Another EU referendum on the way

K-9

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I say vote NO

Where are all those fcuking jobs from the last referendum that they promised us?

No on principal.

I got conscripted and micro chipped.

mikom

Sly diversionary tactic having Seanie FitzPatrick arrested today similar to when they arrested Willie McAteer of Anglo to divert from the bondholder payments.
More shite fed to the proles.
Enda must be making a deal with the devil and hope it doesn't get looked into too deeply.

Chips Lovell

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Where are all those fcuking jobs from the last referendum that they promised us?

http://www.idaireland.com/news-media/publications/annual-reports/pdfs/IDA-Annual-Report_2010.pdf

sensibleken

so it looks like there definetely wont be an EU treaty since the UK has backed out. There may still be a eurozone treaty, a new phenomenon which may or may not require a referendum.

Morlar

Chances of refferendum now 50/50 acc Lucinda Creighton.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1209/eurozone.html

Creighton says '50-50' chance of referendum

Updated: 11:05, Friday, 9 December 2011

Talks went late into the night in Brussels


Ireland may have to hold a referendum on building a fiscal union in the eurozone, according to Minister for European Affairs Lucinda Creighton.

"I would say it's 50-50 and we will be looking at the detail over the next couple of weeks," Ms Creighton told Reuters by telephone from Brussels.

However when RTÉ's Morning Ireland asked if there was a necessity for a new treaty, Ms Creighton said: ''No, we're really not at that stage yet.''

EU leaders fail to agree on treaty change

European Union leaders have agreed stricter budget rules for the eurozone, but failed to secure changes to the EU treaty among all 27 member states.

It means a deal will instead have to involve just eurozone states and any others that want to join.

After hours of talks there was little concrete progress among the leaders, apart from their commitment to work towards a new "fiscal compact" - the term used for a tougher deficit and debt regime to insulate the eurozone against the debt crisis.

European Central Bank President Mario Draghi called the decision a step forward for the "fiscal compact" he has said is necessary if the 17-nation eurozone is to emerge stronger from two years of market turmoil.

''It's going to be the basis for a good fiscal compact and more discipline in economic policy in the euro area members," Mr Draghi said as he left the summit.

"We came to conclusions that will have to be fleshed out more in the coming days."

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy had wanted to get the whole EU to agree to change the Lisbon Treaty so that stricter budget and debt rules for eurozone states could be enshrined in the bloc's basic law.

But Britain, which is outside the eurozone, refused to back the move, saying it wanted guarantees in a protocol protecting its financial services industry.

Mr Sarkozy described British Prime Minister David Cameron's demand as unacceptable.

As a result, Mr Sarkozy and Ms Merkel said the intention was now to forge an inter-governmental treaty among the eurozone countries and any others that wanted to join.

"This is a summit that will go down in history," said Mr Sarkozy.

"We would have preferred a reform of the treaties among 27. That wasn't possible given the position of our British friends. And so it will be through an intergovernmental treaty of 17, but open to others."

Herman Van Rompuy, the President of the European Council and the chairman of the summit, focused on the success in securing agreement for tighter fiscal limits, including the need for countries to bring budgets close to balance.

"It means reinforcing our rules on excessive deficit procedures by making them more automatic. It also means that member states would have to submit their draft budgetary plans to the (European) Commission," he said.

On treaty change, Mr Van Rompuy said the new treaty would involve the eurozone and at least six other countries, with two more waiting for a mandate to participate.

"An inter-governmental treaty can be approved and ratified much more rapidly than a full-fledged treaty change, and I think speed is also very important to enhance credibility," he said.

An Irish Government spokesman said Taoiseach Enda Kenny "welcomed elements" of the deal, including an increased firewall to prevent contagion spreading to larger EU economies.

opinion guy

Hold up a minute - have Enda and crew just agreed to tax harmonisation ?

sensibleken

opinion guy wrote: »

Hold up a minute - have Enda and crew just agreed to tax harmonisation ?

no.

later12

opinion guy wrote: »

Hold up a minute - have Enda and crew just agreed to tax harmonisation ?

No. I see no reason to indicate that is the case. What in particular are you concerned about?

TheZohanS

opinion guy wrote: »

Hold up a minute - have Enda and crew just agreed to tax harmonisation ?

No, no. They've said "YES TO JOBS".

AFAIK the only statement they've made is that they will assess the situation. God help us.

