25/06/2012 Newsnight

We've been droning on about the euro crisis for weeks now. The

underlying assumption is that it is someone else's problem and we are

well out of it. But the attempts to find a solution raise questions

which affect us all. Should we be in or out? More involved or less?

We have a studio audience here. It is nearly 40 years since this

country decide it had could no longer remain a sceppered isle. We

joined a common market and now find ourselves part of a European Union.

If the eurozone needs a form of political union to save the kurn

tri, what will the politicians tell them? What does it say about us as

a nation. Are we depifrn or just deluded. We will try and get to the

Cyprus became the fifth eurozone state to stick its hand out and ask

for financial help today. How lucky Britain is to have decide today

stay out of the single currency you may say. Yet the British position

is we want the euro to survive, jobs and prosperity here depend on

T for that to happen it is increasingly recognised that there

will have to be greater central control of taxes and spending and

that looks to demand greater central political union from which

of course we should be excluded. Our relationship with Europe is a

huge issue on which the political class of this country seems adrift

from the people. In a minute Paddy Ashdown, Peter Hain, David Davies

and Nigel Farage, but first David Grossman.

Things are changing so fast in Europe right now that even by the

time these passengers arrive in Brussels or Paris, there's no great

certainty what sort of continent will await them. There's so many

different possible scenarios, will the euro still exist at all as a

currency? The wonders of foreign travel and

the invention of things like the Eurostar mean we have never been

better connected to the whole of the European mainland. At the same

time though, the complications going on in the eurozone mean we

have never been more politically detached from the whole European

project. The question is where is that project heading next and does

Britain want to be on board. In a perverse way I think it is a

great opportunity for Britain to actually look at our relationship

with Europe. We have been part of an institution which is incredibly

bureaucratic. It's made it difficult for us to be flexible and

to have the ability to do the things which our economy needs.

Pickly -- particularly in the economic crisis. We need to be

focusing on deregulating our economy. That is difficult when

Europe is moving in the opposite direction. Of course it would be

great to have all of the benefits of EU membership without having to

stump up for any of the cost. But say observers of matters EU, why

would our partners allow us on the train unless we are prepared to pay

for a ticket. Britain has always wanted the same thing, we want a

loose free trade arrangement. We don't like the high costs of red

tape. We don't like sending huge amounts of money to French farmers.

We have always wanted the same things. The problem is, that is not

how it works. Europe is a grand bargain. You get the free trade

membership of the single market in return for countries that are not

keen on free trade like France, getting other things for them too.

They want the rules and regulations to guarantee it isn't a race to the

bottom on standards. Last year David Cameron suggested that

Britain could use the eurozone crisis to force Brussels to give us

back some sovereignty. Treaty change can only happen if it is

agreed by all 27 member states of the European Union and any treaty

change, as the last treaty change did, is an opportunity for Britain

to vans our ntional interest. strategy wasn't exactly a

resounding success when Britain refused to sign the new fiscal

compact, the other member states went ahead any way. If you try and

seize the opportunity of others misfortune and when the others are

trying to redraft the treaties to sort out the eurozone crisis and

then we say you can't have your new treaty unless you give us AB and C,

opting out of social policy or whatever, that wouldn't go down

well. We would have no friends or allies in doing that. People would

tell us to go away. Then of course there is the small matter of what

sort of Europe the voters want. They seem less and less happy these

days to leave the driving to their political masters. We will discuss

whether we should have a referendum in a while, but first here with our

studio audience are four people with very different visions of our

future relationship with Europe. The leader of the UK Independence

Party Nigel Farage, David Davies from the Tory Party, and was

previously a Minister for Europe. Peter Hain former Labour cabinet

minister and Minister for Europe as well. Former leader of the Liberal

Democrats lord Paddy Ashdown. David Davies, how important is it

that at a time like this we try to redefine our relationship with

Europe?. It's It's going to become very important. The only way out of

the problem with the eurozone will be more federalism for some of the

European Union members, and more centralisation. We won't want that.

That will be something we have never sibbed up to -- signed up to

and we have to start deciding what we do want. This is a big moment.

very big moment. You would share that view I imagine Paddy Ashdown?

