Is this the same Nick Clegg?

Click for linky

On Friday night, François Fillon, the French prime minister, interrupted an official visit to Brazil to call Mr Clegg to "clarify" his recent comments that Britain's credit rating should be reviewed.
The Deputy PM told Mr Fillon that his recent remarks and those by other senior French figures had been "simply unacceptable and that steps should be taken to calm down the rhetoric".

Yeah, I know. Being told off by Nick Clegg. It sounds like being savaged by a kitten that's been quite heavily sedated, doesn't it? But you know, I reckon he meant it. He might even have meant it more than Cameron meant to say 'no' to the Merkozy being last week, and I wouldn't rule out Clegg going for the full diplospeak version of je t'encule in the future.

Because I think Cleggy boy has noticed something. His reluctant BFF next door has suddenly become more popular with the electorate. Undeserved, perhaps, but even if Cameron stood up to the EU for Britain by complete accident he'd have got some political capital out of it, and Cleggy probably fancies a little of it for himself. Hang on, he may be thinking to himself, there's votes in this Euroscepticism thingy. And let's face it, for a man who's only a liberal or a democrat as and when it suits him it's not impossible that he might decide to be a Europhile only when it's worth his while as well.

To paraphrase Marx - Groucho, that is - these are Nick's principles and if you don't like them he has others.

Do you have to be a European to believe the Euro is not all but dead?

And does the head in the sand approach mean greater problems when it finally keels over? Some certainly think so.

TOP US military officer General Martin Dempsey has admitted he is ''extraordinarily concerned'' about the euro's survival, pointing to potential civil unrest and the break-up of the European Union.

''The euro zone is at great risk,'' the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said, giving the strongest indication yet about the depth of Washington's concerns over Europe's financial tumult.

''We are extraordinarily concerned by the health and viability of the euro because in some ways we're exposed literally to contracts but also because of the potential of civil unrest and break-up of the union that has been forged over there,'' General Dempsey said.

I can't help feeling that if the US are getting the Joint Chiefs of Staff involved they're very, very worried over there. We all know that Americans aren't allowed to die for any reason at all any more, and there are many tens of thousands of them in Europe at any one time. Warnings from economists may carry the weight of expertise but when a major power's military starts talking about it it sounds like someone somewhere now expects the worst.

Has David Cameron grown a set?

Click for linky

Or could he see that capitulation would leave him even more unelectable than Gordon Brown was? Still, as plenty of other bloggers have pointed out it's probably not enough and he'll either be railroaded into it later or be forced to think the unthinkable and talk about leaving the EU.

My money's on the first one. I'm sure the Civil Service do his thinking for him.

Timely

Via the Eye.

Gissa currency

Actually 17 currencies might be better. You could call them Francs, Marks, Punts, Pesetas, Drachmas.....

Silencing of dissent

Yesterday the Snowolf put up a video that was put on YouTube, apparently by the European Central Bank if the user name is any guide, in celebration of the Euro and its forthcoming tenth birthday. Wolfers suggests that with Europe's current financial problems and the part the single currency has played no small amount of chutzpah must have been needed to post a video celebrating that, but he notes something else interesting.

Perhaps a little surprisingly (or not) the owners of the video have decided to disable comments on it.

No room for dissent, Comrades.

No room indeed, though when has the EU or its institutions ever shown much interest in what people think? However, in the spirit of freedom of expression, as enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, I've re-uploaded their video with commenting enabled and the following message:

Original video by YouTube user ecbeuro at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0YrRM7yee0
The European Central Bank has chosen not to allow comments on its video, and given current issues within the EU I feel this is disappointing and undemocratic from an institution ultimately dependent on taxpayers. Accordingly I'm re-uploading the video with comments enabled, which I feel is fair dealing under the law where I currently live (Australian Copyright Act 1968 - for the purpose of criticism or review (s41, s103A)) and fair use in the US where YouTube is based.

All rights to the video and soundtrack remain with its creators. I will happily remove this copy if the original opens to criticism/review in the form of YouTube comments.

Will YouTube take it down and give me a smack on the wrist over copyright or will my bit about the undemocratic lack of comments on the original and appeal of fair dealing be enough to keep it where it is? If it goes it'll reappear on EyeTube, though not if the ECB enable commenting on theirs, but I hope YouTube will see what I'm getting at. In the meantime you can watch the ECB version either at Wolfers' or at the link above, and if you want to be able to comment on the single currency then you can do it on the one I put up instead. At least for the time being.

You know something's in bad shape when...