OurLadyofKnock

CardBordWindow wrote: »

Vote for Jim Corr!

Wow! You must of felt so clever with your civil service chums when you posted this one. I bet you chuckled for 3 hours at least.


During your lunchbreak.

Donal Og O Baelach

"I would say it's 50-50 and we will be looking at the detail over the next couple of weeks," Ms Creighton told Reuters by telephone from Brussels

Good to see we won't be doing anything hasty. Maybe we should set up a tribunal to give us a report on it.

later12

TheZohan wrote: »

AFAIK the only statement they've made is that they will assess the situation. God help us.

Nothing to do with God.

Tax harmonisation requires a referendum. Any change on tax harmonisation must be done by popular consent.

Fiscal union does not have to mean tax harmonisation.

opinion guy

later10 wrote: »

No. I see no reason to indicate that is the case. What in particular are you concerned about?

There is this whole annoucnement of a new deal business:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-16104089

Most EU members have agreed to press ahead with a tax and budget pact to tackle the eurozone debt crisis.
But a German and French attempt to get all 27 EU states to back changes to the union's treaties was dropped after objections from the UK.
Prime Minister David Cameron had insisted on an exemption for the UK from some financial regulations.
Instead, 23 states, including eurozone members, will adopt an accord with penalties for breaking deficit rules.

.....

Sounds like tax harmonisation and looes of sovereignity to me.


I was assuming that was what this was about:

The Highwayman wrote: »

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Well that and dodgy Dutch techno music

opinion guy

later10 wrote: »

Nothing to do with God.

Tax harmonisation requires a referendum. Any change on tax harmonisation must be done by popular consent.

Who says it requires a referendum ?

Fiscal union does not have to mean tax harmonisation.

Ermm......it kinda does really

later12

opinion guy wrote: »

Who says it requires a referendum ?

Our constitution.

The Lisbon Treaty makes no provision for tax harmonisation. You may remember the Government receiving guarantees to the effect that we would retain dominion over our taxation policy. Any change to that effect requires a change to the treaties. This requires a referendum.

Ermm......it kinda does really

Fiscal union is being addressed in the context of automatic sanctions for irresponsible budgetary policy, and the admissibility of budgets to the EU Commission prior to ratification by national parliaments.

sensibleken

opinion guy wrote: »

There is this whole annoucnement of a new deal business:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-16104089


Sounds like tax harmonisation and looes of sovereignity to me.

I think youre taking a hell of a leap there. There will most likely be something to do with tax, be it the financial transaction tax (though unlikely) or something on corporate tax base which is very very different to tax rate. Then again all that they have said so far today is regarding budgetry deficeit rules which is different alltogether.

from the same article

• a cap of 0.5% of GDP on countries' annual structural deficits
• "automatic consequences" for countries whose public deficit exceeds 3% of GDP
• the tighter rules to be enshrined in countries' constitutions
• European Stability Mechanism (ESM) to be accelerated and brought into force in July 2012
• adequacy of 500bn-euro (£427bn; $666bn) limit for ESM to be reassessed
• Eurozone and other EU countries to provide up to 200bn euros to the IMF to help debt-stricken eurozone members

most of those rules are already there.

K-9

Hungary, Sweden and the Czechs seem to be back in talks so the UK are in a minority of 1 on this, a financial services tax the big one for them.

sensibleken

K-9 wrote: »

Hungary, Sweden and the Czechs seem to be back in talks so the UK are in a minority of 1 on this, a financial services tax the big one for them.

I dont see how that is such a big hurdle for them. 75% of european financial services are in london. they would surely benifit from this tax as it would be collected regardless

later12

sensibleken wrote: »

I dont see how that is such a big hurdle for them. 75% of european financial services are in london. they would surely benifit from this tax as it would be collected regardless

The problem is that they wouldn't benefit because the tax wouldn't be collected in Hong Kong and New York.

They fear that financial services would be encouraged to shift their operations elsewhere and that the tax would dilute London's relevance in international finance. I think it's a fair worry to have for a country not even part of the Eurozone.

bleg

All the provos will be delighted. Brits out.

K-9

sensibleken wrote: »

I dont see how that is such a big hurdle for them. 75% of european financial services are in london. they would surely benifit from this tax as it would be collected regardless

The Tories have to keep their banker chums happy. In fairness it is a massive industry for them.

sensibleken

later10 wrote: »

The problem is that they wouldn't benefit because the tax wouldn't be collected in Hong Kong and New York.

