I'm pretty much decided on the whole Europe-Tories-Cock-Up-Debacle but there is a very interesting article from the BBC's Gavin Hewitt about the possibilities for the UK if it does disengage from the EU. It's a very good piece which offers a different perspective from the current arguments.
Crucially, this piece is about the possibilities for the UK of leading the agenda by offering a positive alternative to the French-dominated European 'vision' which is fundamentally anti-democratic.
Showing posts with label EUROPE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EUROPE. Show all posts
Monday, 12 December 2011
SHOULD WE STAY OR SHOULD WE GO? IT'S REALLY NOT DIFFICULT
[I have taken to writing a blog some hours before posting it so that I can review the language. This is a good discipline particularly when referring to our charming coalition 'partners'. You might say there's no 'f' in coalition...]
Ouch. The Independent today discusses whether the Lib Dems should stay in the coalition with the Tories or whether we should accept that we have nothing in common with their self-destructive approach to the world and pull out now, probably precipitating a new General Election. The answer is simple. We have to stick it out, however hard we must hold our noses.
We went into the coalition with the Tories because it was in the national interest. People attack Nick Clegg for changing his tune but he said this before, during and after the General Election campaign. He was absolutely, unequivocally clear that we would work with whichever party won the most votes. Thankfully, in this case it was the Tories for, let no one forget, Labour in 2010 was entirely washed up, with one of the most unpopular leaders ever, a Chancellor promising cuts pretty much along the lines of what we have now and absolutely no idea about what to do next. They were lost and they still are, as Ed Miliband demonstrated on Sunday when the best response he could come up with in response to the European debacle was to declare that he agreed with Nick. And this man has ambitions to be Prime Minister. Seriously.
By contrast, the Tories offered us a good deal. We have lost out in some areas like student fees and the referendum - call it political naivety - but in others we are doing well, such as cutting taxes for the lowest paid, investing in education for disadvantaged schoolchildren and wrestling with the nightmare of our energy policy. We are doing good Lib Dem stuff in government and that will all stop if we walk away. We are also working hard to deliver the stability which is so clearly lacking in much of Europe and which remains the touchstone of this government's success. It's hard, it is hurting but if it succeeds we will all benefit, even union leaders on £120,000 a year who seek to derail all these plans. [Note: the fiery anachronistic leader of UNISON gets this princely sum each year. I wonder how many of his poorly paid members know that...]
On a more inward-looking tack, if the Lib Dems do leave the coalition and an election is called, it's unlikely to be wine and roses for us. We have good arguments and a principled stance but Joe and Josephine Public haven't been sold on that yet. We need time to get the message across that we are holding the Tories in check and delivering on our promises. I don't know many people who dislike the Tories as much as I do and that is because I have seen close at hand how they operate. This government needs principles and clarity of purpose to survive and that isn't going to come from them. Lib Dems need to fight them all the way but do it from the inside.
So plaudits to Nick for what has become one of the best assaults of recent years on arrogance and ignorance in government and the abject failure of British diplomacy in Europe, for which David Cameron is 100% responsible. Forget the nuanced arguments of various pundits about why he did it - he failed to negotiate wisely for our interests in an international forum, he failed to engage with partners and he was comprehensively outflanked by the French - the French, goddamit!
I agree with Nick and I wish him well in what is going to be a Hell of a week for us and for our disastrously isolated country.
Ouch. The Independent today discusses whether the Lib Dems should stay in the coalition with the Tories or whether we should accept that we have nothing in common with their self-destructive approach to the world and pull out now, probably precipitating a new General Election. The answer is simple. We have to stick it out, however hard we must hold our noses.
We went into the coalition with the Tories because it was in the national interest. People attack Nick Clegg for changing his tune but he said this before, during and after the General Election campaign. He was absolutely, unequivocally clear that we would work with whichever party won the most votes. Thankfully, in this case it was the Tories for, let no one forget, Labour in 2010 was entirely washed up, with one of the most unpopular leaders ever, a Chancellor promising cuts pretty much along the lines of what we have now and absolutely no idea about what to do next. They were lost and they still are, as Ed Miliband demonstrated on Sunday when the best response he could come up with in response to the European debacle was to declare that he agreed with Nick. And this man has ambitions to be Prime Minister. Seriously.