... when its creators begin to turn against it. Ladies and genitals, I give you former president of the European Commission Jacques Delors, who believes the Euro is fucked.

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Jacques Delors, the former president of the European Commission, claims that errors made when the euro was created had effectively doomed the single currency to the current debt crisis

Admittedly he doesn't actually say it's fucked and he is saying that it would all have gone swimmingly if it had been done his way, but all the same there's quite a bit he says that a lot of people would agree with.

Mr Delors claims that the current crisis stems from “a fault in execution” by the political leaders who oversaw the euro in its early days. Leaders chose to turn a blind eye to the fundamental weaknesses and imbalances of member states’ economies, he says.
“The finance ministers did not want to see anything disagreeable which they would be forced to deal with,” he says.

Can't argue with that, and nor can I argue with some bits from the interview proper because they sound very similar to what I've said more than once myself.

It is a fault in the execution, not of the architects, which he claimed to have pointed out in 1997 when the plans for introducing the euro finally came together. At the time, he says, the best of the eurosceptic economists, whom he refers to as “the Anglo-Saxons”, raised the simple objection that if you have an independent central bank, you must also have a state.
Mr Delors thinks “they had a point”, but the way round this problem was to insist on the economic bit of the union as much as the monetary. As well as creating a single currency, you also had to create common economic policies “founded on the co-operation of the member states”.
I get the impression from Mr Delors that he thinks Mrs Thatcher would have agreed with this view. She certainly would not have agreed, however, on the Delors version of what that co-operation should produce — the harmonisation of most taxes, plans to deal with youth and long-term unemployment, and that social dimension for which he always called...

And when the Euro finally goes tits up the call will be for exactly that and possibly more. I've said it in comments on several other blogs as well as once or twice here - the former colonies in America formed the United States first and created their single currency later, and there will be Europhiles and Eurocrats who will seize on this as evidence that the EU attempted to put the cart before the horse and call for the full and immediate federalisation of Europe so that Son-of-Euro can be launched as quickly as possible. A United States of Europe wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing if it was a federation of competing states, but does anyone think that's even a remote possibility if it's constructed on the foundations of what's now the EU?

Not. A. Prayer.

We make jokes about the EUSSR now, but I reckon it's not half as bad as it could be if formal union were to occur any time soon. It's already been pointed out before that the European Commission and Parliament are not unlike the Politburo and Supreme Soviet, and if all the borrowed money had to be repaid it won't even look as cheery as 1980s Gorky in the winter.

If they fail and the Euro fails with them it might only be the silver lining round a nasty looking cloud. The breakup of the EU is being warned, but if that sounds good to you my advice would be not to get your hopes up. More likely it'll be patched together to save egos and careers as the architects of half a billion people's misfortune say that the death of the single currency is not proof that Europe should remain a continent of independent nations but proof of the need for a federal Europe.

Questions to which the answer is "No"

Cick for linky

... the question arises, should the rest of the world take over management of Europe to prevent or mitigate disaster? Specifically, should the US Federal Reserve assume leadership as a monetary superpower and impose policy on a paralyzed ECB, acting as a global lender of last resort?

And for the answer I think we should turn to one of those well worn graphical illustrations of how deep America's debt rabbit hole goes. This one is an excellent example from usdebt.kleptocracy.us. The first image shows the approximate US public debt by the end of the year if it was a piles of actual size $100 bills compared to quite a famous landmark, and the second shows that plus its unfunded liabilities.

If you've read the captions on those images (you can embiggerfy, or better yet go look at the original where you can see a similar representation of the US budget for 2011) you'll have noticed that the first of those, the $15 trillion pile, is roughly the size of the Gross Domestic Product for the entire United States. In fact the captions are a little out of date - US debt will not now reach 100% of GDP by Christmas 2011 because that happened four weeks ago.

So actually the answer to the question of whether the US Federal Reserve should act as Europe's lender of last resort is not just "No" - it's "With what?"

Pots and kettles

Half inched from Zerohedge.

From the Mail:

Countries will be forced to submit their budgets for EU approval before they go to national parliaments, will have to sign up to strict new rules on the size of debts and deficits and will be sued for any breach in the European Court of Justice.

Mrs Exile comments, wondering if this would be the same EU that hasn't had its books signed off by the auditors for 17 years in a row. Damn good question. But in the absence of any sane answer I'd say that countries all over Europe can look forward to seeing headlines like the Irish did a couple of weeks ago.

Unless the whole bloody Euro train wreck finally comes off the rails first, of course. Who knows, that might even have happened by the time this post goes up.

