" I SEE EVERYONE SLATING CAMERON "

I would never trust the French - many British and Commonwealth soldiers died helping them during the WWII, and yet they have nothing but contempt for us.

Poland trusted Germany, and look what the German's done to Poland.

Russia trusted Germany, and ditto above.

Do you trust the French ?

No

Do you trust the Germans ?

No

Do you think they care or respect or even like the British ?

I think they don't respect us or like us and I bet they laugh at what we have become

Do you want to stay in the EU ?

Not in a million years

Would you like to have the Euro ?

Not in a million years

ATB. Reeco

I would never trust the French - many British and Commonwealth soldiers died helping them during the WWII, and yet they have nothing but contempt for us.

Poland trusted Germany, and look what the German's done to Poland.

Russia trusted Germany, and ditto above.

How far does that argument go back? Should we distrust the Italians because of the Roman invasion or the Norwegians because the Vikings plundered defenceless monasteries for gold?

Surely judgements should be made with a view to the future and not harping back to the past?

Did it to save his own skin. no respect for him at all.

I can tell you now, until today I had no respect whats so ever for him as I believe he has no balls and has not kept to his promises to the British people,but I disliked Blair and Brown more, they were even worse liars, but enough of that.

Please answer the following.

Do you trust the French ?

Do you trust the Germans ?

Do you think they care or respect or even like the British ?

Do you want to stay in the EU ?

Would you like to have the Euro ?

I would agree with that post , but Cameron is a tw*t too with no balls to give us a referendum simply because he knows what the answer would be . That's why we'll never get a referendum on being in or out and I'll guarantee you that all new treaty changes will filter through our laws in time anyway .

The sooner we out of the whole thing the better .

I can tell you now, until today I had no respect whats so ever for him as I believe he has no balls and has not kept to his promises to the British people,but I disliked Blair and Brown more, they were even worse liars, but enough of that.

Please answer the following.

Do you trust the French ? Ans No

Do you trust the Germans ? NO

Do you think they care or respect or even like the British ? NO

Do you want to stay in the EU ? If It is of Benifit To The Uk

Would you like to have the Euro ?

No And Thank God We Havent

I can tell you now, until today I had no respect whats so ever for him as I believe he has no balls and has not kept to his promises to the British people,but I disliked Blair and Brown more, they were even worse liars, but enough of that.

Please answer the following.

Do you trust the French ?

Do you trust the Germans ?

Do you think they care or respect or even like the British ?

Do you want to stay in the EU ?

Would you like to have the Euro ?

I would agree with that post , but Cameron is a tw*t too with no balls to give us a referendum simply because he knows what the answer would be . That's why we'll never get a referendum on being in or out and I'll guarantee you that all new treaty changes will filter through our laws in time anyway .

The sooner we out of the whole thing the better .

I agree, Cameron has not given us a referendum that was promised to us.

Very scary times if you asked me, even thatcher stayed after vitoing Cameron walked. Right wing toy arse playing up to the far right wing Tory backbenchers and euro sceptics. 40 pc of exports are with Europe!

The velvet glove and iron fist was thatcher

The face of caring but really deep down hard nosed Tory from eaton with no real grasp of society behind the mask

David Cameron acted on behalf of the City of London, other vested interests and under sustained pressure from 70-80 Tory backbenchers. He did NOT act in the interests of the vast majority of British people who have zero idea what a derivative or an equity swap are, or have any real appreciation of the dynamics of international diplomacy and trade. Note the negative comments of the CBI - a frequent critic of the EU.

When one puts down the Daily Mail and The Sun and reads this weekend's Financial Times (the preferred paper of the City elite), the conclusion seems to be that Cameron has probably sold Britain short and backed us into a corner that will allow an understandably angry EU to wreak revenge.

Bulldog Sprit my arse! The Bulldog is a dog that struggles to breathe, has a particularly short life expectancy (c.6.5 years in the UK) and sits firmly among the dunces of the dog world (2 places from the bottom of Stanley Coren's dog intelligence ranking). Contrast this with the German Shepherd which ranks at no.2 in Coren's ranking and the Poodle which sits at no.3.

One really has to wonder whether Dave has been outwitted by shrewder opponents.

Britain is royally fucked if it doesnt turn its back on Europe

Unfortunately, Britain is also fucked if it does.