By contrast, the Tories offered us a good deal. We have lost out in some areas like student fees and the referendum - call it political naivety - but in others we are doing well, such as cutting taxes for the lowest paid, investing in education for disadvantaged schoolchildren and wrestling with the nightmare of our energy policy. We are doing good Lib Dem stuff in government and that will all stop if we walk away. We are also working hard to deliver the stability which is so clearly lacking in much of Europe and which remains the touchstone of this government's success. It's hard, it is hurting but if it succeeds we will all benefit, even union leaders on £120,000 a year who seek to derail all these plans. [Note: the fiery anachronistic leader of UNISON gets this princely sum each year. I wonder how many of his poorly paid members know that...]
On a more inward-looking tack, if the Lib Dems do leave the coalition and an election is called, it's unlikely to be wine and roses for us. We have good arguments and a principled stance but Joe and Josephine Public haven't been sold on that yet. We need time to get the message across that we are holding the Tories in check and delivering on our promises. I don't know many people who dislike the Tories as much as I do and that is because I have seen close at hand how they operate. This government needs principles and clarity of purpose to survive and that isn't going to come from them. Lib Dems need to fight them all the way but do it from the inside.
So plaudits to Nick for what has become one of the best assaults of recent years on arrogance and ignorance in government and the abject failure of British diplomacy in Europe, for which David Cameron is 100% responsible. Forget the nuanced arguments of various pundits about why he did it - he failed to negotiate wisely for our interests in an international forum, he failed to engage with partners and he was comprehensively outflanked by the French - the French, goddamit!
I agree with Nick and I wish him well in what is going to be a Hell of a week for us and for our disastrously isolated country.
Friday, 9 December 2011
FOG IN CHANNEL, BRITAIN FLOATS OFF
I struggle with Europe. I am a passionate European and I see only benefits in the European project. I have always supported Britain’s membership of the EU but that enthusiasm is tempered by my complete disdain for the EU as it is: a garbled, ill-thought out ‘camel’ of an institution with absurdities such as the Common Agricultural Policy, the Common Fish Abolition Policy and the farce of the European Parliament moving lock, stock and barrel from its headquarters in Brussels to Strasbourg once a month at a cost of millions of Euros to satisfy French egos.
Europe is a mess - a great idea but a terrible entity. It needs a counterweight to the French and their self-aggrandizing President. Angela Merkel is a star but her default setting, sadly, is to compromise, not to tell Sarko what's what. It needs a country like ours which, for all our myriad faults, is still relatively uncorrupt and which has been outward-facing for a good few centuries now. Sadly, we have mucked up our relationship with Europe for 70 years and it might just be the case that we can't 'do' Europe.
If you look back at the history of European integration it is obvious to even the most in-bred Tory that Britain has squandered what could have been a key role. When countries began talking about ‘Europe’ in London during the Second World War they were very keen for Britain to join. Britain was at the time important due to its wartime role. Reflect on that, Dave...Crucially, Britain was seen as an essential bulwark against French ambitions to use the European project to create a ‘greater France’.
Sadly, the Tory government of the time (1957) could not see the bigger picture and decided to let the foreign Johnnies get on with it while we declined politely on the sidelines. Thus France got its way from day one and all the current problems of Europe to this day emerged: the CAP, the abject lack of democracy, the corrupt Commission system, the deals behind closed doors. How much better could Europe – and Britain – have been if we had been mixing it from the start, insisting on representative and effective institutions and a free trade area which could have brought countries together while not diminishing states and their democratic checks to the detriment of the people who live in them?
When Britain realised its mistake the government had to go cap in hand to the French, who drove a hard bargain and finally let Britain join in 1973 – just as the global economy sank into one of its perennial crises. Since then we have been in a state of confusion over Europe, not sure whether to be committed or sceptical.
Well Dave has made the decision for us, now. By walking out of one of the most crucial meetings in European history he has taken Britain’s influence with him for a generation. And he let the French win again, which just smarts. We have the Olympics, they have the future of Europe. Well played, Dave.He may be defended by Eurosceptics but the crux of this whole story is that a better politician would not have let himself be put in this position.
