Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


unclebulgaria67

EU renegotiations ?

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1507 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I can't see that Camerons EU changes will persuade the ' out' supporters to change their minds and it also won't firm up the 'remain' supporters. If anything Camerons attempt to persuade the country that he has negotiated significant changes might actually backfire, causing some who support remain and undecideds to change their minds to support an out vote.

 

I am firmly pro EU and nothing would convince me that the UK would be better off leaving the EU. Leaving the EU would create a mess, that would take years to sort out. It might actually lead to the break up of the EU and the UK. If the UK opts to leave the EU, you can bet that other EU countries will want referendums and some may well vote to leave. Scotland will no doubt vote to leave the UK at a future referendum.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't see that Camerons EU changes will persuade the ' out' supporters to change their minds and it also won't firm up the 'remain' supporters. If anything Camerons attempt to persuade the country that he has negotiated significant changes might actually backfire, causing some who support remain and undecideds to change their minds to support an out vote.

 

yes, because all it it has done has confirmed that ever closer union and rule from Berlin and Brussels would be the future. Something London/Whitehall can not accept, and most Brits probably don't.

 

There is absolutely nothing in the renegotiation except a few we will put something in that says 'we may allow this' temporarily in exceptional circumstances - aka we almost certainly wont though.

 

 

It might actually lead to the break up of the EU and the UK. If the UK opts to leave the EU, you can bet that other EU countries will want referendums and some may well vote to leave. Scotland will no doubt vote to leave the UK at a future referendum.

Yep. but Scotland probably will anyway unless we all get sensible and throw London out of the UK first. Probably would even then.


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it one of the top guys in Brussels said that "nothing has been signed off" yet. So the claims that he has everything he wants is just talk at the present.

 

I would want to see everything signed off before any referendum took place, not just promises that they will or might be !

 

I was also interested in some of the comments made by a group of Romanians working in Kent. They would earn just £2,500 a year in their own country - whereas the basic wage would be £14,000 in the UK. This is without any benefits.

 

What I am not happy about is that the European migrants are entitled to all the Child benefits, even if their children are not in this country ! What checks are being done to confirm that they do actually have children?


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As shown on the daily politics today, William Hague had already commented on a large portion of Camerons 'new deal'


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah cant add to post as the time allowed to edit seems to have reduced.

 

The hague speech with Cameron smiling and nodding is at about 20 mins in.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0701jjt/daily-politics-03022016


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In or out the political and bureaucratic establishment of every country will continue to interfere with the lives of the people in every other country. That is what they do. It is not the union that is wrong, it is the greedy power grasping duplicitous crooks that run it that are the problem and they will never go away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donald Tusk's draft EU deal for Britain

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12135328/EU-referendum-draft-deal-revealed-by-Donald-Tusk-live.html#update-20160202-1454

 

MIGRATION AND BENEFITS

 

A watered-down emergency brake will limit migrants' access to benefits for four years immediately after the referendum. Rather than a total ban, access to

in-work benefits will be "graduated from an initial complete exclusion but gradually increasing".

 

Migrants will still be able to send benefits to their children abroad, just in lower amounts than they currently do.

 

Mr Cameron will be given new powers to stop suspected terrorists and criminals coming to the UK, not only if a threat is "imminent".

 

New rules will stop people coming to the UK via "sham marriages". They will prevent non-EU citizens marrying an EU citizen to then live and work in Britain.

 

SOVEREIGNTY

 

The letter recognises that the UK "is not committed to further political

integration into the European Union".

 

A "red card" system will allow the House of Commons to band together

with like-minded EU parliaments and block unwanted Brussels legislation.

 

ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE

 

The deal protects the pound by recognising in law - for the first time - that the EU has

more than one currency.

 

British taxpayers' money can never be liable to support the eurozone.

 

Any issues which affect all member states must be discussed by all member states –

not just countries in the eurozone.

 

COMPETITIVENESS

 

The EU will increase efforts to cut bureaucracy, especially on small and medium enterprises, which the Government has said damages UK businesses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UK renegotiation:

Tusk’s draft Decision of the Council

 

The draft decision of the Council states it will not come into force until the day the UK votes to stay in the EU – this means it will neither be in legislation (not even implementing or delegated acts) nor treaty provisions before the referendum.

The letter consists of 4 sections, discussed below:

1. Economic governance:

Far from reducing EU interference in the UK’s economic policy the draft includes a positive duty on the UK to facilitate further deepening of the Eurozone.

The UK must also refrain from measures that would jeopardise EMU – this restricts our ability to act at the IMF, the World Bank, Basle, the OECD etc. and may even prevent competitive taxation policies.