We have NOTHING to offer the World anymore, what do we make?
what do we manufacture?... next to f**k all. We sell arms, munitions
and weaponry to European Military, Airbus supplies European country's
and erm... erm... ???

If we dont toe the 'Euro' line they will stop buying anything from us
and there's not a lot to buy from us in the first place.

We WILL become Americas 51st state. They will prop us up, but at what
cost??

Do you trust the French ?
No.

Do you trust the Germans ?
No, but more than the French.

Do you think they care or respect or even like the British ?
Yes, but like us they have to look out for number one too. Their actions may seem selfish to us at times but the same could be said for us.

Do you want to stay in the EU ?
Yes, our trade relationship with Europe is too important to throw away.

Would you like to have the Euro ?
f**k no.

Britain is royally fucked if it doesnt turn its back on Europe

Unfortunately, Britain is also fucked if it does.

We have NOTHING to offer the World anymore, what do we make?
what do we manufacture?... next to f**k all. We sell arms, munitions
and weaponry to European Military, Airbus supplies European country's
and erm... erm... ???

If we dont toe the 'Euro' line they will stop buying anything from us
and there's not a lot to buy from us in the first place.

We WILL become Americas 51st state. They will prop us up, but at what
cost??

Our service and pharmaceutical industry in the UK is booming at the moment. America will not prop us up, they have no reason too. Globalization has meant all countries have a large interest in everyone else. China is very dependent on Europe at the moment for example, as the majority of it's exports come here. If the EU continues to we demand less, spend less and China loses out. That is the nature of the world right now. We have an interest in the EU and it's something we can't and shouldn't avoid. If we cut off our relationship with them then our balance of trade is just going to get even worse than it is now and the entire economy suffers as a result.

However, if we get in line with the rest of the EU then we lose power and concede it to Brussels which is something no one really wants. David Cameron was put in a horrible position. He was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. He protected London and protected the soverignty of the UK.

It's not that bad for the UK right now. It's far worse in Spain for example where unemployment is at around 20% right now. The whole world is suffering right now and the world economy has a large interest in the state of the EU and the Euro right now. We can't let it collapse, we have too much to lose. By not joining the EU treaty we have thrown a spanner in the mix but the result would have meant we lose power at home which could be just as detrimental for us in the long run.

We're fucked either way. It's the way the world market has become. That said I'm glad Cameron did what he did. We are now however in a position where the rest of the EU will continue on without us. We have too much of interest in the EU to not have our say heard.

Britain is royally fucked if it doesnt turn its back on Europe

Unfortunately, Britain is also fucked if it does.

We have NOTHING to offer the World anymore, what do we make?
what do we manufacture?... next to f**k all. We sell arms, munitions
and weaponry to European Military, Airbus supplies European country's
and erm... erm... ???

If we dont toe the 'Euro' line they will stop buying anything from us
and there's not a lot to buy from us in the first place.

We WILL become Americas 51st state. They will prop us up, but at what
cost??

JCB still hold their place on the world stage as market leaders but even they have moved some manufacture to India. But your right our manufacturing industries have taken one hit after another over the last 20 years. I remember Massey Ferguson closing their tractor making plant in Coventry and moving production to Noerthern France. Why? the euro it helped their american owned parent company ACCO keep prices stable dealing with only companies who dealt in euro.

I worked for a company who supplied Massey Ferguson we were one of 5,000 UK based companies who supplied them bt within a year of moving to France only 27 UK companies were suppling components. We lost our account 2 years after the move with the reason given the euro. Nothing wrong with quality or price we just were not in the euro.

Thousands of people lost their jobs both at Massey and their UK suppliers but our poltical leaders just allowed it to happen and there are probably countless other stories, I have others.

Right now there may be a chance that both Honda and Nissan who have spents billions developing manufacturing sites at Swindon and Sunderland, investment matched by the UK government, will move into mainland europe if the worst case senario develops here.

But the worst thing I have read this year is about a government order for new trains which a company from Derby was hoping to win, unfortunately the coalition decided to give the contract to a german company. The reason they gave was a poor quotation process introduced by the last labour government. The result of course is lost jobs in the UK.

Your absolutely right that things will never improve until we as a nation support our manufacturing base, sadly right now I don't see any appetite to do that.

The city of London financial sector however well thats completely different as Cameron is prepared to dig the mother of ditches for them.