Appropriate music track

Because this:

British embassies in the eurozone have been told to draw up plans to help British expats through the collapse of the single currency, amid new fears for Italy and Spain.As the Italian government struggled to borrow and Spain considered seeking an international bail-out, British ministers privately warned that the break-up of the euro, once almost unthinkable, is now increasingly plausible.
Diplomats are preparing to help Britons abroad through a banking collapse and even riots arising from the debt crisis.
The Treasury confirmed earlier this month that contingency planning for a collapse is now under way.
[...]
Recent Foreign and Commonwealth Office instructions to embassies and consulates request contingency planning for extreme scenarios including rioting and social unrest.

So this:

Happy sights, happy thoughts

Click for linky

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not gloating. Well, to be honest actually I am gloating a bit, but not all that much. That partly because it's not happened yet and we should keep the champagne on ice until it does, and partly because I'm not philosophically opposed to the idea of single currencies or federalisation as such. I think living in a federation of competing states (with a small 's') has got a lot to be said for it providing they really are competing to attract citizens, and as far as I'm concerned people can do business in Altairian Dollars, Flanian Pobble Beads or the Triganic Pu, or even a single currency with a stupid name if they want, as long as both parties agree to it. What I find so objectionable about both the Euro and about EU federalism is the attempts to impose both on half a billion people whether they want them or not, and the lack of any real efforts to make either really worth wanting much.

The only note of caution I'd sound, and this is aside the view of the experts that the whole process is likely to be painful and bloody even for nations not directly connected, is that I suspect the death of the Euro will lay the grounds for the next battle. "We know what went wrong," they'll say. "We should have done it like the Americans did when the USA was born: political union first and monetary union second." Prepare yourselves, Europeans, because this might not be the beginning of the end, but just the end of the beginning.

That's you lot told

Click for linky

Wolfgang Schäuble said that, despite the current crisis in the eurozone, the euro will ultimately emerge as the common currency of the entire European Union. He said he “respects” Britain’s decision to keep the pound, but insisted that the survival and eventual stabilisation of the euro will convince non-members to join the currency club. “This may happen more quickly than some people in the British Isles currently believe,” he added.

The message to the UK is obvious - it's not your country anymore. But there is another way of reading it, another subtext below the one which really barely qualifies as subtext: we've nailed our colours to the Euro mast and its unravelling, and we're hoping like hell another big economy jumping on board will manage to keep it going and save our careers and/or reputations. I'm not sure that isn't a bit optimistic given Britain's level of debt and the fact that the Cobbleition government are really no less profligate with other people's money than their predecessors, but from here it seems like time is running out. The Euro car had a dodgy handbrake and was parked on a hill by a cliff, and now the bugger's rolling toward the edge and everyone who helped pay for the car is running like hell after it hoping to stop it in time. Getting a country with a good credit rating on board (though fuck knows why the UK still has a good rating) might buy them some more. Either that or when the car reaches the cliff Britain won't have an advantage over those that kept running after it right over the edge.

The alternative is pretty clear. Herr Schäuble must be told, in no uncertain terms, to fuck off.

Lalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalala we can't hear you

Via the von Mises blog, the latest move in Europe to solve the continent's economic problems: ban credit ratings agencies from downgrading member states' credit ratings.

The European Commission on Tuesday (15 November) is to unveil proposals to clamp down on the credit-ratings industry, seen as one of the key villains in the eurozone debt crisis melodrama.

Internal market commissioner Michel Barnier is to propose a series of measures including a 'blackout' in the rating of troubled states in an attempt to limit the ratcheting up of market instability the EU executive accuses the sector of being responsible for when it has delivered downgrades to the credit ratings of countries.

The draft law would allow the EU to temporarily ban companies such as Standard & Poor’s, Fitch and Moody’s from issuing ratings changes if regulators assess that such moves would exacerbate market volatility.

Nice to see such great value being placed on free speech in the EU. If it might harm the project, even if it's an honest opinion, you can't say it. End of. As was said at von Mises, this is simply shooting the messenger. In fact it smacks of such desperation that I'm surprised that the messenger isn't already saying, 'Look, fuck that, I'm not going anywhere near the place and I'd advise anyone else with a vestige of sanity not to go anywhere near it either.'

'Kinell.

Guilty 'til proven innocent

I was going to blog on the arrest (with free strip search thrown in) in Germany of Tracey Molamphy on a charge she knew nothing about relating to an incident involving someone she was with more than 12 years earlier, but SadbutMadLad has already done a thorough job on it over at The Raccoon Arms.

