-
Hmmm. She actually said that she would give the chance for the EU to reform to give sovereignty back to France and then hold a referendum. I think she is hedging her bets to try to appeal to moderate voters.
Stonehedge-
I think she is hedging her bets to try to appeal to moderate voters.
I agree. If Brexit/Trump has shown anything it is the importance of being as many things to as many people as possible.... although you could say that was one of Blaire's strengths too (or at least all things to the voters that mattered).
It is also a shrewd negotiating move. Post Brexit, France is in a strong position if it wants changes in the EU.
Personally I think the media vastly underestimated and downplayed Cameron's achievements in the pre-referendum negotiations. However, I think the Commission would have conceded more* had it believed Brexit was a realistic possibility. Now they know member states leaving is a real risk there's more scope for bargaining.
My bet is on freedom of movement being limited and boarder control changes (an easy spot admittedly). Second, is some sort of financial services bashing regs to win popular appeal while trying to wrestle FS from the UK and Ire.
*coupled with confidence by Cameron to ask for more obvs
**don't actually know what "more" he would have wanted though... the right to overfish all the fish??
hugo7
Even the hardest core of fascists have realised what an awful idea this is.
https://politicalscrapbook.net/2017/01/marine-le-pen-u-turns-on-leaving-the-eu-and-ditching-the-euro/
Who could possibly have foreseen what a shambles the whole thing was going to be?
Apart from 48% of voters, every mainstream political party, every respected economist, and every single other member or soon to be member of the EU. Apart from them, who could have known?