When will the UK adopt the Euro?
 

When the UK adopts the Euro, what do you think the rate will be set at? 60p? 65p? 70p?

Well, as we haven't even had the referendum yet, the question is academic. Who knows? <BR>I suspect that the Euro will sneak into the UK by the back door. Some shops have said that they will accept it,mainland Europeans will use these shops,people will come home with their euros and spend them etc. etc..

Never if I have anything to do with it!

It will happen, but when? Who knows... <BR> <BR>So it's impossible to predict what the rate will be set at.

Unfortunately I think it is unevitable. <BR> <BR>However the WHEN is very much up in the air. <BR> <BR>It's not officially definite that we WILL join yet...

Ha! Wish it was "unevitable" <BR> <BR>I agree with Mr. West.

The sooner the better

Posted from Germany? A teutonic jibe, I think. Touche.

The pound will be history within five years, either by hook or crook. Tony Blair and his party, like most of the European political elite, hates silly traditions like national currencies, fox hunting or non-metric units of measurements. The British people, who are against the Euro by a large margin, could have struck out against Blair's slippery plans to force the Euro on Britain but, by re-electing his government to such an overwhelming victory in the recent parliamentary elections, they guaranteed the death of the pound. In ten years, the pound will have as much relevance to British life as the Plantagents, the Empire and the Anglican Church. So long, Brittania.

I agree with Sheila - the sooner we join the better. However, the pound is too high against both the euro and the dollar at the moment. <BR> <BR>

I'm with you, David! Personally, I think the Euro is not the most clever of ideas. <BR> <BR>I know what it's _supposed_ to do for the EU, but I highly doubt it's going to turn out the way for which the member countries are all hoping...ok, this sentence is getting more convoluted the more I try to explain what I'm trying to say! <BR> <BR>Basically, I don't think it's going to work. If not a lead balloon, at least a solid wood one...

I'm all for us adopting it as soon as possible.

Interesting discussion, but should I give my 2 20 pound notes to my friend who leaves for the U.K. on Monday?

I've been curious about this -- WHY are so many British opposed to the euro? <BR> <BR>Is it for economic reasons (fear of inflation? I'm very ignorant about economics) or is it for sentimental reasons? <BR> <BR>I'd love to hear some opinions. Ben? David? Anyone?

For Carla: <BR> <BR>As someone who is bitterly opposed to joining the Euro I will try to answer your question (someone from the other side may like to give their views). <BR> <BR>The reasons are as follows <BR> <BR>If it ain't broke.... The pound has served Britain well for over a thousand years. It is internationally recognised and respected and is one of the worlds reserve currencies. What is the problem here that requires billions of pounds worth of intervention to change? <BR> <BR>We are in Europe but we are different.... There is no doubt that a significant proportion of our trade is with the EU (still less than half though). However this is the case at the moment and currency differences doesn't seem to be a barrier. Also because of the nature of our economy we are out of step with mainland Europe. Thus interest rates that are appropriate for Germany may very well not be ideal for the UK. This is something that the Irish may be about to find out the hard way. <BR> <BR>Enough governement already....Whatever the pro euro types may say there is no question that this is political union by the back door. Once we have a common currency, supreme court, and central bank, what will our national governements actually DO? They would become similar to the Scottish assembly, with the real power elsewhere. <BR> <BR>They've been wrong about everything else... This is quite simple. If one examines the pro euro brigade (lefties, the Guardian, BBC, Lib Dems etc) they have been wrong about every big issue of the day before and are surely wrong about this one. Pick a major issue of the last 25 years and see where the pro euro people have been. Wrong without exception. Nuclear disarmament? yup! Comprehensive schooling? Yup! Trades unions? All present and correct! Socialism? You betcha! The list is endless. <BR> <BR>Emotion... I'm English first, British second and european a very distant third. I just don't want to be ruled by them. Lovely people and all that, just don't rate their politics. Italian bankers? German politicians? Greek policemen etc etc etc. <BR> <BR>It was never meant to happen like this... The original idea was a small union of the Netherlands, Germany, belgium, luxembourg, leichenstein, in other words countries already in Germany's economic area, with Scandinavia and possibly France following. However all the third rate economies in europe jumped at the chance to swop their drachmas, escudos, punts, lire etc for Deutchmarks (which it is in all but name). <BR> <BR>It will all end in tears.... As I said there is an obvious conflict between different parts of the Eurozone. Power however is not equally distributed. Germany is not going to put itself in recession to help out Ireland. <BR> <BR>There is more to it than this, but this is a flavour of the anti euro argument. Hope it casts some light. <BR>

Carla, if you find out, can you let those of us who live here know! <BR> <BR>I did hear a tale that, during an oil price crisis which led to an employment problem in Texas (80s?), the then Secretary of State (Chairman of Fed?) was asked what he would do to bolster the Texan economy. His reply - "devalue the Texan Dollar". Is this another apocryphal yarn that I have swallowed hook line and sinker?