Absolutely. Welcome to the question of referendum shortly. You also

believe, therefore, that this country has to decide whether it is

in or out long-term? Not now. No. I think the deal that's there on the

table - by the way I was the first politician to say 15 years ago if

there was to be a substantial move of powers to the EU that that ought

to be the subject of a referendum. That is right. Let me see if we can

identify this. 3.5 million jobs now depend on trade with Europe. Our

major partners. Probably reduce the trade annually with a European

Union, 40% of our trade, 2% with China, down to family basis. The

important thing is that we make sure we do the right thing to

ensure the EU survives. I agree with David Davies, that means

deepening the institutions of Europe. At this stage, Britain

cannot go along with that process. How we say we want to stand aside

from the process at the moment is absolute lie crucial. We will

explore that in a moment. Peter Hain, if Paddy Ashdown is right and

there may be a mechanism for saving the euro, it is something that we

want to see succeed isn't it? want to see the euro succeed. 40%

of our trade is with the eurozone countries. Over half our trade is

with the EU as a whole. We have to remind ourselves while we are in

Europe. Why I voted yes in 1975. Because Europe has saved this

continent, which we are part of, although an island off it, from war,

and conflict of a kind which didn't visit any other part of the world.

There would be war in Western Europe without the EU? I am saying

it helped cement peace and prosperity after the second Second

World War. When Paddy was a special representive in Bosnia or shortly

before that, Croatia was at war and now it is actually establishing

democratic procedures because of the EU. Let's not forget the big

prize and prosperity it's brought to everybody. Having said that, the

eurozone... Greece. Spain, it is a disaster zone economically.

Uncompetitive with job regulations, environmental standards. Destroying

jobs in Britain. If you think the eurozone with total unemployment at

23% is a success, I would hate to see what failure is. I am not

saying it is a success. I am saying the EU has brought the whole of

Europe prosperity. The eurozone was designed on an entirely faulty

basis. From the beginning. I voted against the ma trict treaty. --

Maastricht Treaty. The idea that we would get out of Europe and not any

more have access to emergency health care. This is silly. These

arguments we are hearing tonight are 40 years out of date. The idea

that we have to be part of a political union in order to buy and

sell goods with French and German and Italian companies is an idea

that belongs back in the '60s. We have been through global trade

liberalisation through the World Trade Organisation and you should

remember Paddy that we are the biggest export market for the EU in

the world. They sell us far more than we sell them. If you think 3.5

million jobs are dependent on our trade with Europe, there are 6

million jobs in Europe dependent on their trade with us. Just to bring

in the audience. I do wish the politicians read their history

books. Prior to 1914, 40% of the English trade was done with Germany.

It didn't stop at war. The idea that you can, that will not going

to war with people you do trade with is ridiculous. No-one is

suggesting that. Who feels them self to be a

European? Puts your hands up. Why haven't you put your hand up?

don't feel. I feel I am an Englishman and then a Briton second.

European third perhaps? Possibly but very vaguely. The issue for me

is I don't see why we can't trade with these countries, why we have

to take part and be part of a growing federal super state, it's

beyond me. I agree. I believe political and

economyically we will always be tied to other countries but I feel

the relationship of the ear ozone is too close. Let's have someone

from here. Who feels it is a key moment in our relationship with

Europe, because something is going on in Europe at the end, if it

doesn't go away we are going to be in a dit of difficulty. It is a key

moment for us at the moment. If we go towards more central powers and

financial services go into Europe, we are in a horrible situation. If

we leave and rely on our World Trade Organisation, we could be hit

with trade tariffs. We are in a key position now to negotiate. Leaving

wouldn't settle anything would it? If we leave, trade organisation

would be our only sort of meshing nism to trade. The European Union

has 63 trade deals, Mexico has a free trade deal with the EU. Are

you telling me their biggest export market wouldn't have that deal.

you are going to consign us to the position of Norway, outside or

Switzerland... Make our own trade deals... Norway has had to enact

75% of European legislation to remain a trader in the single

market. Completely wrong. Out of Europe but run by Europe, that is

what you are proposing. Let me give you an argument for the future. I

dare say it isn't popular but it is true. The position of Europe has

now now funed amountally changed. - - Fundamentally changed. We have a

Russian President, prepared to use tanks, you have a rising China and

rising India. If Europe doesn't realise the right reaction for the

new circumstances is to deepen the institution of our defence, foreign

affairs and economy, we are bloody fools. Get rid of our democracy!

Let me say this to you. If you do not realise, if you really want to

consign all the countries of Europe to the perfect sovereignty of corks

floating around other people's ocean liners help yourself but in

the world you are about to come into, getting together with our

European partners, and pooling our sofr at this is the way we give

ourselves a powerful voice in a world that is going to be more

turbulent. Why shouldn't we leave? We should renegotiate our position.