Other provisions in this section amount to confirming the existing ‘enhanced co-operation procedure’ which allows nine or more Member States to advance with an EU policy without having to convince the others. The enhanced co-operation procedure has already threatened us with the indirect impact of the Financial Transaction Tax. It is possible the proposals would prevent the UK from challenging enhanced co-operation measures even if they adversely affect the UK.

The draft claims there can be no discrimination against UK but then says "any difference of treatment must be based on objective reasons" – in effect saying that there can be discrimination against the UK if the Eurozone can come up with a reason for it – of course these matters would be decided by the ECJ (a body not known to reject any opportunity to extend EU powers).

The draft admits that the EU’s general budget is used for emergency and crisis measures to safeguard the Euro, and that the cost of this should not fall on non-Eurozone countries but the UK would merely have a right to be "reimbursed" – most EU spending in some way supports the Euro so are they really saying we will get most of our money back? Of course not – no doubt UK reimbursement will be interpreted narrowly to return little or nothing.

Tusk states that the substance of this section will be included in Treaty changes, but similar promises by the Council have been broken in the past. In any event, this Section is arguably worse than the status quo.

2. Competitiveness:

This Section consists of existing promises, warm words and platitudes - nothing new. Accordingly there is no suggestion of Treaty change.

 

3. Sovereignty:

This part of the draft states that "references to an ever closer union among the peoples are... compatible with different paths of integration being available for different Member States and do not compel Member States to aim for a common destination" – although this may mean there is no compulsion towards ever closer union, it doesn’t prevent the ECJ from using those words ‘ever closer union’ (or any other part of the Treaty) to reach the same centralising result. Moreover, there really is nothing else on offer given the design of the ‘5 Presidents Report’, intended to complete Economic and Monetary Union, and the fact that it is only the EU Commission that can propose legislation.

Tusk writes that the substance of this Section will be included in Treaty changes, but once again similar promises made by the Council have been broken in the past.

What this Section doesn't point out is that ‘ever closer union’ is duplicated in the concept of the ‘aquis’ which the ECJ could continue to use for the purposes of centralising power.

The ‘red card’ procedure mentioned in this draft can only be triggered if 55% or more of weighted national parliaments vote within 12 weeks of transmission of the draft EU law to which they object. If objections were so wide-spread that half national parliaments were against them there would be no difficulty in stopping a proposal at the level of the Council of Ministers – the red card is therefore more like a red herring.

4. In-work benefit entitlement:

It will be for the Commission and Council to decide whether the ‘emergency brake’ is triggered – but even if it is used, it will have no effect on immigration and fails to return control of UK borders. In fact it rather underlines the fact that the UK government has to go cap-in-hand to the EU for permission.

At least this part of the draft admits it merely proposes changes to EU secondary legislation, and doesn't even pretend to require Treaty change. Such changes would need to pass though the European Parliament – which could very easily reject them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Message from David Cameron

Dear

I thought I would give you an update on the progress of our re-negotiation of Britain’s relationship with Europe.

The draft new deal for Britain in Europe published today delivers that substantial change. Of course, there is still more detail to be worked on, but we have made real progress.

I said we needed:

• A ‘red card’ system for national parliaments to block unwanted EU laws

• An end to something for nothing welfare for EU migrants

• No more British taxpayers’ money being used to bail out the Eurozone

• An agreement that we will keep the Pound, never join the Euro and fair treatment for our currency in Europe; and

• Britain out of ‘ever closer union’ so we do not become part of a European Superstate

Some said these changes would be impossible to achieve. But they are all in the document.

So there is more work to be done, more detail to be nailed down, but we are delivering.

Of course, as I have said before, if we do not secure the changes that Britain needs, then I rule nothing out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Analysis of Tusk letter

 

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/02/02-letter-tusk-proposal-new-settlement-uk/

 

Exclusions for the UK already in practice

 

- Not to adopt the euro and therefore to keep the British pound sterling as its currency.

 

- Not to participate in the Schengen acquis.

 

- To keep exercising border controls on persons, and therefore not to participate in the Schengen area as regards internal and external borders.

