeak just so you have got something to direct your bile at.
If you think the UK lacks any idea on how to achieve Brexit, it is clear the EU hasn't got a clue how to address the problems of the Euro, just read the waffle below full of aims and objectives without knowing how they will be achieved, remind you of anything?
Finance ministers from Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Sweden underline their shared views and values in the discussion on the architecture of the EMU.
.......European ministers of finance discussed the future of the EMU on several occasions over the last couple of months, while Leaders exchanged thoughts in December. Discussions on the future of the EMU will continue among finance ministers in the coming months and Leaders agreed to come back to the matter in March and June.
HAVEN'T GOT A SCOOBY DOO WHAT TO DO BUT WILL KEEP PRETENDING THEY ARE WORKING SOMETHING OUT
We will take the opportunity over the coming months to give a clear voice to the values we generally share:
THEY KEEP QUIET ABOUT WHAT THEY DON'T AGREE ON AND DENY IT IN PUBLIC
First, we believe discussions about the future of the EMU should take place in an inclusive format. European cooperation is based on strong shared values, among others the value of inclusiveness. Unity is a key asset for the remaining EU27 and must be safeguarded. The future of the EMU (fiscal, structural, financial, institutional issues etc.) is relevant to all and should therefore be discussed and decided by all.
ANY THAT DON'T AGREE WITH THE MINORITY WHO CALL THE SHOTS WILL BE WATERBOARDED UNTIL THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT DEMOCRACY MEANS
Second, a stronger EMU requires first and foremost decisive actions at the national level and full compliance with our common rules. It starts with implementing structural reforms and respecting the Stability and Growth Pact, thereby building up fiscal buffers.....The EU should make use of the strengthened fiscal, economic and financial frameworks already in place, to deliver concrete results ....
ITALY CAN GO FUCK ITSELF IF IT THINKS IT CAN BORROW OR BRING BACK THE LIRE INSTEAD OF AUSTERITY
Third, we should focus on initiatives that have public support in Member States. ...it is of the essence that we do our utmost to ... regain public trust. ....For that reason the discussion ..should find a consensus on ..., priority should be given to areas with the greatest convergence of views between Member States, notably the completion of the Banking Union, and the transformation of the ESM into a European Monetary Fund. The EMU strengthening should be complemented by ....pursuing an ambitious free trade agenda....the Banking Union, should have priority over far-reaching proposals.
THE PUBLIC DON'T TRUST THE EU SO ONLY TALK IN PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT THEY THINK THEY HAVE VOTED FOR, LIKE AN EU FEDERATION WITH THE CENTRAL BANK CALLING THE SHOTS. WE TAKE A LEAF FROM BREXIT AND DIVERSIFY AWAY FROM THE SINGLE MARKET AND GO FOR MORE FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS
Fourth, we are all committed to the process of completing the Banking Union. .... A next step could be to add more precision as regards to the specific steps that have to be taken. ...
GERMANY IS READY TO RUN THE BANK BUT ONLY WHEN IT CONTROLS THE FISCAL POLICIES OF EU STATES INCLUDING GREECE AND ITALY AND WAYS HAVE BEEN FOUND FOR THEM TO SWALLOW THEIR OWN TOXIC DEBT
Sixth and finally, ...Structural reforms are key for strengthening the resilience and potential growth of Member States and the EU as a whole. ..structural reform could support their implementation, while targeted investments financed by the EU budget could also complement the effects of structural reforms. Such measures would need to reflect the budgetary constraints of the future EU-budget.
THE EU NEEDS TO PROVIDE MORE SUBSIDIES TO REPLACE DEBT, BUT DON'T KNOW WHERE THE MONEY WILL COME FROM
Italy is a nation often governed by coalitions, a mixture of parties who aren't always ideologically coherent. This is the latest example of this, with no party having enough for a singular majority.
Lega have always performed well in the north of Italy, and they were previously in favour of greater independence for the region from the South of Italy, a much poorer area and one that is percieved as a hive of criminality and depravity. So for Lega to do well, isn't a statement on the EU, but instead a statement on economic matters and Italy's wide divide, socially and financially.
As for Five Star, they won the aforementioned South by a landslide, but again, whilst they are undoubtedly eurosceptic, that was far from their only or even main platform- rather they stood on a highly anti-establishment platform, that looked at everything from access to fresh water and to greener energy. In a country where the main parties have crumbled from a failed referendum and the lingering smell of corruption that is associated with Berlusconi. So no surprise, that in the South, an area struggling and that feels abandoned, would reject the mainstream parties.
Even their coalition agreement is more in favour of reforming the EU than leaving or its downfall. To suggest that Italy's possible new government is a result of anti-EU sentiment is rather naïve to say the least.