The veto has done nothing to protect the City of London from a transaction tax as one can be brought in any way without the UK’s agreement by consensus majority of the other 26 EU Nations (BTW that is ‘majority’ agreement not unanimous)

This daft decision by Cameron has totally backed the UK into a corner and now he can’t sit at the table and try to bring on board other natural European allies like Holland, Sweden, Poland and Hungary to try and influence direction.

Also Cameron had a powerful argument that as a transaction tax would hit Britain disproportionately he would expect Germany to impose a tax on say BMW/VW Car sales and France on wine and the revenues raised should be used to pay off the sovereign debts of member countries, rather than the UK paying alone.

But by walking away he has proved nothing but that he is an absolute coward and is prepared to put the vanity of his backbenchers above the wellbeing of you or me.

BTW Uccello Azzurro your post was both brilliant and extremly clever and I loved the use of Dog intelligence to make your point.

The veto has done nothing to protect the City of London from a transaction tax as one can be brought in any way without the UK’s agreement by consensus majority of the other 26 EU Nations (BTW that is ‘majority’ agreement not unanimous)

This daft decision by Cameron has totally backed the UK into a corner and now he can’t sit at the table and try to bring on board other natural European allies like Holland, Sweden, Poland and Hungary to try and influence direction.

Also Cameron had a powerful argument that as a transaction tax would hit Britain disproportionately he would expect Germany to impose a tax on say BMW/VW Car sales and France on wine and the revenues raised should be used to pay off the sovereign debts of member countries, rather than the UK paying alone.

But by walking away he has proved nothing but that he is an absolute coward and is prepared to put the vanity of his backbenchers above the wellbeing of you or me.

BTW Uccello Azzurro your post was both brilliant and extremly clever and I loved the use of Dog intelligence to make your point.

Your are right Tony about the UK being unable to stop the rest of the EU implementing these financial regulations which include the financial transaction tax. Your have to go back to the Single European Act in the mid 80's to understand exactly what the then conservative government signed into, only Ireland and Denmark didn't initially sign up to the act until they held a referendum. Maggie chose not to as she preferred to bask in the glory of achieving our annual rebate.

In effect the single european act laid waste to the national veto but Cameron would have us all believe he was the tough guy the other night. In reality the Single European act besides creating the single market also replaced the national veto with "Qualified Majority" voting in the EU Parliament.

In reality if the European Parliament votes, through a qualified majority, to introduce financial requirements including a transation tax and control of national budgets then it becomes law and we must apply that legislation.

If anyone has any doubts they should look no further than the Schengen Agreement (1985) which effectively created a borderless area, with free movement of all citizens, within the EU or more acuratelt with 5 member states of the EU. 2 Countries refused to sign the agreement , (Ireland and the UK) and the agreement remained in force for only Belgium, Netherlands, France, Germany and Luxembourg.

The Iron lady refused to sign up to losing control of our borders as it was not in our national interest, however when the agreement changed to law after being adopted by the european partliament the free movement of all EU citizens between member countries became law and we could do nothing about it. Maggie deflected this by bigging up the annual rebate which she had negoatiated.

The same will happen here forget the veto it will not exist if this is enatced to law through the european parliament, but Cameron can then of course blame someone else saying he had done his best.

I believe overall the cost of our membership to club europe is far to high and I think our membership should be subject to a referendum. If the majority vote yes then so be it but we should then go for it hook line and sinker and join the euro as well.

But before that our politians must be honest about what our real powers are here.

One really has to wonder whether the City is universally behind the line Cameron and the Little Englanders have taken. In the past 24 hours, some City figures have emerged to express concern that the privileged position of the City of London is now probably under greater threat following the line the Government has taken. Interestingly, the Conservatives are claiming that 10% of UK GDP is in financial services, less than most would have expected. Worse still, and what they are not telling us, is that the City equates to just 4% of UK economic output, not the entire 10%. Of this 4%, how much would have moved if it was subjected to an EU transactional tax which would have had the added benefit of penalising some of the more questionable trading models most.

According to a PWC study, the entire FS sector contributed just 13.9% of UK tax revenue, That includes all forms of tax, including income tax from the FS sector's employees. You can be sure that the biggest City earners will be contributing little or none of that 13.9% as they wrap their incomes in all kinds of tax avoidance, including through offshore residence (like Sir Philip Green who earns in the UK, but protects his wealth by maintaining a residence with his wife in Monaco).