I don't want to start an argument about the Euro and the European Union but I notice a really interesting difference between the UK and Germany in perceiving the European institutions. <BR> <BR>While someone from the UK sees the own centralized government which leaves little or no power to the regional institutions like the Scottish assembly, a German sees the own federal structure which leaves a lot of power to the regional governments of the German states making up the Federation. I guess that the automatic assumption for someone from the UK is an European government replacing the current central British government and leaving little or no political power in the UK. A German on the other hand expects the EU to take some of the powers of the federal government but leave the current regional institutions and part of the powers of the federal government in Germany. The idea of a transfer of some power to the European institution doesn't seem to be frightening since Germans automatically assume that the national governments will continue to play an important role for national issues exactly as the current German state governments play an important role for regional matters. For Germans, it's just an extension of the current system to address common European issues, not the radical change of the political system which is expected in the UK. <BR> <BR>As for the question of the adoption of the Euro in the UK, I guess that a good rule of thumb is 5-10 years until the UK went the way of other countries in European matters. As long as the Euro doesn't turn out to be a failure (which is unlikely in my opinion), I think that it will be the same this time. There are just too many advantages of Europe working together and this has overcome similar doubts and fears in the UK several times before.

Not all Brits are against the Euro, but I think most of those of us who are not anti are not hugely pro either. <BR> <BR>I find it difficult to believe that there are great benefits to be gained by a single currency within Europe, but now that so many other countries are adopting it, I feel that we may find there are disbenefits to remaining separate. Let's face it - no-one really knows. <BR> <BR>I have absolutely no attachment whatever to the pound and would be quite happy to pay for my shopping with Euros. There are advantages for travel, of course, but I don't think they are really big enough to warrant such a big step. <BR> <BR>I do have a big problem with David West's argument that the pro-Euro lobby are always wrong, however. <BR> <BR>Nuclear disarmament? Naive perhaps, but is it really *wrong* to believe the world would be a better place with fewer weapons of mass destruction around? <BR> <BR>Comprehensive schooling? I take big issue here. As a product of a comprehensive school, I think comprehensive education is one of the best things to have ever happened to the British education system. <BR> <BR>Trades unions? I agree that they tend to be stuck in the past, but in that past, they were a strong force for good. <BR> <BR>Socialism? Why, was Thatcherism so much better?

Personally I think we should join the Euro ASAP. The only cogent economic argument the anti-Euro people have is that Britain's economy is out of step with the continental economies at the moment. Fair enough; let's join when it is in step. Most of our trade is with other EU members. Once we share the same currency there will be no more currency exchange costs or exchange uncertainties in this area. Prices of traded goods between EU countries will fall because it will be easier to compare prices in different countries. And the bigger currency will offer greater protection from shocks when the economy is in recession. There are many other good reasons for joining... <BR> <BR>The main reasons the anti-Euro people have against joining the Euro are political. If the Euro comes to Britain I will still be British. We will still have a monarch, a prime minister, a parliament, armed forces to send to Macedonia etc. <BR> <BR>The Euro is a small 'price' to pay for increased prosperity and wealth. <BR> <BR>Mel Roberts

It is interesting what Hans says about a German perspective on fedarlism. I would only add that in Britain we have very little experience of meaningful local government (not since William the Conqueror anyway!). This unfamiliarity makes us less likely to embrace the idea. <BR> <BR>Regionalism is however becomming increasingly popular in Britain, especially at the geographical fringes. However we are a long way off fedaralism. <BR> <BR>Ironically one long term driver of devolution may be centralisation within the EU, ie if we all have the same money, laws, and eventually armed forces, why shouldn't Scotland (or the basque region) become independent? <BR> <BR>One other point in this is that we have an economic and political system that has grown organically over thousands of years. This is an accident of history as we are an island but should not be lightly disregarded. Many other European countries are comparitively recent constructs, or have had recent trouble with their neighbours. <BR> <BR>Finally I welcome Anna's disagreement, and yes I think all those things are wrong. I also think that it is instructive to see who supports the Euro and what their past record is. <BR> <BR>David <BR>Who clearly cannot type.