Having now comprehensively lost all credibility in Europe, perhaps this is the time for everyone here to reflect. Frankly, we just don’t get it. Perhaps we should admit that Britain cannot be part of the EU, not because it is not in our interests – it is, and the moment we leave, London goes down the tubes as global finance moves to Frankfurt and Shanghai – but because we haven’t escaped the curse of empire, the notion that we are somehow different and better than others. We are not, we are Europeans and we have been ever since people first arrived here many thousands of years ago from Europe and continued to trade and work with their neighbours ever since.
Maybe Europe is better off without us. Maybe the spirit of closed door deals and compromise is what is needed. Maybe the new powers of Poland and Germany can stand up to France better than we have. For the first time in my life I find myself strangely sympathetic to the imbecilic voices calling for us to leave the EU. I don't agree with them but it may just be that we have shot our collective bolt and now is the time to call it a day.
As for Nick, my God he's a cool one. I can imagine what he's been saying to Dave behind the scenes but his sang froid before the cameras is a sight to behold. I'd have preferred him to have called Dave every version of fool in the English language but he is playing the long game and he deserves credit for that.
Europe is a mess - a great idea but a terrible entity. It needs a counterweight to the French and their self-aggrandizing President. Angela Merkel is a star but her default setting, sadly, is to compromise, not to tell Sarko what's what. It needs a country like ours which, for all our myriad faults, is still relatively uncorrupt and which has been outward-facing for a good few centuries now. Sadly, we have mucked up our relationship with Europe for 70 years and it might just be the case that we can't 'do' Europe.
If you look back at the history of European integration it is obvious to even the most in-bred Tory that Britain has squandered what could have been a key role. When countries began talking about ‘Europe’ in London during the Second World War they were very keen for Britain to join. Britain was at the time important due to its wartime role. Reflect on that, Dave...Crucially, Britain was seen as an essential bulwark against French ambitions to use the European project to create a ‘greater France’.
Sadly, the Tory government of the time (1957) could not see the bigger picture and decided to let the foreign Johnnies get on with it while we declined politely on the sidelines. Thus France got its way from day one and all the current problems of Europe to this day emerged: the CAP, the abject lack of democracy, the corrupt Commission system, the deals behind closed doors. How much better could Europe – and Britain – have been if we had been mixing it from the start, insisting on representative and effective institutions and a free trade area which could have brought countries together while not diminishing states and their democratic checks to the detriment of the people who live in them?
When Britain realised its mistake the government had to go cap in hand to the French, who drove a hard bargain and finally let Britain join in 1973 – just as the global economy sank into one of its perennial crises. Since then we have been in a state of confusion over Europe, not sure whether to be committed or sceptical.
Well Dave has made the decision for us, now. By walking out of one of the most crucial meetings in European history he has taken Britain’s influence with him for a generation. And he let the French win again, which just smarts. We have the Olympics, they have the future of Europe. Well played, Dave.He may be defended by Eurosceptics but the crux of this whole story is that a better politician would not have let himself be put in this position.
Having now comprehensively lost all credibility in Europe, perhaps this is the time for everyone here to reflect. Frankly, we just don’t get it. Perhaps we should admit that Britain cannot be part of the EU, not because it is not in our interests – it is, and the moment we leave, London goes down the tubes as global finance moves to Frankfurt and Shanghai – but because we haven’t escaped the curse of empire, the notion that we are somehow different and better than others. We are not, we are Europeans and we have been ever since people first arrived here many thousands of years ago from Europe and continued to trade and work with their neighbours ever since.
Maybe Europe is better off without us. Maybe the spirit of closed door deals and compromise is what is needed. Maybe the new powers of Poland and Germany can stand up to France better than we have. For the first time in my life I find myself strangely sympathetic to the imbecilic voices calling for us to leave the EU. I don't agree with them but it may just be that we have shot our collective bolt and now is the time to call it a day.
As for Nick, my God he's a cool one. I can imagine what he's been saying to Dave behind the scenes but his sang froid before the cameras is a sight to behold. I'd have preferred him to have called Dave every version of fool in the English language but he is playing the long game and he deserves credit for that.
Monday, 24 October 2011
CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHAT WOULD BE WRONG WITH A MULTI-SPEED EUROPE (BUT NOT BEFORE THE TORIES HAVE FINISHED FIGHTING)?