Was she unlawfully arrested? No, because the EAW is law. Was she unfairly treated by the German police? No, they were following their lawful procedures. So if everything was above board and followed the law what was wrong? The fact that no evidence needs to be shown to back up the extradition request.

The only thing I'll add is that thanks to the European Arrest Warrant and its provision for detention with absolutely no prima facie evidence, and of course the feckless politicians who signed the UK up to it, that nasty little phrase 'Guilty 'til proven innocent' effectively applies to everyone living in the UK. For that matter it applies to everyone else in the world who might visit any part of Europe - if a British citizen can be picked up in Germany over an incident in Portugal then there's no reason why an American or an Aussie or a Japanese tourist visiting London couldn't be arrested over a years old accusation they no nothing about in a completely different part of Europe. Any protection that might be afforded by a statute of limitations will depend on which country issued the warrant since many don't have one.

'Kinell!

Quote of the Day

Science news, and none of that useless science with no practical application either. This is the announcement of a new SI unit that will transform measurement of a day to day phenomenon to an easy standard so that everyone knows what is being talked about and precisely how much of it there is.

Following his comments on the UK being just an island at the G20, [Nicolas Sarkozy] has been selected by the International Science Community as the new System of Units(SI) as the standard cunt for scientific purposes.
[...]
The Cunt, which the measure of absolute intolerability, was recalibrated by the French Academe de Sciences after the previous standard cunt, former UK PM and bigot caller Gordon Brown who has degraded in cuntitude slightly over time to 0.9992 of a cunt.

Pop over to Down With That Sort Of Thing to read the PR in its full abusive glory. Made Oi larf.

I'd call that an out

Click for linky

Mr Cameron supports steps that the eurozone is taking to boost its banks and bailouts funds as part of wider moves towards closer fiscal union in order to avert a European debt crisis that has threatened to plunge the global economy into a slump.
But he fears that regular meetings of the euro’s 17 governments will lead to the creation of a Franco-Greman dominated “caucus” or a bloc that could hijack the EU’s single market for its own ends, damaging the British economy by imposing regulations that benefit Paris or Frankfurt over the City of London.
”There is danger that as the eurozone comes together that those countries outside might see the eurozone start to take decisions on some of the things that are vital to them in the single market, for instance financial services,” he said.

Well, no shit, Dave. So it'd be a really good idea to get the fuck out of there, right? Rather than have your supposedly Eurosceptic Foreign Secretary, Willy the Vague, attacking the idea of consulting the millions of British people who've never had a say on Europe along with the smaller number who were consulted and now feel they were misled? So if the Euro block is going to impose damaging regulation then the answer surely is to remove its power over the UK and cancel the standing order that pours vast sums of UK money into the EU black hole. You just need a good excuse, and happily the neighbours have provided one.

”We’re sick of you criticising us and telling us what to do. You say you hate the euro, you didn’t want to join and now you want to interfere in our meetings,” the French leader told Mr Cameron, according to diplomats.

He didn't even want you in the room, Dave. Not even in the room. Can it be made any clearer for you? But don't treat it as an insult when Nicky is really doing you and Britain a tremendous favour. The response should be a dignified exit while tossing the phrase "Well, if our money isn't good enough for you..." over your shoulder on the way out.* Come home, announce a change of mind and policy in the light of the new attitude of the Eurozone to the UK's participation in helping to rescue it, and say that referendum is very much on the table.

Yes, I realise that there's a good chance you'll lose the vote in parliament because your LibDem partners are opposed, and right now Labour would vote against you if you copied every single policy from their own last manifesto. But that could work for you too, do you see? Having been defeated on the issue you could say that the only way Britons could have their say is with a Conservative majority government and call a snap election. Hell, you probably wouldn't need to actually call an election but just tell the LibDems you'll go see Mrs W if the vote is lost. They're unpopular with everyone at the moment and know it, and the last thing they want is an election any time soon where they'd probably lose seats to both the other two main parties. You'd probably also pick up UKIP votes by the bucketload as well. So man up and go for it, Dave. Sarkozy has opened a door a crack for you here, and all you have to do is be willing to kick it hard enough to open it all the way.

But of course this is Call-Me-Dave we're talking about, a man who has, like the other party leaders, already reneged on a similar promise and so someone I would trust slightly less far on this issue than I could throw a tree.


* Only, point of order: it's not your fucking money, and don't you even forget it in your sleep.

Wallets out, everybody

Little time for blogging this weekend, so my comments on this will be brief.