David, I'm not a Nationalist,in the politial sense, but answer your question for me, please. <BR> <BR>If it's what the Basques and the Scots want, why shouldn't Scotland and the Basque region become independent? <BR>

I agree with you Sheila. I'm English, so I hope everyone doesn't believe that David West speaks for the majority. <BR> <BR>If Scotland wants independence, then I think they are entitled to it. Purely selfishly I think it would be a shame – I adore the variety of nationalities in Britain and in an age when Europe is coming closer together I would regret driving a wedge between us – but from an historical perspective I can understand it. <BR> <BR>With the question of the euro, David West is a Tory - a party who are clearly on the margins of political opinion these days. <BR> <BR>I am in favour in joining the euro at the right time – I think our government is playing it correctly in this sense. We need to resolve issues as to where the financial centre would be - Germany clearly wants Frankfurt but we would not want London to lose its dominance in this area. <BR> <BR>But ultimately, one stable currency across Europe can only be a benefit. Fluctuations in currency strengths cause endless problems for businesses trading in Europe (and beyond). My father is a major exporter in sports goods all round the world and his business regularly suffers when the pound is strong. It makes building and maintaining strong trading relationships very difficult. <BR> <BR>There is a tendancy amongst certain english people to panic about european influence - signs of Britain being a diminishing world power. But let's be sensible guys - in the face of major economic forces from the US and the Far East we can only hold our own if we pull together to form one major (european) economic force.

Sorry to make a comment that isn't really related to the original question-but I had to say something!!! <BR>So many of the positive changes that have occured in the UK in recent years have been due to our EEC membership. Legislation that has been enforced surrounding our working hours and wages have proved to benefit low earners around the country. This possibly has meant nothing to people like David West who is obviously such an important person he is able to dismiss something like 'socialism' as being a passing phase! However for millions of people who were living on the breadline during Thatcherism in the eighties the combination of a Labour government and our progression into Europe has bought a better life!

I agree Sarah <BR> <BR>You can hardly take someone seriously who still uses the term "lefties" - he sounds like my grandad

Wow! <BR> <BR>Thank you all very much. <BR>I didn't realize it was so complicated, and am now following this with great interest.

Great arguments all round. Two bones to pic with Kate. First, though the Tory flag is certainly in tatters, 30 % of the electorate still voted for them in the last election, a substantial body of electoral opinion. Second, Winston Churchill was very much on the outside with regards to British political opinion in the 1930s. He was proven right on most of his stands of the times (but for abdication of Edward VIII) while Stanley Baldwin, Neville Chamberlain, Lord Halifax and most of the rest of political society were proven wrong.

Well I just hope Clydesdale Bank will be able to issue Scottish Euros. I've always felt that Scotland having its own currency, accepted at par in most places in the UK, was an important cultural touchstone. Why not Basque or Breton Euros? It would help retain local pride while still aiding trade? Plus think of the art design possibilities...

Pah, John! You're not taking this seriously and we all know that the Euro is a VERY serious topic;-) <BR> <BR>As to Roger, Yes, 30% DID vote Tory and a substantial minority of them are pro Europe. Your point is? <BR>Winston Churchill (whose relevance here I'm struggling to grasp)was very much an internationalist. He was also a Liberal MP. Your point is?

As an American, I find this thread very fascinating. I figured that the Germans would attempt to control the EU, it wouldn't work out, Germany would leave the EU, the EU would fall apart, and everything would eventually be back to the good old days. I'm not biased against Germans, since they manufacture such quality automobiles, but I am realistic. Why would Germany and Great Britain want to share the wealth with the rest of Europe. We would love the common currency in most of Europe, but many Americans still don't believe it will work. Free trade agreements are one thing. However, even without the historic traditions that Europeans have, we would never join Mexico and Canada in the creation of Americos, or any other currency. We love our greenbacks as much as the counterfeiters do. Sorry, just rambling a little...

I knew this question would spur some good viewpoints. I'm an American and the UK should never never never adopt the Euro. It would be very foolish.

Packerman <BR> <BR>Why?

Sheila, of course my comment was slightly tongue-in-cheek, but not entirely. What were the driving forces behind making the Euro a uniform currency? As I recall, it had to do mainly with the need to stabilize exchange rates, ease monetary transfers to make them compatible with free trade, link the various central banks’ monetary policies so that the big discrepancies between the Mark and the Peseta and the Pound would not continue to lead to regional economic hot or cold spots, and to provide a psychological break from the past. These points may all be well and good, but plainly the UK is more attached to sterling than Italy is to the Lira, and the debate focuses heavily on the last point, that of national identity, and on the psychology of it all. <BR> <BR>So what would be so wrong about moving to a common unit of currency, offering all the above benefits, but with national banknotes (maybe not coins, but who will miss the 50p piece?) reflecting the different history, cultures, and identities of the constituent members? The designs of the common Euro notes look precisely for what they are, the product of a committee in Dublin 5 years ago. Having a “common” European theme of Rococo architecture means what precisely in Scotland? Or Greece? Better the pictures of Greek Thompson or Logie Baird or R. Bruce, methinks, but make the currency interchangeable (and make the note sizes and colors the same so blind folks or visitors won’t get mixed up.) And what if the term “Euro” were made the official currency of Britain but then Threadneedle Street officially pegged the pound at £1 = €1, then printed both on the currency? When you travel to Barcelona or Brindisi you’d be able to spend the money in your purse without getting ripped off, but people from Porto to Piraeus would be able to enjoy one another’s currency. I think it would be fun to find Portuguese or Danish Euros in my wallet, with Lord knows what faces or pictures on them, alongside pictures of Burns or Mrs. Q. National pride would be served, along with monetary equality. <BR> <BR>As far as the US dollar being the general unit of currency in North America, it already is. <BR>