When one considers how much ordinary tax payers have been asked to hand over to save the so-called Masters of the Universe and the distortion it is having in terms of the UK economy as a whole, one has to wonder whether the City really is such a golden goose for the UK. If you are an exporting company in Swindon, Newport or Newcastle or just an average family with 2 kids, the City really is just one hell of a burden.

Much of the information we are being fed is distorted and it is wise to do your own analysis when hearing the arguments being presented by politicians and biased sections of the media. We need to think for ourselves.

Your are right Tony about the UK being unable to stop the rest of the EU implementing these financial regulations which include the financial transaction tax. Your have to go back to the Single European Act in the mid 80's to understand exactly what the then conservative government signed into, only Ireland and Denmark didn't initially sign up to the act until they held a referendum. Maggie chose not to as she preferred to bask in the glory of achieving our annual rebate.

In effect the single european act laid waste to the national veto but Cameron would have us all believe he was the tough guy the other night. In reality the Single European act besides creating the single market also replaced the national veto with "Qualified Majority" voting in the EU Parliament.

In reality if the European Parliament votes, through a qualified majority, to introduce financial requirements including a transation tax and control of national budgets then it becomes law and we must apply that legislation.

If anyone has any doubts they should look no further than the Schengen Agreement (1985) which effectively created a borderless area, with free movement of all citizens, within the EU or more acuratelt with 5 member states of the EU. 2 Countries refused to sign the agreement , (Ireland and the UK) and the agreement remained in force for only Belgium, Netherlands, France, Germany and Luxembourg.

The Iron lady refused to sign up to losing control of our borders as it was not in our national interest, however when the agreement changed to law after being adopted by the european partliament the free movement of all EU citizens between member countries became law and we could do nothing about it. Maggie deflected this by bigging up the annual rebate which she had negoatiated.

The same will happen here forget the veto it will not exist if this is enatced to law through the european parliament, but Cameron can then of course blame someone else saying he had done his best.

I believe overall the cost of our membership to club europe is far to high and I think our membership should be subject to a referendum. If the majority vote yes then so be it but we should then go for it hook line and sinker and join the euro as well.

But before that our politians must be honest about what our real powers are here.

Thanks for that Castle and it really sums up just how much we are being lied to and Cameron is not the hero he is trying to portray himself as. His actions make no sense at all because as you have pointed out the EU Parliament can pass any law they want and we have to comply and that will now happen without us even having a say.

Therefore I fully agree with you that we should hold a once and for all referendum on membership of the EU were the full consequences of leaving or staying in should be explained without spin to the people of Great Britain.

If we vote against we should pull out lock stock and barrel, if we vote to staying in we should join up for the full journey including the Euro.

What can’t be allowed to happen is this constant tinkering and sitting on the fence to appease the Euro sceptics of the Conservative Party.

One really has to wonder whether the City is universally behind the line Cameron and the Little Englanders have taken. In the past 24 hours, some City figures have emerged to express concern that the privileged position of the City of London is now probably under greater threat following the line the Government has taken. Interestingly, the Conservatives are claiming that 10% of UK GDP is in financial services, less than most would have expected. Worse still, and what they are not telling us, is that the City equates to just 4% of UK economic output, not the entire 10%. Of this 4%, how much would have moved if it was subjected to an EU transactional tax which would have had the added benefit of penalising some of the more questionable trading models most.

According to a PWC study, the entire FS sector contributed just 13.9% of UK tax revenue, That includes all forms of tax, including income tax from the FS sector's employees. You can be sure that the biggest City earners will be contributing little or none of that 13.9% as they wrap their incomes in all kinds of tax avoidance, including through offshore residence (like Sir Philip Green who earns in the UK, but protects his wealth by maintaining a residence with his wife in Monaco).

When one considers how much ordinary tax payers have been asked to hand over to save the so-called Masters of the Universe and the distortion it is having in terms of the UK economy as a whole, one has to wonder whether the City really is such a golden goose for the UK. If you are an exporting company in Swindon, Newport or Newcastle or just an average family with 2 kids, the City really is just one hell of a burden.

Much of the information we are being fed is distorted and it is wise to do your own analysis when hearing the arguments being presented by politicians and biased sections of the media. We need to think for ourselves.

