91Èȱ¬

Europe has damaged the Tories in the past , you say Nick.

Heath (EEC)Thatcher(Maastricht)and Major(Single European Act) would surely say otherwise,after all they once led a great political party.

Anti Europeans who wanted to strangle Europe, get out and ultimately 'save the pound'now know through rejection,that to be anti goes against the grain of popular thinking and is not,as you say,top of the agenda in The Queen Vic.

To those would be Prime Ministers who are anti's: Don't call us and we'll never call you.

Gary

A breach of relations with our key European partners will not exactly help

I'm not sure that's true; the public seems to be mostly slightly eurosceptic, the problems that the Toris had with Europe in the past were all about the division, not so much about the policy.

Backing down on this commitment shows that the Tories are still divided over Europe, that a Cameron promise can't be taken at face value, and that can't run his own party, much less the country.

Leaving the EPP and getting (somewhat) off the European Parliament gravy train would show not only a principled determination to do the right thing, but also free the Tories up to attack the other two parties for going along with the whole charade just for the fringe benefits.

Hague has promised an announcement by the end of July so I can’t see him kicking it very far at all. Though on the question of having bad relations with our European allies. Does it really matter? Blair has not exactly had wonderful relations with France and Germany over the course of his premiership. It hasn’t done him much harm. The UK is too big, too noisy and too rich to be sidelined and despite Blair’s protestations that he is in the ‘driving seat’ in reality he has achieved next to nothing. Apart from getting Turkey into accession talks what has he done? He failed to do anything on budget reform and gave away a huge slab of the rebate in return for vague promises. It hasn’t stopped him being elected three times in a row.

Also the difference between Cameron and Major is that his whole shadow cabinet is now broadly Eurosceptic. Even Ken Clarke has chosen to keep quiet on this subject. The only ones complaining are the MEPs who - frankly – come lower down than backbench MPs in the pecking order of power.

Nick, Do you think Europe might give David Cameron his opportunity for a 'clause 4 moment'?

Europe has been a open wound in the Conservative party for a generation... will members finally realise they have to accept Europe for all it's faults, and only through that acceptance will any influence come and only subsequent to that will be opportunity for any reform.

Surely this is now a 'hygene factor' for any future government?

Dear Nick
You omitted to mention that New Labour are equally divided on Europe.
Hardly anyone except AC Blair and his cronies wants a federal Europe yet we get it rammed down our throat.
I'm sure Mr Blair did not realise when he signed up to the Human rights convention, (because he never looks at detail only headlines) that it was not possible to deport EU criminals. It never crossed his mind that it would cause him trouble. That's the problem with Blair, if its good for him its OK, and to hell with the electorate.
Europe is good only for free trade, for everything else its bad news.

In fact the "pro-Europeans" (like Gary Elsby)claim that people are not interested in the EU question, Nick, but they have no real way of telling. My experience is that people are increasingly concerned about the nature of the EU - wasteful, inefficient, undemocratic, unacountable and institutionally corrupt. Their habit of patronising people who speak out against all this, and labelling them extremists, shows how insecure they really are. Time for a proper, honest debate about the nature of the EU and our membership of it. Nothing in life is inevitable, and certainly not a political union which flies in the face of common sense, history and the best interests of the UK.

This is not a right wing versus everybody else issue - it crosses the political divide - but unless Cameron addresses it sensibly, it will be largely the Conservative party which will haemorrhage votes even more to parties like UKIP. Contrary to Gary, (who seems to be so well schooled in history that he gets the treaty signatories wrong)I believe that the Eurosceptic storm is gathering pace, and that secretly he knows it. It doesn't have to be that way.

I agree with all of what you said until the last sentence "A breach of relations with our key European partners will not exactly help." What made you jump to that conclusion?

Surely there are two points here. First, prior to the next Euro elections, the Tories need to be seen to be saying and doing the same thing.

They can't be saying that they want to realign Europe, when the party they are in, the EPP, says it wants Europe to become more federalist.

Second, it's not about relations with our European partners, its about relations with our supporters and, crucially, our potential supporters.

Our potential supporters will be put off by being clearly deceitful on this issue, which we have been to an extent in the past; and will warm to a realistic attitude.