They fear that financial services would be encouraged to shift their operations elsewhere and that the tax would dilute London's relevance in international finance. I think it's a fair worry to have for a country not even part of the Eurozone.

ok,maybe i missunderstood. was this not a tax on transactions within the eurozone, payable to the eurozone countries. surely having the services centre in hong kong, london or timbuctoo wouldnt matter. I work in a financial company that deals with worldwide institutions and we calculate australian tax here in dublin.

(oh by the way in case anyones wondering, the most incompetent banks i deal with daily are the French and Italian ones, total basket cases)

later12

sensibleken wrote: »

ok,maybe i missunderstood. was this not a tax on transactions within the eurozone, payable to the eurozone countries. surely having the services centre in hong kong, london or timbuctoo wouldnt matter.

It was proposed as a tax for the EU27,not the Eurozone.

And that does matter if I'm a trader who moves to Hong Kong and you're a trader who moves to Timbuctoo, and we go back trading with one another like we used to do in The City because we didn't want to pay Tobin tax back there.

In the words of my favourite Tipperary man, George Osborne, it's a bit like Britain proposing a "tax on cheese".

Batsy

later10 wrote: »

It was proposed as a tax for the EU27,not the Eurozone.

And that does matter if I'm a trader who moves to Hong Kong and you're a trader who moves to Timbuctoo, and we go back trading with one another like we used to do in The City because we didn't want to pay Tobin tax back there.

In the words of my favourite Tipperary man, George Osborne, it's a bit like Britain proposing a "tax on cheese".

Basically, Britain was against a financial transaction tax because it would have had to pay a whopping 80% - or £37 million - of it.

Britain was also worrired that, if such a tax were introduced, 500,000 jobs could have been lost.

Despite such justified reservations about paying such a tax, it didn't stop the French and Germans attacking the British for having the audacity to stand up for British interests. Volker Kauder – one of Mrs Merkel’s closest allies – sparked anger when he said Britain could not block the tax because ‘now Europe is speaking German’ in its outlook.


Read more: http://www.metro.co.uk/news/882101-david-cameron-says-no-to-tax-that-will-cost-britain-37bn-and-500-000-jobs#ixzz1g2m5owCW

mikom

So Enda goes to Brussels hinting that debt cuts will be worked out due to his supreme bargaining skills.
But Enda comes home with an increased debt.

A commitiment with the other countries to pay the IMF up to €200 billion.

Jesus wept.

later12

mikom wrote: »

So Enda goes to Brussels hinting that debt cuts will be worked out due to his supreme bargaining skills.
But Enda comes home with an increased debt.

A commitiment with the other countries to pay the IMF up to €200 billion.

Jesus wept.

That's a very strange conclusion to arrive at.

Why are you presuming there won't be an opt-out clause for countries under program, just like there is for the EFSF and EFSM?

Ireland's debt has not increased,and the IMF arrangement won't be finalized for another 10 days.

Tayla

later10 wrote: »

Why are you presuming there won't be an opt-out clause for countries under program, just like there is for the EFSF and EFSM?

There's no opt out clause of the European stability mechanism.

googsy

From listening to Lucinda Creighton on the six one news I get the impression, from the way she was answering the questions that are thrown at her, that she doesn't actually know what it is she has signed up for in Brussels today.... This worries me slightly.

later12

Tayla wrote: »

There's no opt out clause of the European stability mechanism.

Where are you getting that from?

The protocols for the ESM haven't even been established yet.

I see no reason whatever to assume that the Stepping-Out Guarantor system that was in place with the EFSF will not simply continue with the ESM.

ilovesleep

I admire Cameron for not bowing down to Merkozy and having the UKs interests on his sleeve. What's being proposed by the EU with the financial tax and tax harmonisation is tying a noose around our necks and strangling us slowing.

The Eurozone has a huge debt problem and to some degree I can see where Merkozy is coming from with the tax harmonisation and financial tax in that it will bring more taxes/revenue into the debt ridden eurozone but at a huge cost to both - the uk and ireland in that it will deepen our recessions but it won't solve the debt problem. It may go a little towards it but certainly it won't fix the problem of the huge debt. The debt is just too large.

As if Intel and the likes are responsible for the debt and have billions to pay into the eurozone.