 

- To choose whether or not to participate in measures in the area of freedom, security and justice

 

Economic Governance

 

- Those member states not in the Eurozone should not create obstacles, but facilitate further deepening of Eurozone - will work vice versa (1)

 

- Union law on banking union only apply to Member States where the euro is the currency (2)

 

- Financial emergency measures for the euro will not entail financial responsibility for non-euro countries, and if the EU pays overall then reimbursement will be established (3)

 

- Supervision of financial markets of non-euro countries for their own authorities (4)

 

Competitiveness

 

- Lowering burdens and compliance costs on SMEs, repealing unnecessary legislation (5)

 

Sovereignty

 

- More or less powers transferred must be agreed by all Member States (6)

 

- Countries which want further integration should be allowed, UK is not one of them. Will be put into treaties at next relevant provision (7)

 

- Red card procedure - 55 percent of Member States must agree. (8)

 

- National security is down to Member State (9)

 

Social Benefits

 

- Emergency brake procedure (10)

 

- Certain benefits may be restricted to those who have a degree of connection to Member State (11)

 

- Economically inactive people must not become a burden on the social assistance system of Member state, must have health insurance (12)

 

- Member states can refuse social benefits who came just to obtain benefits and have no right of residence (13)

 

- Stop sham marriages (14)

 

Changes to EU secondary legislation -

 

- A proposal to amend social security systems in order to give Member States, with regard to the exportation of child benefits to a Member State other than that where the worker resides, an option to index such benefits to the standard of living in the Member State where the child resides;

 

- The EU which will provide for an alert and safeguard mechanism that responds to situations of inflow of workers from other Member States of an exceptional magnitude over an extended period of time.

 

- The implementing act would authorise the Member State to limit the access of Union workers newly entering its labour market to in-work benefits for a total period of up to four years from the commencement of employment. The limitation should be graduated, from an initial complete exclusion but gradually increasing access to such benefits to take account of the growing connection of the worker with the labour market of the host Member State. The Council implementing act would have a limited duration and apply to EU workers newly entering its labour market during a period of [X] years, extendable for two successive periods of [Y] years and [Z] years.

 

Changes to EU primary law

 

- With regard to future enlargements of the European Union, it is noted that appropriate transitional measures concerning free movement of persons will be provided for in the relevant Acts of Accession to be agreed by all Member States.

 

 

 

 

 

UKIP leader Nigel Farage said:

 

"Hardly worth waiting for. It is truly pathetic. No treaty change, no repatriation of powers, no ability to control our own laws, our money or our borders. Now let's get on with the referendum. What it means is more Europe with an EU army, EU accession of Turkey, and EU primacy over our laws and our courts.

 

"Well Cameron wanted a four year ban on migrant benefits, he didn't even ask for a restriction on the open door movement that we have to nearly half a billion people. We can in the first few months or year stop benefits, but from years 2, 3 and 4 bring them up to the current levels. This is pretty weak stuff.

 

"Fundamental treaty change, that is what the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary talked about. A change in our relationship, reform of the European institutions and Donald Tusk, the President of the European Council, in the first sentence of this document says that all the principles on which the European Union was founded have been respected. The treaties stay intact.

 

“There is no fundamental reform, there's some fiddling around the edges on migrant benefits. I absolutely predict that the effect of this will not be to reduce the numbers coming to Britain but given the huge increase that is coming to a minimum wage, to our living wage, even more people will come. I suspect the European Council will approve this document; they are giving us nothing."

 

Ditched pledges by Cameron

• DITCHED PLEDGE 1: ‘to restore social and employment legislation to national control’(The Guardian, 6 March 2007, link).

• DITCHED PLEDGE 2: ‘a complete opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights’(Speech on EU, 4 November 2009, link).

• DITCHED PLEDGE 3: ‘limiting the European Court of Justice’s jurisdiction over criminal law to its pre-Lisbon level’ (Speech on EU, 4 November 2009, link).

• DITCHED PLEDGE 4: ‘treaty change that I’ll be putting in place before the referendum’(Daily Telegraph, 5 January 2014, link).

• DITCHED PLEDGE 5: ‘we want EU jobseekers to have a job offer before they come here’(speech at JCB, 28 November 2014, link).

• DITCHED PLEDGE 6: ‘if an EU jobseeker has not found work within six months, they will be required to leave’ (speech at JCB, 28 November 2014, link).

• DITCHED PLEDGE 7: ‘revising the [working time] directive at EU level to give the NHS the flexibility it needs’ (Hansard, 18 January 2012, col. 746, link).

• DITCHED PLEDGE 8: ‘the European Parliament must end its absurdly wasteful practice of meeting in Strasbourg as well as Brussels’ (Conservative Party European Election Manifesto, link).

• DITCHED PLEDGE 9: ‘further reform of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy’(Conservative Party Manifesto 2015, p.21, link).

• DITCHED PLEDGE 10: ‘further reform of … Structural Funds’ (Conservative Party Manifesto 2015, p. 73, link).