Let me take one point. Paddy has a point that we want to maintain a

trading relationship with Europe. I don't accept the price is the one

he puts up. We should have a relationship which allows us to

trade with them, which has co- operation agreements but not

subordination. They should be co- operation arrangements. What should

we renegotiate with Europe? It is the whole package. The whole thing?

The whole package. In a In effect, Merkel has told us something

already. They see they are going down a route that does not suit us.

They know that and they are going to have to come to a new

relationship. What it will be is a very difficult guess. If they don't

should we leave? There's no reason why all the other countries are

going to say we will give you what you want and you can have exactly

the free trade arrangements you want but you don't have to make any

of the rules or be part of all of that. It doesn't seem to me to be

practical common sense. Are you in favour of renegotiating our our

arrangement with Europe? It is important we learn from Greece, and

everyone is properly in the EU or out of it. When one member state,

when its financials or goes bankrupt, there are serious

ramifications for the other members so we are either all in together or

half out. There is a halfway house and we are in it, we are not in the

euro but in the European Union. Your point is? There is no halfway

house. There are 60 halfway houses. 60 trade deals. If we separate

trade and politician, we can have a trade relationship without being

members of the political union. are the people pretty much in a

sticky dilemma, the main threat to our sofr at this is hardly other

nations, it is large multi- nationals who can dictate to us our

fiscal policies otherwise they will go somewhere else. The alternative

to that is ganging up with the EU and wider and that we know is

fairly undemocratic. That we know is very much captured by the same

sector. But some kind of change is our only hope against something

like debt servitude. I was going to say that all the

conversations so far has been control, about trade, but you asked

the question earlier who feels like a European. To me the EU project is

more about binding, breaking down barriers, taking away traditional

hostilities, to me a large reason to be part of it and to remain part

of it and to strengthen and deepen the relationship is things like the

experience of my son, who has graduated from the University of

Geneva. That wouldn't have been possible for me at my time when I

was at university. I am talking about a situation in which across

Europe, including some countries not in the EU, we have seen a

tendency for countries to come together and break down barriers.

Actually the north and south are breaking away and being very rude

about each other. Do you feel this is a democratic institution? Do you

feel you have a say over how it behaves? No. Does anybody?

Absolutely not? This is a specifically selected audience to

represent public opinion. Does anyone feel they have control of

the EU or their views are represented? It is a false die cot

We elect politicians to represent us and we have politicians in

Britain and politicians in Europe who do that. Were I to show you a

picture of a European politician or Mr Barrossi, would you know him, du

know him? Not at all. One or two people do know him. You can't

remove them. I wonder if you put every member of the cabinet up

there would people know. He hasn't been voted for and we can't remove

him. This is a debate, not a shouting match. It is accepted that

the democratic democratic institutions of Europe need

reforming, so do they at Westminster. The fact that the

democracies in these institutions is not up to the standards we would

wish to see is not a reason for abandoning them. The American state,

United States has now agreed to begin trade negotiations with the

EU. Our two primary trading partners. Nigel wants us not to be

at the table at all. A third of the population of the globe who offered

us seven years ago a free trade deal... Be serious Nigel.

European Union is on our doorstep. You have never worked in the real

world but most of our business is done on telephones.

I am with Lord Ashdown about the earlier arguments about the peace,

prosperity and stability that Europe has brought. Certainly the

recent history of Europe in terms of Yugoslavia, the fragmentation,

the nationalisms and hatred, that was indicative of what happens when

nations... Are forced together against their will... The point is

the issue about integration surely is is about stability, acceptance

of respect for human rights and Rule of Law and the Copenhagen cry

tear ya. The countries that came from the former Eastern bloc to

escape Soviet totalitarianism, which has been corrupted by the way

the political class has characterised it... Suppose the

members of the eurozone do manage to save their currency by going to

a fiscal union, taxing union and political decision-making union,

would it it still be an organisation worth belonging to?

think it would be. I think it is important at the centre. What seems

likely is we are seen as a serious power in Europe, when we negotiate

with the eurozone we get the best deal for Britain, instead of

exercising vetoes which the Prime Minister did.