Another excellent post UA. Since the banking collapse in 2007 I have often wondered whether the financial services industry is worth having in this country. It is true that even on the figures above it does contribute towards our overall wealth but when you weigh that up against how much it cost to bail them out when things go wrong you have to wonder if they are worth the trouble.

Honestly the next time they issue their threat to relocate if they don't get their own way I would tell them straight 'fine find some other mug country that will bail you out next time you f**k up'

One really has to wonder whether the City is universally behind the line Cameron and the Little Englanders have taken. In the past 24 hours, some City figures have emerged to express concern that the privileged position of the City of London is now probably under greater threat following the line the Government has taken. Interestingly, the Conservatives are claiming that 10% of UK GDP is in financial services, less than most would have expected. Worse still, and what they are not telling us, is that the City equates to just 4% of UK economic output, not the entire 10%. Of this 4%, how much would have moved if it was subjected to an EU transactional tax which would have had the added benefit of penalising some of the more questionable trading models most.

According to a PWC study, the entire FS sector contributed just 13.9% of UK tax revenue, That includes all forms of tax, including income tax from the FS sector's employees. You can be sure that the biggest City earners will be contributing little or none of that 13.9% as they wrap their incomes in all kinds of tax avoidance, including through offshore residence (like Sir Philip Green who earns in the UK, but protects his wealth by maintaining a residence with his wife in Monaco).

When one considers how much ordinary tax payers have been asked to hand over to save the so-called Masters of the Universe and the distortion it is having in terms of the UK economy as a whole, one has to wonder whether the City really is such a golden goose for the UK. If you are an exporting company in Swindon, Newport or Newcastle or just an average family with 2 kids, the City really is just one hell of a burden.

Much of the information we are being fed is distorted and it is wise to do your own analysis when hearing the arguments being presented by politicians and biased sections of the media. We need to think for ourselves.

The City Of London Financial Services sector has grown as a direct result of the "Free Market Ideologies" so ferevently followed by Thatcher in the UK and Reagan in the USA. Let the market decide with no state intervention or control but sadly we and the rest of the world are now reaping the rewards of 30 years of Thatcherism. I say that because New Labour were even more Free Market orientated than Thatcher as they allowed no room for any form of control and deregulated at will because they were to busy filling out their expense claims, writing their memoirs and sexing up reports on WMD.

After the second world war most adavanced countries met at Breeton Woods in America and agreed an accord on the exchange rate between each country, a fixed exchange rate to help rebuild the world economies following the depression of the 30 and the 2nd world war. This served to put consistency into foreign exchange and helped all countries develop trade through a sustained period of growth which ceated jobs and wealth worldwide. The system was basically backed by the USA dollar and worked well until Nixon decided it would be better if the US dollar was allowed to become a floating currency. The UK followed then shortly after and by the end of the 70 Thatcherism was born and that was the source of all problems with financial markets.

By the early 90 the EU or that Kraut chancellor dreamt up the single currency idea for the single EU market, however the tory eurosceptics refused to committ to join but did enter the Exchange Rate Mechanism which allowed currenncies to trade within agree bands. However the currency dealers in London, and other centres enjoyed playing games with the markets until we were forced to withdraw from the ERM having spent billions supporting the £. Our currency was effectively devalued and this should have been a warning to everyone but it wasn't.

It is no coincidence in my opinion that the UK and USA were the 2 countries where the financial crisis started in 2008 because of this free market bollocks.

It also does beg the questions if we had agreed to join the euro would we have been better off, would manufacturing companies be benefitiing from the stability brought about by having a fixed currency like existed as a result of the Bretton Woods accord.

Cameron will say no because it would damage the City Of London Financial Centres because it would limit the games they could play with the currency exchange markets.

I'm no economist but my guess is we would be better off now if we were a part of the euro and we had government control over the amount of currency that can be moved out of the country.

Just my opinion.

One really has to wonder whether the City is universally behind the line Cameron and the Little Englanders have taken. In the past 24 hours, some City figures have emerged to express concern that the privileged position of the City of London is now probably under greater threat following the line the Government has taken. Interestingly, the Conservatives are claiming that 10% of UK GDP is in financial services, less than most would have expected. Worse still, and what they are not telling us, is that the City equates to just 4% of UK economic output, not the entire 10%. Of this 4%, how much would have moved if it was subjected to an EU transactional tax which would have had the added benefit of penalising some of the more questionable trading models most.