Articles in the text as reference -

 

(1) It is acknowledged that Member States not participating in the further deepening of the economic and monetary union will not create obstacles to but facilitate such further deepening while this process will, conversely, respect the rights and competences of the non-participating Member States.

 

(2) Union law on the banking union conferring upon the European Central Bank, the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, authority over credit institutions is applicable only to credit institutions located in Member States whose currency is the euro or in Member States that have concluded with the European Central Bank a close cooperation agreement on prudential supervision, in accordance with relevant EU acquis.

 

(3) Emergency and crisis measures addressed to safeguarding the financial stability of the euro area will not entail budgetary responsibility for Member States whose currency is not the euro, Appropriate mechanisms to ensure full reimbursement will be established where the general budget of the Union supports costs,

 

(4) The implementation of measures, including the supervision or resolution of financial institutions and markets, and macro-prudential responsibilities, to be taken in view of preserving the financial stability of Member States whose currency is not the euro is a matter for their own authorities

 

(5) This means lowering administrative burdens and compliance costs on economic operators, especially small and medium enterprises, and repealing unnecessary legislation as foreseen in the Declaration of the Commission on a subsidiarity implementation mechanism and a burden reduction implementation mechanism, while continuing to ensure high regulatory standards. And the European Union will pursue an active and ambitious policy of trade.

 

(6) The competences conferred by the Member States on the Union can be modified, whether to increase or reduce them, only through a revision of the Treaties with the agreement of all Member States.

 

(7) The Treaties allow an evolution towards a deeper degree of integration among the Member States that share such a vision of their common future, without this applying to other Member States. It is recognized that the United Kingdom, in the light of the specific situation it has under the Treaties, is not committed to further political integration into the European Union. [The substance of this will be incorporated into the Treaties at the time of their next revision in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaties and the respective constitutional requirements of the Member States.]

 

(8)- Where reasoned opinions on the non-compliance of a draft Union legislative act with the principle of subsidiarity, sent within 12 weeks from the transmission of that draft, represent more than 55 % of the votes allocated to the national Parliaments, the Council Presidency will include the item on the agenda of the Council for a comprehensive discussion on these opinions and on the consequences to be drawn therefrom.

 

(9)- Article 4(2) of the Treaty on European Union confirms that national security remains the sole responsibility of each Member State. This does not constitute a derogation from Union law and should therefore not be interpreted restrictively. In exercising their powers, the Union institutions will fully respect the national security responsibility of the Member States.

 

Social Benefits

 

(10)- if overriding reasons of public interest, such as encouraging recruitment, reducing unemployment, protecting vulnerable workers, averting the risk of seriously undermining the sustainability of social security systems, make it necessary, free movement of workers may be restricted by measures proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.

 

(11) - conditions may be imposed in relation to certain benefits to ensure that there is a real and effective degree of connection between the person concerned and the labour market of the host Member State.

 

(12) The right of economically non active persons to reside in the host Member State depends under EU law on such persons having sufficient resources for themselves and their family members not to become a burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State and have comprehensive sickness insurance.

 

(13) Member States have the possibility of refusing to grant social benefits to persons who exercise their right to freedom of movement solely in order to obtain Member States' social assistance although they do not have sufficient resources to claim a right of residence.

 

(14)- In accordance with Union law, Member States are able to take action to prevent abuse of rights or fraud, such as the presentation of forged documents, and address cases of contracting or maintaining of marriages of convenience with third country nationals for the purpose of making use of free movement as a route for regularising unlawful stay in a Member State or for bypassing national immigration rules applying to third country nationals.

 

Changes to EU secondary legislation

 

- A proposal to amend Regulation 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems in order to give Member States, with regard to the exportation of child benefits to a Member State other than that where the worker resides, an option to index such benefits to the standard of living in the Member State where the child resides;

 

- Within the Union which will provide for an alert and safeguard mechanism that responds to situations of inflow of workers from other Member States of an exceptional magnitude over an extended period of time.

 

- The implementing act would authorise the Member State to limit the access of Union workers newly entering its labour market to in-work benefits for a total period of up to four years from the commencement of employment. The limitation should be graduated, from an initial complete exclusion but gradually increasing access to such benefits to take account of the growing connection of the worker with the labour market of the host Member State. The Council implementing act would have a limited duration and apply to EU workers newly entering its labour market during a period of [X] years, extendable for two successive periods of [Y] years and [Z] years.

 

Changes to EU primary law

 

- With regard to future enlargements of the European Union, it is noted that appropriate transitional measures concerning free movement of persons will be provided for in the relevant Acts of Accession to be agreed by all Member States, in accordance with the Treaties. In this context, the position expressed by the United Kingdom in favour of such transitional measures is noted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...