What a huge number of issues the planned Tory revolt throws up today. First it demonstrates that there is only a sticking plaster over the deep division within their party over Europe - and remember, dear reader, which party signed us up to Europe, signed us up to the Single European Act and signed us up to the Maastricht Treaty and, of course, which party has NEVER offered voters a say in a referendum on any aspect of our relationship with Europe. Aha, it was the Tories (harmonica riff here if you're a fan of Manfred Mann).
Second, it shows how foolish the Tories still are, offering their leader no support when he is arguing with other European leaders over the whole future of the continental system. If ever there was a time for closing ranks, this is it but Tories like Bill Cash and John Redwood, egged on by a new crop of petty grandstanders, cannot see beyond this issue. Third, it highlights the irrelevance of Labour as they are just as split over Europe as the Tories. Just look at the disarray on both sides over the Lisbon Treaty. Fourth, it shows that Parliament matters - a categorically good thing.
Perhaps most importantly for this utterly biased blog, it demonstrates that, whether you like the Lib Dems' views on Europe we are the only party which is consistent, clear and honest about our support for the union and for co-operation between European countries. It is, however, a disappointment that our leadership decided to 'whip' our MPs today.
Rising above the petty politics of today's debate and vote is a much larger issue, one which is considered in a very 'black and white' way. Almost all the commentaries raise the spectre of possible two- or three-speed Europes, with an inner core of Eurozone countries, an outer group of less economically committed countries and a periphery of sceptics, one of which would inevitably be Britain, since British governments have shown unfailing stupidity over Europe ever since the 1940s when the smaller countries urged us to join to counterbalance France and provide a more practical, less corrupt model for the continent than les Grenouilles managed to introduce. The notion of a multi-speed system is seen as A Bad Thing by almost everyone and a road to ruin for Britain and for Europe. Why? What evidence is there that flexibility leads to failure?
Putting aside the record of 70 years of crass stupidity and failure to lead when leadership was needed by Britain, what is wrong with a multi-speed Europe? Why should some countries not share a currency while others don't? Why shouldn't some countries retain their currencies until such time - if such time arrives - that they decide that their interests lie within a currency union? I favour membership of the EU but not on any terms so why not look at working with others to develop differently. Isn't that the gift Britain can bring to Europe? Not the narrow-minded 'in or out' argument but a more nuanced one about shared interests. Forcing countries together, as the French favour, causes discord, dissonance and a lack of buy-in by citizens of European countries. Isn't that old devil, democracy, meant to be about winning popular support for progress and competing ideas fighting for acceptance?
That's the trouble with the European debate in Britain: it isn't a debate, it's a shouting match. We're either in or out, we either have to love Europe or hate it. Can't we be mature and accept the pluses of European membership while decrying and seeking to improve on the problems, like the CAP and the farce of the Strasbourg Parliament?
Coo, with all this favouring debate, dialogue and flexibility, I'll never get anywhere in politics, will I?
Second, it shows how foolish the Tories still are, offering their leader no support when he is arguing with other European leaders over the whole future of the continental system. If ever there was a time for closing ranks, this is it but Tories like Bill Cash and John Redwood, egged on by a new crop of petty grandstanders, cannot see beyond this issue. Third, it highlights the irrelevance of Labour as they are just as split over Europe as the Tories. Just look at the disarray on both sides over the Lisbon Treaty. Fourth, it shows that Parliament matters - a categorically good thing.
Perhaps most importantly for this utterly biased blog, it demonstrates that, whether you like the Lib Dems' views on Europe we are the only party which is consistent, clear and honest about our support for the union and for co-operation between European countries. It is, however, a disappointment that our leadership decided to 'whip' our MPs today.
Rising above the petty politics of today's debate and vote is a much larger issue, one which is considered in a very 'black and white' way. Almost all the commentaries raise the spectre of possible two- or three-speed Europes, with an inner core of Eurozone countries, an outer group of less economically committed countries and a periphery of sceptics, one of which would inevitably be Britain, since British governments have shown unfailing stupidity over Europe ever since the 1940s when the smaller countries urged us to join to counterbalance France and provide a more practical, less corrupt model for the continent than les Grenouilles managed to introduce. The notion of a multi-speed system is seen as A Bad Thing by almost everyone and a road to ruin for Britain and for Europe. Why? What evidence is there that flexibility leads to failure?
