Norwegian Butter Shortage

[The Larch]

More importantly there will be another crisis before the accord takes effect (March 2012) and further action will be required.

I personally think that this is the most worrying issue of all. What this crisis has shown is that reaction times have shrunk so much that expediency is seen as the biggest requiriment for any economic decision in answer to the boogeyman that are "the markets", rather than consensus for its implementation or better shaping of the proposals. Governments have to react almost overnight with little time to think things over much, while political realities need much longer reaction times. What's the result? The rise of technocracy, diktats and one-size-fits-all solutions. They're fast, they look good for "the markets" and some of them *might* be right at the end of the day on occasions, but piss off lots of people as a result and stink of a deep bias in many situations.

[Valmy]

And I think the democratic institutions of the Union are also too weak to share the pain and force Cornwall and Manchester to sacrifice for the other's sake.

That's true and given that I doubt the EU could survive a major crisis without doing serious integration and ensuring that it would have the legitimacy to do that.

[Sheilbh]

I think that you also have to take something else into account, and it is that, even if the rest of the governments agreed to these new financial measures, it doesn't mean that they like them or want them, but it's more of a "something has to be done about this" kind of thing. These new era is not one where most countries are entering singing praises and happily ahead, but being dragged by the harsh current situation. Everybody would have wanted things to be different, and done well since day 1, but they're the way they are now and we have to deal with them in the current sad state of affairs.

I agree and it's a very difficult situation - made more difficult by market expectations that were so lovingly stoked by press briefings in the build-up to the summit.  Something has to be done, but it should at least work.  This deal, I think, undermines the credibility of integration, is being rushed in a way that ignores political and constitutional reality for many member states and is wrong on the policy.  Given that this is the direction the EU's going, I'm less happy to support it, but I think we should at least get out of the way.

Personally I'm not particulary angry about the UK not wanting to go ahead with this on the basis of the proposals themselves, as I'm not particulary thrilled about them either,  but I think that the way it was handled could have been much better, as it made the UK seem like a bit of a prima donna, so to speak, and made way too easy for others to paint a bullseye for criticism on Cameron. For instance, I think that it was Sweden who also voiced similar concerns, but you don't see many consequences for them.

Oh no doubt.  I think there's a lot of spin on this and it is actually a cock-up for Cameron. 

I mean for a start Cameron didn't win any 'safeguards' for the City that'll still be decided by QMV.  He's allowed his position to be portrayed as supporting 'Anglo-Saxon neoliberal' regulations.  In reality on a number of issues the problem is that the UK wants, like Switzerland, to impose stricter requirements on banks, because they're such a large part of our economy.  So for example on capital requirements the EU wants the bare minimum, Germany and France argued for lower at Basel due to the problems in their banks, Britain wanted more at Basel and wants to impose more here.  My understanding is that won't be allowed if EU regulation of financial services moves forward. (Edit: That last is the Lib Dem argument in favour of the Cameron: we need to stop the EU regulating the banks so we can be even stricter.)

Beyond that I've read that the government didn't try to sort out a common view with states broadly supportive of the UK position: Sweden, Hungary, the Czechs, possibly Denmark.  They also failed to really discuss it, as they should have, with Eurozone friends like Germany, the Netherlands, the Baltics and Finland.

I've tried to think through Cameron's acts and the only justification I can think of is that he didn't realise until that week, when the Tory right started acting up, that he couldn't get something past Parliament and regardless would probably need to have a referendum.  Either way I think it's plausible that it'd be the end of his Premiership.

Edit: Regarding the press, I think that it's also a big issue for you as the way EU topics are presented by most UK media really distort public discourse and push it towards a jingoistic and emotional debate that is, ultimately, sterile in order to draw sensible solutions, and shapes public opinion in a way that makes any attempt to resort to direct input by the public senseless as the result would be almost surely negative to any question posed related to the UK and its relationship with the EU.

I broadly agree, but I think the press element is overstated to be honest.

[mongers]

......

In reality on a number of issues the problem is that the UK wants, like Switzerland, to impose stricter requirements on banks, because they're such a large part of our economy.  So for example on capital requirements the EU wants the bare minimum, Germany and France argued for lower at Basel due to the problems in their banks, Britain wanted more at Basel and wants to impose more here. 