Italians, including the youth there no longer like the EU apparently. This is not my opinion. Do your own research if you disbelieve me.
Grauniad March 11th
As one EU headache subsides in Germany, another starts in Italy
While the Germans have a government at last, Italy’s right turn will add to the EU’s problems
It took barely 12 hours for a collective sigh of relief to turn into a collective intake of breath; less than a day for smiles of European satisfaction to be transformed into frowns of European concern.
At 10.30am on Sunday in Berlin, Germany’s centre-left SPD announced that on a turnout of 72%, more than two in three of its members had voted to approve a fresh GroKo, or grand coalition, with the centre-right CDU and its Bavarian CSU sister party. Their decision ended five months of political uncertainty in Berlin, clearing the way for chancellor Angela Merkel to form her fourth government and move forward on a range of fronts – including ambitious plans for EU and eurozone reform pushed by France’s pro-European president, Emmanuel Macron.
But shortly after 10pm in Rome, early exit polls from Italy’s general election suggested that just as one big EU member state and major eurozone economy was emerging from political stalemate, another was about to enter it.
In delivering a horrendously hung parliament, Italy’s voters had also turned their back on their mainstream ruling parties, with a majority backing populist, anti-establishment, hard-right and broadly EU-critical candidates.
Show
The poor showing by Silvio Berlusconi’s centre-right Forza Italia and Matteo Renzi’s Democratic party may be no surprise given Italy’s two decades of stagnation (its economy remains 6% smaller than in 2008, with unemployment stuck at 11%) and the migration crisis: more than 600,000 irregular migrants have arrived since 2014.
But the fact that the insurgent Five Star Movement finished as the country’s biggest party by far, and the anti-immigration La Lega as the strongest force on the right, raises questions not just about Italy’s capacity to pursue domestic reforms, but also its inclination to play any part in planned closer EU and eurozone integration.
Italy’s angry, fed-up voters rejected the path of economic modernisation and broad eurozone compliance followed by successive Italian governments since the financial and economic crisis, opting instead for parties whose generous campaign promises – a flat tax rate, a universal income, early retirement – would set them on a collision course with Europe’s budget constraints.
Germany and France may choose to push ahead without Italy’s support, or they may decide the new environment makes that untenable. “An unstable, Eurosceptic Italy could well put the brakes on Franco-German plans,” said Charles Grant, co-founder of thinktank the Centre for European Reform.
But Sunday’s two votes are also a reminder, after a year of electoral scares in the Netherlands, France and Austria, that the challenge to the EU’s centre-right and centre-left establishment parties from populists on both the far right and the far left is far from over.
Following its worst electoral performance since 1949, Germany’s SPD – which has lost more than half its voters in the past 15 years – agonised over whether to support another GroKo. Many members felt it risked strengthening the far right AfD, which now becomes the country’s largest opposition party.
In the end, the fear of an even worse defeat in the event of a snap election produced a strong majority for a new coalition. But many members of Merkel’s far-from-flourishing CDU have reservations too, worried the concessions she has had to make weaken her authority and alienate centre-right voters.
As the centre retreats and politics fragment across the EU, the birth pains of Germany’s new coalition and Italy’s messy election show that unless mainstream parties can regain voters’ trust by responding to their real concerns – immigration, identity, economic inequality, unemployment, out-of-touch elites – the joint European project they built faces an increasingly rough ride.
But if it was possible to reform the EU from within then surely when Cameron was negotiating they would have offered him something rather than run the risk of us leaving.
The fact that they gave him fuck all shows just how hard it is to reform from within.
Simply tell us the solution to the Irish land border, and any other ideas you have might have greater credibility.
I am all ears for the good bits.
That is very different to the EU itself being on the verge of imminent collapse though: having lived and worked in two EU countries as well as having friends living in various EU countries I can say it is so embedded into everyday life that people can't really imagine or would want to be out of it. Certainly here at least, Brexit has actually caused most people to become more pro-EU as they react against the perceived isolationism of the British vote which is seen as part of the bigger picture of Trump/Le Pen etc which the EU can easily position itself against.
The EU constantly reforms itself, major reforms require Treaty change (hence Maastricht, Lisbon, etc.). The changes that many Leavers complained of, give the lie to the idea that it cannot be changed.
The problem with Cameron is that he set out to achieve major reform, of the four freedoms that underpin the EU, without Treaty change. He wanted to gain such change on a nod and wink, and in an unreasonably short time frame.
The other members did offer him something, but, hubris being what it is, Cameron had set himself up for failure by ignorance (IMHO wilful) of the fundamental principles of the EU.
He might as well have promised that he would receive a Lamborghini for each of us after a little after dinner chat with EU 27 leaders. (it may even have been more achievable, although it would have meant a tractor each).