Putting aside the record of 70 years of crass stupidity and failure to lead when leadership was needed by Britain, what is wrong with a multi-speed Europe? Why should some countries not share a currency while others don't? Why shouldn't some countries retain their currencies until such time - if such time arrives - that they decide that their interests lie within a currency union? I favour membership of the EU but not on any terms so why not look at working with others to develop differently. Isn't that the gift Britain can bring to Europe? Not the narrow-minded 'in or out' argument but a more nuanced one about shared interests. Forcing countries together, as the French favour, causes discord, dissonance and a lack of buy-in by citizens of European countries. Isn't that old devil, democracy, meant to be about winning popular support for progress and competing ideas fighting for acceptance?
That's the trouble with the European debate in Britain: it isn't a debate, it's a shouting match. We're either in or out, we either have to love Europe or hate it. Can't we be mature and accept the pluses of European membership while decrying and seeking to improve on the problems, like the CAP and the farce of the Strasbourg Parliament?
Coo, with all this favouring debate, dialogue and flexibility, I'll never get anywhere in politics, will I?
Thursday, 20 October 2011
TORIES ARGUE OVER EUROPE. BEARS STILL USE WOODLAND FOR RELIEF. RELIGIOUS LEADER STILL HAS FIRST FLOOR OUTSIDE EXTENSION...
The debate on Europe palls a bit when contrasted with the momentous news that the Libyan dictator has been captured and may even have spluttered his last on this earth but it is still important for this country.
It's difficult as a Lib Dem to hide one's glee at the abject stupidity of Tories for reviving this particular corpse, not a failed dictator but a pointless, childish argument which never fails to put the Tories at each others' throats. Keep fighting, chaps and let's hope the political casualty rate in this spat is high.
While they bicker between themselves, it would be nice if we could have a clear, unequivocal statement from the Lib Dem leadership that:
1. we are 100% pro European
2. we are also highly critical of the mess that Europe is and want it reformed root and branch
3. we are the only party - yes, the only one - which supported a referendum on European membership at the last election
4. Lib Dem MPs will be given the freedom to vote as they choose in next week's debate
We're sitting pretty on this issue as the only party with a clear view and a commitment to giving voters a proper choice on membership and this is a golden opportunity to show people why we're different. I hope Nickers makes some political capital out of it rather than just being Mr Nice Guy. They stuffed you earlier this year, Nick. It's payback time now.
It's difficult as a Lib Dem to hide one's glee at the abject stupidity of Tories for reviving this particular corpse, not a failed dictator but a pointless, childish argument which never fails to put the Tories at each others' throats. Keep fighting, chaps and let's hope the political casualty rate in this spat is high.
While they bicker between themselves, it would be nice if we could have a clear, unequivocal statement from the Lib Dem leadership that:
1. we are 100% pro European
2. we are also highly critical of the mess that Europe is and want it reformed root and branch
3. we are the only party - yes, the only one - which supported a referendum on European membership at the last election
4. Lib Dem MPs will be given the freedom to vote as they choose in next week's debate
We're sitting pretty on this issue as the only party with a clear view and a commitment to giving voters a proper choice on membership and this is a golden opportunity to show people why we're different. I hope Nickers makes some political capital out of it rather than just being Mr Nice Guy. They stuffed you earlier this year, Nick. It's payback time now.
Thursday, 30 June 2011
EUROPE, THE TICKING BOMB IN THE FOUNDATIONS OF DAVE'S 'NEW' TORIES
Its always nice to learn that the Tories are the same old lags they always were, even if we're all supposed to be pally with them. Switching channels last night, I happened on Newsnight, which I try to avoid as the presenter is a pompous oaf lacking the wit to spot a news story even if it were 12 feet tall and painted purple, with 'this is a serious news story' tattooed on its forehead.
But I digress...The reassuring sight was a Tory backbencher - name of no consequence - arguing with an eloquent Dutch MP about the merits of the European Union. Yes, Dave, it hasn't gone away for your party, regardless of how much whitewash you splash over the issue. Faced with the absurdly reasonable approach of the Dutch MP, pointing out the many areas where combined action at a European level, such as investing in green technology and setting up a single office for the EU countries in Benghazi as opposed to 27 (sic.) separate missions, benefits us all and saves us money, the Tory simply blathered about how these things should not be done at a European level.