We would have no say in that central core. We could have

influence in it. I don't any anybody in Britain wants to join

the eurozone. I think some people do. Tony Blair seemed to be saying

we should think about it. What I think I do say and what separates

me from Nigel and David is this: if it becomes in Britain's interests

to join the euro in the future, I think we should do so. They think

they wouldn't want to. They are not going to want to join the euro if

it is not in our interests. If it was in Britain's to join the euro,

would you join it. The euro is headed for a disaster. We should

never give up control of our own economy. It's becoming increasingly

widely accepted in euroland that for the currency to work there will

have to be an integration of taxes. That implies an integration of

politics and political institutions. The government has promised a frism

if there is any significant transfer of power to Europe. It is

time to hear again from David If you are a British voter under 55,

you may have noticed you have never been given a direct say in our

membership of the EU. You can judge how far attitudes have shifted

since 1975 by looking at how newspapers that are now hostile to

the EU then welcomed the yes vote. The yes vote that even Margaret

Thatcher campaigned for. Unlike some countries who see the EU is

bringing about a new age of freedom and democracy, Britain has has

always been more hot head headed. We were going to make a better

living for ourselves S now that living has been thrown into doubt

by the eurozone crisis, well, many in Britain believe that British

voters should be given a say on what sort of future Europe has.

I speak as someone who will make a business defence of the single

market and EU membership. I used to work in Brussels for five years and

I watched them lose the referendums on the institution and then turn it

into a new treaty to avoid further referendums, and that was an anti-

democratic act. If someone says to me Europe basically isn't a very

democratic project, I am afraid I have to agree with you. I

completely understand why there is a real desire to let the people in

on this process, because it is felt like a conspiracy of the elite and

that at the moment is in desperate shape. I completely understand that.

I have my own moment to think we should do this and have a

referendum. The big question with a referendum is what would the big

referendum question be, what would the public be asked. There are no

specific specific treaty changes under discussion now. This is the

political difficulty which David Cameron is facing at the moment,

deciding what that question might be. The public are fretty clear

they do -- pretty clear they do want a referendum, whether you

frame it in terms of in or out is the question.

In an ideal world, the simplest way of doing it would be a radical

renegotiation which takes us back to something which is more akin to

simply a free trade relationship. The difficulty you have there is

getting the rest of Europe to agree to that. I think at the moment it

is looking increasingly unlikely that we would get what we want in

that renegotiation. What terrifies the politicians is

however they try to contain anti-EU sentiment, and channel it into a

safe sort of referendum, it will end up as a de facto in out

referendum. And Britain could end up out of the EU and none of the

main party leaders right now wants to risk that. Let's be clear, there

aren't safer options. Almost any referendum you do offer, will be an

in or out referendum. Despite many uncertainties over the form the

referendum will take, what the negotiated terms will amount to,

the campaign has already started. That is just as true today. The

background campaigning on the referendum we may or may not get is

already going on. The The politics is moving in one direction only.

All the parties under increasing pressure to commit to that

referendum in their next manifestoes. None wants to be the

last to agree. Our panel and audience are still

here. Just as a matter of interest among the audience here, how many

people would like to see a referendum sometime when we can

frame the question in the next few weeks or months? You in the green

shirt, have you nothing interesting to say on the referendum? I have,

we already had a referendum, I voted, there was two million for

and one million again. There are 32 million of us I didn't vote, I was

11. The question was about a common market not a European Union. Which

is why mar threat Thatcher made it so large that it wasn't possible to

work very efficiently. There is an overwhelming majority who do want

some sort of say on the subject. Is that what you are going to say.

point I am going to make is the fact that I, too, voted for it, but

I voted purely and simply for trade. I didn't vote for a political union,

I didn't vote for this country to lose its sovereignty. I didn't vote

for the amount of money which the EU is costing us and quite clearly

I do agree with Nigel Farage's that I have watched on U tube. Thank

you! I think if the European project is

to succeed, it has to take the people with it. The people in

Europe in France and Germany are getting more and more anti-EU

projects because it's seen what it is costing them. Furthermore, you

cannot just wipe away 1,000 years of history in all these countries.

They speak different languages, they have different cultures. It is

not a question of trade and human resources and silly rules coming

over from Brussels. It is a lot more than that, that involves the

entire population. The lady is right. It is a point we didn't

cover. You have 27 different views of what you want out of Europe. We

talk about democracy when the Greeks came in, it was after the

colonels. When the Spanish came in, it was after Franco. We came in

with a fully formed democracy. Paddy doesn't like it, but it is a

fully formed working democracy. Nothing like the EU. We have

something to lose in this, which others perhaps didn't have. So you

are in favour of a referendum. Absolutely. In out referendum?

have to have the negotiation first and yes when it comes down to it,

it probably does have to be an in and out referendum, once people

have seen what the New Deal is, but you have to have a new deal first.

