Sign up or dont , so he vetoed it.
The French and Germans also had special talks with us prior to the main talks. If it was as simple as you say, then why bother with all the extra time spent with Cameron?
Sign up or dont , so he vetoed it.
yes, i think its a figment of your imagination when couched in such terms.Do you have an explanation for his absolute attention to the square mile?
Do you have an explanation for his absolute attention to the square mile?
Maybe, I'm sure the truth will eventually come out.In that case I think you're being incredibly naiive. The simple fact is that they wouldn't have been locked in discussion for two days if that was the case.
Maybe, I'm sure the truth will eventually come out.
100 000 jobs in Birmingham and 100 000 in Scotland.
What's up with you today? Hung over? This is well below you usually rabid level of response.
Feel dreadful,got a bug or something so not hungover, but perhaps I do need to be less rabid , one of my closest friends( i was best man at his wedding ) has politics maybe even to the left of you ,thats the trouble with internet forums, you focus solely on the views/posts of the individual rather than the fact thas he is in all probability a nice bloke, but i suspect you find some of my more , er "vehement" assertions more fun ?
I had a token on my stag do , and one gave a reading at my wedding, perhaps thats where it all went wrongAre you going to tell me some of your best friends are black next
.
The EU Internal Market isn't my area of expertise (perhaps if directly related to Healthcare); however I've just spent a "few" minutes searching online and have come up with the following from the updated and re-issued Capital Requirements Directive (2006/48/EC) that was ipublished in June 2006.
Article 75 (Calculation of Requirements - Minimum Level of Own Funds) reads as follows:
"Without prejudice to Article 136, Member States shall require
credit institutions to provide own funds which are at all times
more than or equal to the sum of the following capital
requirements:"
The Directive then goes on to list list various types of risk (eg credit, dilution, foreign exchange, commodity....) with the levels of funds required for each.
However, these are minimum requirements and the Directive clearly gives member states the flexibility to set a level above this if they so wish; hence it's whatever Parliament decided to pass into UK law that's the issue really; eg if the paragraph I've quoted wasn't included then we may have just the minimum levels applied? If so, this doesn't contradict the Directive in any way.
This was probably in the later public sector job losses section of his speech. Where the Tory backbenchers loudly whooping and cheering at the unemployment? If so then it was for sure.
As I understand it, it was a non-negotiable clause, why on earth they chose this particular time for this particular fight I dont know.
do me a favour, you know full well that they were not going to negotiate on this, and it would have certainly been in the as yet undrafted treaty, which looks like its under pressure already, with the czechs and hungarians making noises about pulling out of it.Would appear that this wasn't the case, the treaty not even having been drafted. CMD now looking like he jumped the gun a bit!!!