This is a shame as there is a serious discussion needed about the ludicrous French-inspired European model, the waste within that bureaucracy, the shocking scandal of unchecked expenses for MEPs, the disaster of the monthly trudge to Strasbourg to soothe French egos [the capital of Europe is Brussels, now get over it, mes amis] and the crime that is the copper-bottomed pensions for former Eurocrats like Lord Kinnock of Gravytrain.
The problem is that Blimpish Tories fail utterly to engage with these real problems, with their ostrich-like denial that there is anything good about Europe. There is: co-operation, a blissful lack of war since 1945, the promotion of democracy across the globe, the opportunity to be heard in international forums as a group of 28 countries and to make big decisions in the world over issues like supporting Arab democracies, which is good for everyone. Europe is a 'good' in principle but a failure in practice. The British government should be working to change it and make it successful, something bleating Tories will never do.
Good on Nickers and the LD MPs for their continued support of the coalition. We are playing with a straight bat but, my word, how glad I am that I don't have to cosy up to that lot.
But I digress...The reassuring sight was a Tory backbencher - name of no consequence - arguing with an eloquent Dutch MP about the merits of the European Union. Yes, Dave, it hasn't gone away for your party, regardless of how much whitewash you splash over the issue. Faced with the absurdly reasonable approach of the Dutch MP, pointing out the many areas where combined action at a European level, such as investing in green technology and setting up a single office for the EU countries in Benghazi as opposed to 27 (sic.) separate missions, benefits us all and saves us money, the Tory simply blathered about how these things should not be done at a European level.
This is a shame as there is a serious discussion needed about the ludicrous French-inspired European model, the waste within that bureaucracy, the shocking scandal of unchecked expenses for MEPs, the disaster of the monthly trudge to Strasbourg to soothe French egos [the capital of Europe is Brussels, now get over it, mes amis] and the crime that is the copper-bottomed pensions for former Eurocrats like Lord Kinnock of Gravytrain.
The problem is that Blimpish Tories fail utterly to engage with these real problems, with their ostrich-like denial that there is anything good about Europe. There is: co-operation, a blissful lack of war since 1945, the promotion of democracy across the globe, the opportunity to be heard in international forums as a group of 28 countries and to make big decisions in the world over issues like supporting Arab democracies, which is good for everyone. Europe is a 'good' in principle but a failure in practice. The British government should be working to change it and make it successful, something bleating Tories will never do.
Good on Nickers and the LD MPs for their continued support of the coalition. We are playing with a straight bat but, my word, how glad I am that I don't have to cosy up to that lot.
Wednesday, 16 June 2010
DON'T WORRY, THE FRENCH WILL SOLVE ALL EUROPE'S PROBLEMS
Worried about the global economic crisis? Concerned for the Euro? Doubtful about European markets for British goods? Don't be! The French government has announced plans to raise the retirement age from 60 to 62.
The good news is that we can expect the French to accept these necessary measures and to eschew the demonstrations and violence which have so damaged Greece in the name of defending the rights of Greek trombonists. I am sure that the moderate French unions will accept these plans with a workmanlike common sense. It will doubtless be a reassurance to the thousands of British visitors to France who will have to work until they are 67 to know that French people have accepted some of the pain which is spreading across Europe.
Can I finally say that anyone posting a comment suggesting that the French are in Europe for what they can get out of it and noting that half the EU budget goes on the Common Agricultural Policy - and half of that goes to poverty-stricken French farmers - will find their posts rejected as scurrilous slanders on our neighbours across the English Channel.
The good news is that we can expect the French to accept these necessary measures and to eschew the demonstrations and violence which have so damaged Greece in the name of defending the rights of Greek trombonists. I am sure that the moderate French unions will accept these plans with a workmanlike common sense. It will doubtless be a reassurance to the thousands of British visitors to France who will have to work until they are 67 to know that French people have accepted some of the pain which is spreading across Europe.
Can I finally say that anyone posting a comment suggesting that the French are in Europe for what they can get out of it and noting that half the EU budget goes on the Common Agricultural Policy - and half of that goes to poverty-stricken French farmers - will find their posts rejected as scurrilous slanders on our neighbours across the English Channel.