Before we get to referendums. There are some things we will lose. But

there are sings we will gain as well. This is going to be a very,

very, very turbulent, bloody decades ahead of it. There is

nothing I would like the British people to have that we cannot get

better than work being our parters and the mechanism for doing that is

the EU and if we abandon that, and commit ourselves to the perfect

sovereignty of small small nations drifting around, our capacity to

have the voice to be able to deliver the security I want for the

British people will be massively diminished. We are living in an age

where what needs to be done cannot be done by national governments

alone. I agree with the lady here, I think a referendum on Europe is

now in or out referendum, is unstoppable. I think secondly,

although I shall be... How far off do you think it might be? I think

we will have to see the result of these negotiations. Then we have to

see whether or not that shifts power to Europe from Britain. If it

doesn't we will have to decide whether or not Britain is

advantaged for disadvantaged by that. In the end what it comes down

to is an in our out referendum. I have to say I think think those who

argue the case are going to find it very, very difficult to win a yes

vote. Surely the question on the ballot paper should be do you want

to be ruled by Berlin. We have to look at the future and

Nigel taking over this discussion and changing the rhetoric out there,

the British population is being influenced by this minority against

Europe. What we are arguing is there is no European demos. Even

the introduction tonight said is Britain being silly and deluded.

This argument is happening all over Europe. We want a Europe of trade

and co-operation, not one that costs us a fortune. Not one whose

courts overrule ours. On the referendum specifically, I think a

referendum is almost inevitable. If people want a referendum,

politicians should not deny them one, but this is going to be a big

big decision. It shouldn't be now because Europe is in crisis. If you

suddenly put... Don't know what you are voting on now. You could

emergency the chaos -- imagine the chaos. We have to see where we get

to as a result of this crisis. I am not frightened of a referendum. I

don't think the Labour Party should be frightened of one. If people

want a referendum, they will get one. We were the party who gave

people a vote in 1975, the Tories having taken us in without one. We

will give people a vote if that is what they want. When do you suggest

this referendum would be run. Lord Ashdown said maybe we have two or

three decades of turmoil. No I didn't say that. Are you suggesting

that we wait until calm waters and then decide whether we want to be

in or out. I agreed with David Davies, when the negotiations are

finished, we see what the balance of powers are. If this country is

going to be disadvantaged by that, then a referendum... On a point of

clarification, is it possible that Britain could be significantly

disadvantaged, a shift of power, which was not actually a passing of

a power from our parliament to a European institution but was

disadvantaged by the existence, creation of some political union

that involves the other members of the euro. It is possible. That

could trigger a referendum? If this country believes because of the new

arrangements for Europe, we believe that there is a danger that will be

disadvantaged, that may be the circumstances in which a referendum

needs to be. That shouldn't be a ministerial judgment. Who is going

to decide, The Sun newspaper? The government is made to decide.

should be a referendum either way, whatever the outcome of the

negotiation, there should be a referendum, because we are already

in a transform circumstance. We are already -- Paddy may not have said

it. Do you trust David Cameron and Nick Clegg to make that judgment?

Any nition in power is -- politician is power is going to

have to make the call in favour of a referendum. Do you trust them to

make an adequate call? I think they will.

The danger is what we get is not a referendum. The political class

will play the truck on us -- trick of us, they will say you can have a

trade deal with Europe, and they will ask us to vote yes to stay

part of a single market. That is my big fear with us. Let's have a

proper in, out referendum. I hope the government gets the best deal

for Britain. What I fear is we will have a government which turns its

back on the negotiations and says we are just walking away. Then they

go and do a deal like they are doing on financial transactions tax

which may be prejudicial to Britain's interests and in this

case our finance. We have to be right at the centre. This is about

power and whether Britain is serious about being with our

neighbours, against China and India and Russia and negotiating...

you renegotiated a good deal would you give us an referendum on the

negotiations, that is the key here? I do not think you can dodge the

issue of the referendum. Thank you. That simple binary choice in or out

is the distilation of 1,000 years of history of wars endured and

holidays enjoyed, cultural traditions and eating enthusiasm.

All our ideas of whether we want to be part of the European project are

based on who we think we are. Here We will fight on the beaches, we

will fight on the landing grounds, we will fight in the fields and in

the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender.

Can you stop talking about the war. You started it! You invaded Poland!