According to a PWC study, the entire FS sector contributed just 13.9% of UK tax revenue, That includes all forms of tax, including income tax from the FS sector's employees. You can be sure that the biggest City earners will be contributing little or none of that 13.9% as they wrap their incomes in all kinds of tax avoidance, including through offshore residence (like Sir Philip Green who earns in the UK, but protects his wealth by maintaining a residence with his wife in Monaco).

When one considers how much ordinary tax payers have been asked to hand over to save the so-called Masters of the Universe and the distortion it is having in terms of the UK economy as a whole, one has to wonder whether the City really is such a golden goose for the UK. If you are an exporting company in Swindon, Newport or Newcastle or just an average family with 2 kids, the City really is just one hell of a burden.

Much of the information we are being fed is distorted and it is wise to do your own analysis when hearing the arguments being presented by politicians and biased sections of the media. We need to think for ourselves.

Another excellent post UA. Since the banking collapse in 2007 I have often wondered whether the financial services industry is worth having in this country. It is true that even on the figures above it does contribute towards our overall wealth but when you weigh that up against how much it cost to bail them out when things go wrong you have to wonder if they are worth the trouble.

Honestly the next time they issue their threat to relocate if they don't get their own way I would tell them straight 'fine find some other mug country that will bail you out next time you f**k up'

Thanks TBW.

No sector should be allowed to dictate. On any basis, 4% of economic output is not much at all, and one has to ask how much of this, if any, would be lost to a Tobin Tax. In any event, to use investment theory why would any rational portfolio manager sacrifice returns on 96% of his holdings to protect the other 4% of his portfolio, particularly when that 4% has already proven the damage it is capable of doing to the 96%? This argument about protecting the golden goose is starting to look like utter folly, or more likely a misleading message thought up by the spin doctors of the Little Englanders' party.

The fact that Cameron dined with leading Eurosceptics at Chequers on his return from Brussels speaks volumes. That dinner should have been with the senior management of Britain's leading exporters - they will have plenty to say right now!

I am enjoying reading this debate, We've got some big name posters involved.

Thanks TBW.

No sector should be allowed to dictate. On any basis, 4% of economic output is not much at all, and one has to ask how much of this, if any, would be lost to a Tobin Tax. In any event, to use investment theory why would any rational portfolio manager sacrifice returns on 96% of his holdings to protect the other 4% of his portfolio, particularly when that 4% has already proven the damage it is capable of doing to the 96%? This argument about protecting the golden goose is starting to look like utter folly, or more likely a misleading message thought up by the spin doctors of the Little Englanders' party.

The fact that Cameron dined with leading Eurosceptics at Chequers on his return from Brussels speaks volumes. That dinner should have been with the senior management of Britain's leading exporters - they will have plenty to say right now!

When I first heard of the transaction tax I did fall for the line of Europe is pulling a fast one getting the UK to pay off its soverign debt via the backdoor.

But having heard more of the debate I'm coming around to your way of thinking UA in that whatever the Tobin Tax take was it would be a drop in the ocean to what the banking sector make each year.

I agree fully that the Golden Goose excuse is looking more and more like a red herring and the real reason for Cameron's decision can be found in that dinner party held at Chequers on his return.

The City Of London Financial Services sector has grown as a direct result of the "Free Market Ideologies" so ferevently followed by Thatcher in the UK and Reagan in the USA. Let the market decide with no state intervention or control but sadly we and the rest of the world are now reaping the rewards of 30 years of Thatcherism. I say that because New Labour were even more Free Market orientated than Thatcher as they allowed no room for any form of control and deregulated at will because they were to busy filling out their expense claims, writing their memoirs and sexing up reports on WMD.

After the second world war most adavanced countries met at Breeton Woods in America and agreed an accord on the exchange rate between each country, a fixed exchange rate to help rebuild the world economies following the depression of the 30 and the 2nd world war. This served to put consistency into foreign exchange and helped all countries develop trade through a sustained period of growth which ceated jobs and wealth worldwide. The system was basically backed by the USA dollar and worked well until Nixon decided it would be better if the US dollar was allowed to become a floating currency. The UK followed then shortly after and by the end of the 70 Thatcherism was born and that was the source of all problems with financial markets.

