 EU experts in Britain don't really agree on why Britain uses its veto. There are many competing theories. I think it's two or three things coming together. Part of the problem for the British was that the government was very worried about getting a new treaty through the House of Commons. It feared a rebellion by Tory Eurosceptics joining with opportunistic Labour party opposition defeating the government. So there was a great reluctance to put any new treaty through the House of Commons, even if that treaty being mainly about the eurozone didn't take powers away from Britain. That was part of it. Not much enthusiasm for any treaty at all. In addition, I think there was an element of cock up. I think some people in the government probably thought that an agreement was doable that the special British demands to protect the city of London could have been met at least in part. But by the time the British produced their proposals at 2.30 in the morning, it was very late and nobody wanted to haggle over the detail, the British made a mistake in not sharing those ideas with potential allies before the summit. So there wasn't really any support for the British ideas when they emerged. The British had expected more support than there was. So I think it's a mixture of cock up and also some people in the government really not wanting a deal at all and therefore insisting on demands at the summit, the special British protocol, that were really never going to be a runner with most of our partners. The assumption is that the provisions of the fiscal compact will be incorporated into EU treaties. But you'd need the consent of every EU member state to do that. I think it's highly unlikely that the British would agree to do that because that would mean Britain exceeding to a new EU treaty. And even though, as I said, the treaty consent doesn't really take powers away from countries not in the euro, it would be politically difficult and controversial in Britain could provoke a referendum on EU membership. So unless you get a very pro-European government in Britain, which doesn't seem very likely at the moment, I see little chance of Britain agreeing that the fiscal compact should be folded in to the EU treaties. If it was folded into the EU treaties, it wouldn't really affect Britain at all because the provisions apply to eurozone countries. I think Britain has a very strong interest in a stable, successful eurozone. And most British Eurosceptics would accept this point. The British government, though fairly Eurosceptic, certainly wants the eurozone to succeed. About half Britain's traders were the rest of the EU, most of it were the eurozone. And I think if the eurozone fell apart, there'd be economic chaos, there'd probably be protectionism, there'd be a great loss of output, that'd be very damaging to the British economy. Having said that, there is a school of thought in Britain amongst the strongly eurosceptic circles that is starting to think that it might actually be better if the eurozone broke up because the current policies pushed by the Germans seem to be imposing deflation and high unemployment and negative growth on much of the eurozone and that's not good for economic activity in the eurozone. It's going to damage output for a long time and that's not very good for Britain which likes to export for the eurozone. So there is this radical school that would welcome a eurozone break up but that's not the mainstream view, even in eurosceptic circles and it's certainly not the British government's view.