Without changing them there really isn't any reform.
And the EU refuses to change them.
In other words no reform.
Every new Treaty amends/changes what went before.
As the EU is a rules-based organisation, for which agreement on the rules is crucial, the only way to amend the rules is to work together and agree something that will be of benefit to all members.
We don't know what the other member states would or would not have been willing to negotiate in terms of Treaty change, because the UK didn't even try.
Instead, we had a Prime Minister who tried to (in diplomatic terms) peremptorily change the terms of membership for the UK alone, with no real concern beyond his own short-term calculations.
And, even those were, frankly, delusional.
If the EU had of offered the UK the option to leave the freedom of movement we would have voted remain.
Not talking about myself I voted leave on a number of reasons.
But there was a sizeable amount of voters who voted leave for this reason alone.
The stupid thing about this is if and when we leave the amount of people coming to this country will probably be the same as if we had remained.
But a large percentage of people who voted leave did so because of this.
You are right about the current attitude of Italian youth towards the EU. The poll you had read about is mentioned - in passing - in this article by the Centre for European Reform's Italian specialist. Happy to help mate, and I am not going to make a cheap joke about broken clocks, either :-)
However it's the only country I am aware of where the young are more eurosceptic than the old, which should tell you that Italy is a very specific case. The article reminds us of some current factors which make it special; youth unemployment especially in the South remains stubbornly high, and the migration crisis is unquestionably a factor as over 600,000 migrants arrived directly on Italian shores, and the rest of us did sod all to help them (and Greece) out. On the other hand the same article points out that 59% of Italians still favour membership of the euro and that both the Lega and 5-start rowed back their anti-euro rhetoric during the campaign (the article was written a few days before the election). Like I said, Italy perplexes me so I am not going to go out on a limb commenting on it from a position of ignorance, but feel free to carry on. This is all the help you are getting from me for a while :-)
All I am saying really, and it's an attack on Cameron, is that he never tried to seriously address the four freedoms.
Simply put - if they are central elements of the founding Treaty, you cannot amend them without Treaty change. And, you cannot achieve Treaty change in the period Cameron allowed.
He was dishonest with the people in claiming that he could get the deal that he said he wanted in the manner and timeframe that he chose.
I don't believe that the four freedoms would have been torn up, but it might have been possible to agree mechanisms for specific crisis situations. We won't know, because he never tried to find out.
In any event, his chances of achieving change were not helped, also, by the UK's failure to make use of the tools that were already allowed to reduce immigration pressures.
Personally speaking, if immigrants in Northern Ireland can dilute the fuckwittery of what passes for politics and society here, I'm delighted. Please feel free to take the fragrant and lovely Arlene (and her colleagues) to your hearts, and keep her there; no need to hurry about returning them...
I think the main reason he came back with nothing is that he wanted nothing.
Anyway I'm watching the cricket now ,have a nice evening mate.
There are more land crossing points to 'move' through between the Republic of Ireland (EU) and the now post EU United Kingdom, than the number of crossing points between the whole of the EU and it's Eastern frontier.
Granted that if fences and walls and security people and whatever infrastructure was paid for and sustained along the land border with the ROI, the movement would be restricted, but that would be costly financially, and go against an international treaty that the UK signed.
The Royal Wedding at the weekend brought out a lot of people saying what a great country this is, but if the country breaks it's word on an international treaty it wouldn't be able to call itself great any more, would the population go for that? Or would the population go for the 'fuggit' option, you know, say fuggit to it's obligations and do whatever it wanted from moment to moment.
If control of the borders, and dealing with freedom of movement was or is a central plank of brexit, then how is it going to happen in purely practical terms?
Solutions simple Seth - a single united Ireland - both sides ought to realise they have more in common than divides them. They’d fiogotten there used to be a border that the EU now wants enforced.
My father in law was a Catholic from Clonmel in the Republic and fought as a Commando in the British army with distinction. He married the daughter of an RUC officer from Omagh who pulled a pistol on him before they eloped. Neither being safe living in their own country they ended setting up home and raising their family in Charlton,
That was a different time and a different generation and Ireland has moved on, except Brexit is now being accused of liable to bring those days back. The people of Ireland should be grown up enough to take responsibility for sorting out their own back yard. Blaming the U.K. for the fact that an intellectually challenged minority would rather kill one another than live together as a result of Brexit is a denial of where the problem sits and who holds the key to a resolution - the people of Ireland.
When the U.K. or any other nation allows its foreign policies to to be dictated by speculation on what excuses it might give criminals to commit violence we might as well hand over the reins to them.
Alternatively you are simply buying another line of Project Fear and there is not a risk of Ireland allowing itself to descend into open warfare because an invisible border is enforced invisibly at the behest of the EU.