British taxpayers risk being caught up in a £1.75trillion deal aimed at saving the euro by allowing Greece to default on its massive debts.
[...]
The eurozone deal, being brokered by the G20 group of nations, would seek to "ring fence" the crisis around Greece, Portugal and Ireland - preventing it from spreading to major EU economies such as Italy and Spain.
It would involve the bailing out those European banks - mostly French - most at risk from their massive lendings to tottering economies.
Greece, crucially, would be able to default on at least some of its more than £300billion debts but remain inside the eurozone. The Greek government's private creditors would bear most of the increased costs.
At this stage, a new bail-out programme would be devised for Greece - with cash coming at least in part from the International Monetary Fund, in which Britain holds a 4.5 per cent stake.

And so...

This could mean British taxpayers paying out more than the £1billion they are already slated to have to contribute under the terms of the first Greek bailout fund.

I suspect 'could' in this context means 'will'. How can Britain avoid it when the IMF is involved? And so I'll make my usual comment in this kind of situation:

It's not your fucking money!

And add only that actually allowing a default isn't a bad thought but this idea is still, to use Douglas Carswell's phrase, bailing water into a sinking boat. The idea that a bail out involves adding more of the problem is just gold standard professional window licking.

Irony

Click for linky

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

A top European court banned the Soviet Union's famous hammer and sickle from being used as a commercial trademark as it is "a symbol of despotism" in some EU countries.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

"The symbols in question would be seen as contrary to public policy and to accepted principles of morality by a substantial section of the relevant public living in the part of the European Union which has been subject to the Soviet regime."

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha haha ha. Haha. Heh.

If they'd said refused to grant it trademark status because it's too well known a symbol, or because it's been public domain for so long that it's just not practical, or even because trademarks and IP in general are something which are being abused and were never supposed to be a route to easy money for IP holders and their legal departments, if they'd said any of that I could have respected it. But instead an institution that dictates to EU member states and hands down decisions felt by some to be morally a bit shaky side has knocked back this request because of the Soviet Union's dictatorial nature and whether using its symbols for business is moral. Motes and beams, boys, motes and beams.

As the saying goes, you couldn't make it up.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

And on the topic of finance and debts

Clarke and Dawe, Australia's John Bird and John Fortune, on the Greek economy.

If it were a private company there'd be a fire there on Saturday, about 4 o'clock in the morning.

Gold.

Permitted discrimination

We all know that we're not allowed to discriminate against almost anyone these days, even though discrimination is, when you get right down to it, someone just making a choice. It might well be a choice that I think makes them an arsehole but the point is that it's their choice. Still, when it comes to people who might look different, have different body parts in their underpants, worship a different sky-being or even worship the same one in a different way, it's a choice you're expected not to make anymore.

No, not even if they are ginger.

Not a bitch, okay?

However, the operative word in that opening sentence up there is 'almost' because the other thing we all know is that discriminating against the English is just fucking fine by everybody.* And so I see that Scotland have discriminated - in the sense of a choice and in the spirit of take and take - to take the fifteen hundred quid a head extra they get under the Barnett Formula and at the same time charge English students the thick end of ten grand to go to a Scottish uni.

But only English students.

Education Secretary Michael Russell this week announced that Scottish universities would be allowed to charge students from England, Wales and Northern Ireland up to £9000 (A$13,500) a year from 2012-13, after England and Wales raised their own tuition fees.
But Mr Russell reiterated his commitment to keep higher education tuition-free for Scottish students.
This means students from the other 26 European Union member nations can study for free too, because EU laws essentially preclude members from discriminating against citizens of partner nations, but leave them free to discriminate within their own country.

So there you have it. England and Scotland, not partner nations. The Act of Union is over 300 years old and the Union itself a century older, the two countries have benefitted from each other down the years, and currently one derives a not inconsiderable financial benefit - not just the Barnett Formula but the large public sector north of the border - but whatever that makes them they're certainly not partners because the EU says partner nations' governments can't screw each others' citizens. Screwing their own is okay, and of course that's a principle function of government. And therefore screwing different groups of citizens is presumably a domestic issue that the EU isn't too interested in. It's discrimination, sure, but it's officially sanctioned discrimination which means it's perfectly fine and above board.

So suck it up, fellow countrymen, and pay up without complaining. And please remember not to take it out on any gingers even if it seems like they deserve it.

No, look, it doesn't go up your nose, it's ... oh, nevermind

* Presumably not fine by English students wanting to study in Scotland, but I imagine they don't really count anyway.