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
SCOTCHING MYTHS PART 2: THE EURO
The opposition parties, especially the Conservatives, are likely to target us on this issue in coming days as the leaders focus on foreign affairs in the leaders' debate on Thursday. Setting aside my advice to any Tory leader to avoid reopening the European wound that still gapes in the Tory side, let me quote what the Lib Dem manifesto (page 67) says:
'We believe that it is in Britain's long-term interest to be part of the Euro. But Britain should only join when the economic conditions are right, and in the present economic situation, they are not. Britain should join the euro only if that decision were supported by the people of Britain in a referendum.'
Now that commitment will not be popular to many people but it is a clear, unequivocal statement of where we stand. Two key points must be made, in bold, below:
1. We do not plan to do this any time soon. It is NOT a manifesto commitment, merely a statement of our beliefs.
2. We have clearly promised a referendum on this or any other major change to our relationship with Europe.
Can the Conservatives in particular be this clear?
For those of you still reading, as this is not a topic of major interest to most voters who have given it a second's thought, allow me to remind you that the Conservatives took us into Europe without a referendum, the Conservatives signed the Single European Act - committing us to joining a single currency in the future - without a referendum and the Conservatives signed the Maastricht Treaty establishing the larger European Union without a referendum.
Liberal Democrats are clear and open about our commitment to Europe. Are others?
'We believe that it is in Britain's long-term interest to be part of the Euro. But Britain should only join when the economic conditions are right, and in the present economic situation, they are not. Britain should join the euro only if that decision were supported by the people of Britain in a referendum.'
Now that commitment will not be popular to many people but it is a clear, unequivocal statement of where we stand. Two key points must be made, in bold, below:
1. We do not plan to do this any time soon. It is NOT a manifesto commitment, merely a statement of our beliefs.
2. We have clearly promised a referendum on this or any other major change to our relationship with Europe.
Can the Conservatives in particular be this clear?
For those of you still reading, as this is not a topic of major interest to most voters who have given it a second's thought, allow me to remind you that the Conservatives took us into Europe without a referendum, the Conservatives signed the Single European Act - committing us to joining a single currency in the future - without a referendum and the Conservatives signed the Maastricht Treaty establishing the larger European Union without a referendum.
Liberal Democrats are clear and open about our commitment to Europe. Are others?
Sunday, 18 April 2010
CONSERVATIVES ON EUROPE - LIKE TURKEYS VOTING FOR CHRISTMAS
Can I first apologise for the length of this post but the detail is crucial to destroying the latest Conservative attack on Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats.
The election campaign has a hard but enjoyable slog but it was still nice to have something to genuinely laugh about this morning as I heard on the radio that the Conservatives have attacked us over our stance on Europe. We must remember that this is the issue which effectively destroyed the Conservatives in the 1990s and from which they are only just emerging.
Liberal Democrats, building on a long tradition of internationalism, are of course pro European but we are also highly critical of a creaking institution which - let no one forget - the Conservatives took us into without a referendum.
Let's review that proposition for a moment. Britain joined the 'Common Market' in 1973 under Tory Prime Minister Edward Heath and he certainly didn't allow voters a real say on this major issue. A referendum on membership was only held in 1975 under the new Labour government.
The embarrassment doesn't end there for the Tories. In 1986 Margaret Thatcher's government signed up to the Single European Act - once again without a referendum. The Tories will tell you that this Act improved the efficiency of Europe and was thus a major step towards the 'trading bloc' which they profess to favour. However, one detail they won't own up to is that the Single European Act also signed Britain up to joining a single currency.
Let me repeat that: the Thatcher government signed Britain up to a single European currency without a referendum in 1986.
The embarrassment for the Tories continues when we jump forward to 1992 when the next Conservative government signed us up to the Maastricht Treaty - without a referendum - which created the new 'European Union', among whose innovations was a common foreign and security policy and greater powers for the European Parliament. Effectively, you could say that 'Europe' as a self-supporting entity came into existence in 1992 and the COnservatives signd up to it.
As many people will be aware the aftermath of the Maastricht Treaty was the near-extinction of Conservatives over years of in-fighting and argument, culminating in the 1997 Labour election victory.
Now the policy detail. As I mentioned, Liberal Democrats are completely committed to the European Union but we also want to make significant changes which the other parties have ducked for decades:
* We want to stop the pointless and hugely expensive monthly movement of MEPs and their entire offices between Brussels and Strasbourg purely to satisfy the French. Why haven't the Tories or Labour done this before?