By the early 90 the EU or that Kraut chancellor dreamt up the single currency idea for the single EU market, however the tory eurosceptics refused to committ to join but did enter the Exchange Rate Mechanism which allowed currenncies to trade within agree bands. However the currency dealers in London, and other centres enjoyed playing games with the markets until we were forced to withdraw from the ERM having spent billions supporting the £. Our currency was effectively devalued and this should have been a warning to everyone but it wasn't.

It is no coincidence in my opinion that the UK and USA were the 2 countries where the financial crisis started in 2008 because of this free market bollocks.

It also does beg the questions if we had agreed to join the euro would we have been better off, would manufacturing companies be benefitiing from the stability brought about by having a fixed currency like existed as a result of the Bretton Woods accord.

Cameron will say no because it would damage the City Of London Financial Centres because it would limit the games they could play with the currency exchange markets.

I'm no economist but my guess is we would be better off now if we were a part of the euro and we had government control over the amount of currency that can be moved out of the country.

Just my opinion.

Bloody hell Castle have you ate a history book for Sunday Dinner? Fair play the saying 'you learn something new every day' should be changed to 'you learn several things everyday' when your on posting form

I must correct myself. My PWC data is two years out of date. The latest edition of the report was published in December 2010 and covers the tax year to the end of March 2010. In that year, total tax revenue from the financial services sector and from all sources, including income tax, was just 11.2% of total government tax receipts. In the previous year (2008/09), it was 12.1%. The data I provided was for 2007/08 when financial services contributed 13.9% of tax income for the Government.

With the City providing just 4% of UK economic output and an the entire financial services sector providing just 10% of economic output, I fail to see why their voice should be more important than much larger sectors such as manufacturing and construction.

Government talk of rebalancing the national economy by expanding manufacturing and exports were just hollow words.

When I first heard of the transaction tax I did fall for the line of Europe is pulling a fast one getting the UK to pay off its soverign debt via the backdoor.

But having heard more of the debate I'm coming around to your way of thinking UA in that whatever the Tobin Tax take was it would be a drop in the ocean to what the banking sector make each year.

I agree fully that the Golden Goose excuse is looking more and more like a red herring and the real reason for Cameron's decision can be found in that dinner party held at Chequers on his return.

Your close there Tony but the dinner party at Chequers is just Cameron showing off with tax payers money to his friends in the City Of London.

Friends like David "Spotty" Rowland who was appointed Treasurer of the Conservative Party by Cameron to find people in the City prepared to donate to Tory Party Funds, never mind this guy had spent years in tax exile in Monaco and Guernsey keeping more of his money then you or I or basically anyone who looks to pay their way in this country.

In 2005 the City Of London Financial institutions provided just over £2m to the Tory Party Coffers, last year a general election year that figure was over £10m of which good old Spotty donated £3m.

The question is was the decision to use a veto in the interests of this country, the City of London or the Tory Party.

I think I'll perm two from those 3 and I'd be spot on. Where the feck is Milliband and why is he not shouting this from the rooftops.

As Jim Royle would say - National Interests my arse.

Thanks TBW.

No sector should be allowed to dictate. On any basis, 4% of economic output is not much at all, and one has to ask how much of this, if any, would be lost to a Tobin Tax. In any event, to use investment theory why would any rational portfolio manager sacrifice returns on 96% of his holdings to protect the other 4% of his portfolio, particularly when that 4% has already proven the damage it is capable of doing to the 96%? This argument about protecting the golden goose is starting to look like utter folly, or more likely a misleading message thought up by the spin doctors of the Little Englanders' party.

The fact that Cameron dined with leading Eurosceptics at Chequers on his return from Brussels speaks volumes. That dinner should have been with the senior management of Britain's leading exporters - they will have plenty to say right now!

When I first heard of the transaction tax I did fall for the line of Europe is pulling a fast one getting the UK to pay off its soverign debt via the backdoor.

But having heard more of the debate I'm coming around to your way of thinking UA in that whatever the Tobin Tax take was it would be a drop in the ocean to what the banking sector make each year.

I agree fully that the Golden Goose excuse is looking more and more like a red herring and the real reason for Cameron's decision can be found in that dinner party held at Chequers on his return.