......

There seems to be a lot of smoke and mirrors over this question, ''The City' biggin itself up and claiming its 1/4 or 1/5 of all govt. taxation etc. Whereas the latest figures I've seen indicate that financial services are 7.5% of GDP and that included rather pedestrian activities like 'domestic' insurance etc.

To my mind, it looks like Cameron steeled himself and went out to bat for England (the City) but found himself playing on the unused practice wicket, next door to the one the Europeans were playing on.

[Sheilbh]

There seems to be a lot of smoke and mirrors over this question, ''The City' biggin itself up and claiming its 1/4 or 1/5 of all govt. taxation etc. Whereas the latest figures I've seen indicate that financial services are 7.5% of GDP and that included rather pedestrian activities like 'domestic' insurance etc.

This could be true.  But I've no issue with requiring higher capital requirements than set out in Basel for our banks.

[mongers]

There seems to be a lot of smoke and mirrors over this question, ''The City' biggin itself up and claiming its 1/4 or 1/5 of all govt. taxation etc. Whereas the latest figures I've seen indicate that financial services are 7.5% of GDP and that included rather pedestrian activities like 'domestic' insurance etc.

This could be true.  But I've no issue with requiring higher capital requirements than set out in Basel for our banks.

Shelf, I've no disagreement with what you've written, all sound carefully though out stuff, it's just this act of 'the city' biggin itself up has a subtext, which to me seems to be "try and control us and we'll spoil the party, take the ball and go home" or worse.

Meanwhile the rest of the economy is being decimated.

[Sheilbh]

Shelf, I've no disagreement with what you've written, all sound carefully though out stuff, it's just this act of 'the city' biggin itself up has a subtext, which to me seems to be try and control us and well spoil the party, take the ball and go home or worse.

I agree.  I really can't stand the constant tantrums and threats to run away to Switzerland/Dubai/Hong Kong (though the latter makes sense for Standard Chartered and, eventually, HSBC).

I read a funny Economist article a while ago about some City boys who got transferred to Geneva, motivated by lower taxes and are now begging to come back because they've realised how tediously dull Geneva is

[mongers]

Shelf, I've no disagreement with what you've written, all sound carefully though out stuff, it's just this act of 'the city' biggin itself up has a subtext, which to me seems to be try and control us and well spoil the party, take the ball and go home or worse.

I agree.  I really can't stand the constant tantrums and threats to run away to Switzerland/Dubai/Hong Kong (though the latter makes sense for Standard Chartered and, eventually, HSBC).

I read a funny Economist article a while ago about some City boys who got transferred to Geneva, motivated by lower taxes and are now begging to come back because they've realised how tediously dull Geneva is

You should read Robert Harris' most recent, set in Geneva and about financial services, quite a good airport read.

[JonasSalk]

http://youtu.be/nQpUTz3B_xs

Wooo, more

[Richard Hakluyt]

If the financial services sector is 7.5% of GDP then it is about the same size as the NHS. However it is also an export-earner, Britain is a bit short of those, so it is an important part of the economy. The tantrums and threats should be ignored, they are just the usual sort of special pleading that is practised by all sectors of the British economy, the government should continue to try and improve regulation IMO. The media tend to assume that the Tories have a soft spot for the City, I'm not so sure, City excesses have brought a lot of general opprobrium on to the heads of rich people; I would imagine that many wealthy Tories are not too pleased about that.

[Viking]

in USD that is 73,73 US$ per kilo or 33,44 US$ per pound. No profanities suffice. This is a max price found, not a normal price. But, there are people who get away with selling it at this price.

[Admiral Yi]

Enjoy you United Nations #1 quality of life ranking Norway. 

[Valmy]

Enjoy you United Nations #1 quality of life ranking Norway. 

They are building up demand for their impending explosion of butter consumption.

[Capetan Mihali]

Enjoy you United Nations #1 quality of life ranking Norway. 

I can't wait til the US healthcare shortage ends.   

[Admiral Yi]

I can't wait til the US healthcare shortage ends.   

Wut?