
Being out gives us control over economic decisions rather than doing what Europe want. And as the city of London is such a massive chunk of our GDP, we need it to be strong or we go the way of Greece. I think.
( , Mon 12 Dec 2011, 8:07, archived)

Is there no financial benefit to being part of the EU that we'd miss out on?
( , Mon 12 Dec 2011, 8:15, archived)

unlike Norway, who can't afford to import butter
( , Mon 12 Dec 2011, 8:21, archived)

It's great. Loadsabutter.
( , Mon 12 Dec 2011, 8:53, archived)

The financial sector has never reached double figure %age of GVA and is typically closer to 5%. Even if it had a ratio of taxation to profits that isn't between 5 and ten times less than average, it would still only contribute about 10%. And all Cameron has done by throwing his toys out of the pram is reduce his ability to influence or veto future decisions that are critical to the UK economy.
Apart from that ... yeah ... go Cameron and the bankers! Woot.
( , Mon 12 Dec 2011, 8:22, archived)

So i'll assume you're right and ask why is Cameron so desperate to protect tge city and financial control?
( , Mon 12 Dec 2011, 8:29, archived)

Dave got smashed on pimms before the talks and beasically just started a fight.
( , Mon 12 Dec 2011, 8:37, archived)

He just shouts lounder until they all walk off in disgust.
"I SAID, WE NO HAVA THIS SILLY MONEY. PUT LIZ'S FACE ON IT, THEN WE'LL TALK."
( , Mon 12 Dec 2011, 8:41, archived)

because he's a Tory and the eurofriendly Tories are a weak faction, plus he gets a few UKIP votes this way and doesn't upset the Mail. But if he wasn't, there's also financial sovereignty; the European Commission is an unelected body that would (under the original proposal) be able to enforce financial controls.
( , Mon 12 Dec 2011, 8:57, archived)

"We have to protect the Euro."
"DURH WE AVE TO PRUTEKT THE UHRO"
( , Mon 12 Dec 2011, 9:02, archived)