TBW, the biggest "losers" from a Tobin Tax would have been firms that process large volumes of trades which are pushed through by programmed trading systems. These are heavily used by quantitative-based hedge fund traders and have been associated with some of the worst excesses in the financial crisis - hence why Merkel and Sarkozy have them in their sights. They are also noteworthy for the fact that they employ relatively few people, many of whom have a particular penchant for tax avoidance in the UK. These same people are also among the Conservative Party's more enthusiastic donors. Where would these firms run if that's what they felt they had to do? Monaco? Switzerland? Tax havens which are already feeling the heat from the German, French and other EU governments.

Apparently, Deutsche Bank is now the largest employer in the City. I can see the German government applying pressure on its leadership to relocate business from London to the Eurozone. Similarly, there are ways the French government and EU can apply pressure on BNP Paribas, Societe Generale and other EU-HQ'd banks. Even the bulge bracket US banks are not immune to such political, regulatory, tax and other pressure.

All the same, I cannot decide whether Cameron is merely corrupted, or just a complete fool.

When I first heard of the transaction tax I did fall for the line of Europe is pulling a fast one getting the UK to pay off its soverign debt via the backdoor.

But having heard more of the debate I'm coming around to your way of thinking UA in that whatever the Tobin Tax take was it would be a drop in the ocean to what the banking sector make each year.

I agree fully that the Golden Goose excuse is looking more and more like a red herring and the real reason for Cameron's decision can be found in that dinner party held at Chequers on his return.

Your close there Tony but the dinner party at Chequers is just Cameron showing off with tax payers money to his friends in the City Of London.

Friends like David "Spotty" Rowland who was appointed Treasurer of the Conservative Party by Cameron to find people in the City prepared to donate to Tory Party Funds, never mind this guy had spent years in tax exile in Monaco and Guernsey keeping more of his money then you or I or basically anyone who looks to pay their way in this country.

In 2005 the City Of London Financial institutions provided just over £2m to the Tory Party Coffers, last year a general election year that figure was over £10m of which good old Spotty donated £3m.

The question is was the decision to use a veto in the interests of this country, the City of London or the Tory Party.

I think I'll perm two from those 3 and I'd be spot on. Where the feck is Milliband and why is he not shouting this from the rooftops.

As Jim Royle would say - National Interests my arse.

As with brown-nosing Murdoch and his empire, both Labour and the Conservatives have been bought by vested interests in the financial community. When it comes to vested interests in the City and among the hedge fund community, both Cameron and Miliband's parties have sold out. Apparently, hedge fund contributors represent the single largest group of donors to Tory Party funds.

I assume that a deep analysis would raise awkward questions about private donors to Labour party funds. Perhaps this is why the quality of Miliband's critique is so weak

As with brown-nosing Murdoch and his empire, both Labour and the Conservatives have been bought by vested interests in the financial community. When it comes to vested interests in the City and among the hedge fund community, both Cameron and Miliband's parties have sold out. Apparently, hedge fund contributors represent the single largest group of donors to Tory Party funds.

I assume that a deep analysis would raise awkward questions about private donors to Labour party funds. Perhaps this is why the quality of Miliband's critique is so weak

Ah yes David Sainsbury or should I say Baron Sainsbury after Tony Blair give him a life peerage after helping him to power in 1997.

But that only goes to prove just how corrupt funding of political parties is. Perhaps we should start a debate on funding UK political parties from public funds.

As with brown-nosing Murdoch and his empire, both Labour and the Conservatives have been bought by vested interests in the financial community. When it comes to vested interests in the City and among the hedge fund community, both Cameron and Miliband's parties have sold out. Apparently, hedge fund contributors represent the single largest group of donors to Tory Party funds.

I assume that a deep analysis would raise awkward questions about private donors to Labour party funds. Perhaps this is why the quality of Miliband's critique is so weak

Ah yes David Sainsbury or should I say Baron Sainsbury after Tony Blair give him a life peerage after helping him to power in 1997.

But that only goes to prove just how corrupt funding of political parties is. Perhaps we should start a debate on funding UK political parties from public funds.

There was a proper committee working on making funding more fair but both the Tories and Labour have tried to veto it because they perceive it to affect them more than the other party.

I don't trust half the people living in my street, never mind the French, Germans or indeed any other European nations.

One thing I must emphasise though, is that at least a lot of Europe share many positive Western philosophies and traits. Something which our 'friends' in China, Iran etc aren't so keen on.

We don't want to be on our own fighting a war with crippled America, fighting against the neuveau fascists of China and the Islamic tyrants of Iran.