My point, Sheila, is that being temporarily politically popular or unpopular is irrelevant to being wise or correct. In the 1930s, Churchill was right and Baldwin, Chamberlain, Halifax and the rest were wrong with regards to Adolf Hitler. Kate seems to think that if you have the political numbers, you are right. Tony Blair has the numbers but he is almost never right in his political point-of-view. On the other hand, Mr. David West seems to be most wise.

ooo er, I seem to have started a bit of a row. Firstly I was asked to explain the anti case. This I did as best I can, it is necessarily concise as this isn't an essay. To take up the points directly addressed at me: <BR> <BR>Firstly I couldn't care less if Scotland becomes a self governing socialist hell hole (although I will feel sorry for the half of my family who live there). It will reduce my taxes on handouts to them. The point I was trying to make is that, paradoxically, centralisation of power through the EU actually makes the Nation State rather more willing to give up the power that it has. This was always a strong Scottish Nationalist arguement ie well we'll all still be in the EU so where's the harm in independence? I have no view either way. <BR> <BR>Secondly yes I am a tory, along with 30% of all voters. Quite proud of it actually (see my comments on the peopel who are always wrong). <BR> <BR>Thirdly: The statement that a stable pan european currency would be good for Europe is at best debatable. However it is my contention that Euro is inherently unstable. (To put this in an american context it would be as if EXACTLY the same economic policies were folowed at all times through NAFTA). Only time will tell the wiser. <BR> <BR>Thatcherism in my opinion was the best thing to ever happen to this country (the sound you can now hear is liberals rending their garments). Maybe you don't agree, but the labour prime minister appears to think I may be onto something (he's not a fan of socialism either) <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR>

No David, that sound you can hear is laughing...

If it wasn't for Mrs. Thatcher, Kate, Britain would be some East German-looking rathole with a supermajority of aimless, decadent people with their hands stretched out looking for alms. By the late seventies, Britain was sliding fast to being Romania on the North Sea. Remember when the unions ground Britain to a halt about 1973-74? Remember 10 % + inflation? High unemployment? High taxes? Top rates of 95 % (remember George Harrison's song TAXMAN?)? The communist menace on the loose? Maggie Thatcher was great.

Huzzah Iain Duncan Smith!!!!!!!!!!!!! Savior of Britain. If the UK is wise enough.

Derek, wasn't Kenneth Clarke a functionary in Ted Heath's glorious reign in the early 70s? The guy has leader written all over his face.

Er Derek, my memory of the eighties isn't exactly clear on all political points (they were my teenage years and things like boys and exams seemed so much more important at the time), but didn't we experience 10%+ inflation and high unemployment during Thatcher's reign? I seem to remember the communist menace was still very strong with much talk of nuclear war - it was the Russians who put an end to that, not Thatcher. <BR> <BR>Thatcher did a lot of damage to Britain. I've no doubt she also did some good, too, but I confess I struggle to see what. <BR> <BR>The one thing that astonishes me is why Tories still harp on so much about her. Do they not see that this constant looking backward is one of their biggest problems? They need to look forward and have some kind of aim to where they are going, not try to regain the greatness (?) of the past. <BR> <BR>By the way, I can't stand Tony Blair either, he's a grinning idiot in whom I place less trust than my dodgy oven which cremates my dinner at least once a week. I am a "leftie" and proud of it - TB isn't. <BR> <BR>I am, on balance, in favour of the Euro, but mainly because it is a fait acommpli that I think we would benefit from joining. Our "we're different" nationalist stance is doing us no favours right now.

Thanks for the replies. And, Anna, Maggie Thatcher inherited a mess. Don't they teach history in Britain or is the UK historically ignorant like us Americans? She didn't turn it around overnight. For a caveat, I was a college senior during the Falklands. My lefty profs laughed at Mrs. Thatcher's resolution to re-take the Falklands. In so many words, I replied that Britain had too much pride to allow themselves to lose a war to some Latin American country. With Mrs. Thatcher's leadership, Britain re-took what was hers and restored pride in their nation. I doubt Misters Wilson, Heath, Callaghan or Blair would have led Britain to victory. As for Foot, Benn and Kinnock, they probably rooted for the Argentines.