He wanted the commission to be the executive and he wanted the Council

of Ministers to be the Senate. No. We have let the politicians have

their say but Europe isn't just a political issue. Here to discuss

the cultural aspects of Britain's relationship with Europe are Tony

Parsons and Jeanette Winterson and Annalisa Piras.

What is it with the British in Europe do you think Tony? I think

it's other people have said tonight, we voted for one thing, as I did,

first time I voted in 1975, voted to be part of a trading block,

voted to be part of a common market and a lot of people in this country

feel as though they have had something else rammed down their

throats and they object to that. It's nothing to do with not feeling

European. You can feel like a European without wanting to be part

of an EU we never voted for. When you look at it from as a foreigner

among us, how do you see it? Bemused. I am really, really

bemused, by the way you relate to the problem. I have been living in

this country for 15 years and I have been constantly puzzled by how

a country that is normally so rational and intelligent, when it

comes to Europe, it's like if there was a blind spot. All the ational

arguments go out the door and you start talking about things that

relate very, very little with the real issues that are on the table.

How does it seem to you? Everything I heard tonight I found disturbing,

because we haven't been talking about people. We talk about

policies and politics. But what about people in Europe in Britain.

A lot of the things that happened, it seems to me, from our union with

Europe, have been very positive, particularly for women. We haven't

heard the word woman at all tonight. We have an invited audience here,

six women out of 24. We had a bunch of guys lined up here as we always

do. We need to talk about what happens to people and to women. It

is a useful argument. Maternity leave, childcare rights, that is

things that have come out of the European Union. You are not saying

these improvements would not have occurred had we not been members of

the EU? I am, yes. She's right. What do you make of that argument?

What I think different shaits this country from the rest, where we are

different our history and our memory. In 75 when we had our

referendum when I voted to be part of a trading block, I spent a year

travelling and was in Spain of General Franco and in the Greece of

the colonels. I travelled across Europe where memories were fresh of

Nazi occupation. We haven't had that in this country. We have had a

different experience of freedom and democracy and I think that really

sticks in the throat of a lot of British people, when things are

done, when we can't kick someone like cat like Abu ka taed da out of

our country. It's something about being on an island, without having

land borders, There is a lot of people in Munich and Athens and a

lot of people in Madrid and Milan that feel like we do. It's wrong to

paint the British as these xenophobic island race.

geography of Britain certainly matters in the attitude towards

Europe. This is the island nation. Since when has been Ince lar been a

crime? It is not a crime, but affects the way you look at the

continent. Do you remember the Ealing comedy

passport to Pimlico, where a few British people decide they are in

Burgundy and it's great because in the pubs all night and then they

are back in Britain and it's raining. There is that mentality

here. We always focus on the negative. That is one of the bad

things about being British. In all this discussion tonight, I haven't

heard what's been good about the EU. I would like to hear a little bit

of that because by no means is it all bad. Quick whiz round the

audience, who can think of good things about the EU? No capital

punishment. Good wine. Better food.

Freedom of movement from one country to another. Civil

partnerships. Better employment legislation.

Creativity. Low cost flights. Now we are

talking about people. 15% of young people in Spain have got a job. 50%

that haven't got a a job but we don't want to mention them. Let's

stick with the positives. Low cost flights is a direct consequence of

Europe. Millions of people would not have been able to travel. You

have 23 fascist MPs in parliament. It seems to be rational to some

people, the distinction between a relatively Middle East elite...

EasyJet, Ryanair, that is not for... When the monetary union was first

talked about we were given this argument that it would be easier

when you went abroad, it is an infant isle argument. The monetary

union has been the greatest catastrophe in this continent of

our lifetime. That is not true. I have to stop you there, because

creating a kurn sigh from nothing and having this kun this currency

becoming the second in the world, this is not a disaster. What is

happening in this country - you are confusing the crisis of the

eurozone which is happening nourks which is a consequence of a credit

crunch by started in the United States. That is absolute tripe. The

eurozone problem is entirely the consequence of the way it was

designed and implemented. There was a flaw in the design of it. Thank

you. The euro is not a failure. flaw is in the common market

agricultural policy. These have been disasters. You want to vote on

a democratic institution. They cannot be got rid of. You can

change your MP. It doesn't make a difference. We are in a fantasy of

democracy. It would be good for the British people to be involved in

something instead of side lined. would be like kicking a dying man

in the head, having a referendum at the moment. We have waited 37 years.

I am going to stop you there. That is it for now. The English football

team collected their bagfuls of retentions from the carousel this

afternoon. Their manager making the profound observation that we have