* We want to remove trade barriers to help create green jobs, benefiting British businesses and helping to address climate change across the Union.
* We will stop the 'gold plating' of European directives, whereby British Civil Servants add extra aspects to European laws, making them more onerous and putting the blame on to Brussels.
* We will use the European Union to work for stricter international regulation of financial services and banking.
* We will keep the pressure up for reform of the outlandish agricultural subsidies to give farmers, consumers and taxpayers a fair deal.
We will seek continuing reform of the EU budget to make sure your money is only spent on things the EU really needs to do.
Britain is a small island off the coast of Europe. The so-called 'special relationship' is so one-sided that it is not a real relationship at all. We are a very successful international actor in most forums across the world but this is increasingly because of our cooperation with our European partners. Britain is a European country and has been for all but about 150 years of its existence, when it looked outwards towards the empire.
We must work towards a better, reformed Europe which serves our interests and those of our partners. We won't achieve anything if we cut ourselves off from the debate. I hope the Conservatives think long and hard about this attack on the Liberal Democrats. To say they have left a flank open is an understatement of continental proportions...If they do wish to pursue this I trust Nick will show them no quarter.
The election campaign has a hard but enjoyable slog but it was still nice to have something to genuinely laugh about this morning as I heard on the radio that the Conservatives have attacked us over our stance on Europe. We must remember that this is the issue which effectively destroyed the Conservatives in the 1990s and from which they are only just emerging.
Liberal Democrats, building on a long tradition of internationalism, are of course pro European but we are also highly critical of a creaking institution which - let no one forget - the Conservatives took us into without a referendum.
Let's review that proposition for a moment. Britain joined the 'Common Market' in 1973 under Tory Prime Minister Edward Heath and he certainly didn't allow voters a real say on this major issue. A referendum on membership was only held in 1975 under the new Labour government.
The embarrassment doesn't end there for the Tories. In 1986 Margaret Thatcher's government signed up to the Single European Act - once again without a referendum. The Tories will tell you that this Act improved the efficiency of Europe and was thus a major step towards the 'trading bloc' which they profess to favour. However, one detail they won't own up to is that the Single European Act also signed Britain up to joining a single currency.
Let me repeat that: the Thatcher government signed Britain up to a single European currency without a referendum in 1986.
The embarrassment for the Tories continues when we jump forward to 1992 when the next Conservative government signed us up to the Maastricht Treaty - without a referendum - which created the new 'European Union', among whose innovations was a common foreign and security policy and greater powers for the European Parliament. Effectively, you could say that 'Europe' as a self-supporting entity came into existence in 1992 and the COnservatives signd up to it.
As many people will be aware the aftermath of the Maastricht Treaty was the near-extinction of Conservatives over years of in-fighting and argument, culminating in the 1997 Labour election victory.
Now the policy detail. As I mentioned, Liberal Democrats are completely committed to the European Union but we also want to make significant changes which the other parties have ducked for decades:
* We want to stop the pointless and hugely expensive monthly movement of MEPs and their entire offices between Brussels and Strasbourg purely to satisfy the French. Why haven't the Tories or Labour done this before?
* We want to remove trade barriers to help create green jobs, benefiting British businesses and helping to address climate change across the Union.
* We will stop the 'gold plating' of European directives, whereby British Civil Servants add extra aspects to European laws, making them more onerous and putting the blame on to Brussels.
* We will use the European Union to work for stricter international regulation of financial services and banking.
* We will keep the pressure up for reform of the outlandish agricultural subsidies to give farmers, consumers and taxpayers a fair deal.
We will seek continuing reform of the EU budget to make sure your money is only spent on things the EU really needs to do.
Britain is a small island off the coast of Europe. The so-called 'special relationship' is so one-sided that it is not a real relationship at all. We are a very successful international actor in most forums across the world but this is increasingly because of our cooperation with our European partners. Britain is a European country and has been for all but about 150 years of its existence, when it looked outwards towards the empire.
We must work towards a better, reformed Europe which serves our interests and those of our partners. We won't achieve anything if we cut ourselves off from the debate. I hope the Conservatives think long and hard about this attack on the Liberal Democrats. To say they have left a flank open is an understatement of continental proportions...If they do wish to pursue this I trust Nick will show them no quarter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)