Cameron does have a problem in that some of his Euro MEPs might walk, and walk noisely, if the Conservatives do what they have promised earlier and leave the EPP.

But, it's the younger generation MEPs who Cameron should be more concerned with. Daniel Hannan has already said he will fulfil the commitment made by Cameron and leave the EPP. And he will have loads of sympathy with the younger generation in the Tory party.

Please 91Èȱ¬, stop getting your opinions from people like Ian Taylor, who the 91Èȱ¬ and others have often described as a "senior Conservative" (he was a Science Minister - is that senior??) and get real.

Their concerted attempts to push the issue of Europe to the wings of the political stage leaves me with absolutely no doubt in my mind that David Cameron's Conservatives are trying to embrace the triangulation strategy that proved so successful in getting Bill Clinton and New Labour elected. From a party political standpoint this may prove very successful, but the promotion of policy by mass appeal brings about the danger of the Darren Gough Dancing Effect coming into play. What you end up with is second or third rate policies where instinct and passion have prevailed over reason. And if you have sold yourself by handing out sweets and toys it is very difficult ever to put through a policy that requires them to be taken back again.

So my advice to Mr Cameron is to try to get into the mindset that power won through squalid, unprincipled promises is power not worth having. Look to establish modern Conservatism as the philosophy of the thinking person. Focus on sagacity and statesmanship and refuse completely to engage in tacky character assassination. Talk ideas, not people, and thereby force the other parties also to lift themselves out of the gutter.

This is the greatest service any political leader can give the country at this time.

Sorry, Nick.

The idea that voters are going to say to themselves: "Ah, I quite like what the Tories are saying on tax/health/law and order/immigration and I think Labour have run of steam [or whatever], but I don't like the way that the Tory leadership made its MEPs split away from a bunch of federalist MEPs in the European Parliament, so I'm going to vote Lib Dem / Labour / not vote at all..." is bonkers.

Come on, think ahout it - that's an absurd thing to say. No-one thinks like that. I bet you couldnt find a single voter who would say that staying IN the EPP was a pivotal issue for them - regardless of whether any Eurosceptic Tories believe that it would be a vote winner.

And I'm a Labour voter!

Would love to get a response!

It is fundamentally not anti-european to say that now is not the time to increase the pace of integration, and perfectly understandable that people should worry about their cutural integrity and constitutional sovereignty in the face of such change (indeed, I would argue that the strength of such feeling shows rather succinctly why now is not the time to rush forward with integration) just because anti-europeans advocate the same caution. The problem that the conservatives have is that it is very easy for the pro lobby to make the "all mammals are cats" argument and paint them into a selfishly nationalist corner. What they need to do is point out in blunt terms that this represents an idiotic fanatacism at least as damaging as the anti- viewpoint, and then perhaps we can have a proper debate about how best we can move forward.

It's ironic really!
Blair wants us to become a part of federal europe but creates the welsh and scottish parliaments and, maybe one day, the northern ireland assembly.
How devisive is that?
My advise to Cameron would be to state clearly that the EEC is solely and purely a trading area and we will govern our own country and make our own rules.
Then we will see how his lead in the polls will really climb!

There is another dimension to all this that is never discussed. Denying people at large a say in big issues (and there is no bigger issue in politics than the EU)ceates a pressue cooker syndrome, where the repressed feelings slowly build up, and unless vented, will explode.

As the EU as expanded in both size and scope, the only people who have shaped its direction have been politicians and Eurocrats - hardly disinterested parties. The "pro" lobby have largely had their way by default. A subtle but discernable shift has taken place. Respected voices in the business community are now openly calling into question the benefits of British membership, a recent opinion poll - for the first time- showed a majority in favour (given the chance) of voting to pull out, and UKIP have elected MEP's. The smart money is on them having at least one MP at Westminster after the next election.

After France (of all countries) fired a shot across the bows by rejecting the proposed constitution, the EU in typical style reacted by ignoring the vote and pressing ahead with establishing agencies to which only the constitution could have given legitimate life. It's not in their nature to let legal niceties get in the way of their project. If anyone on the inside (like the Chief Accountant, or Paul Van Buitenen) points out misdeeds it is they, not the offender who is fired. None of this is lost on the British public.

The only real incentive for membership was the single market, but even that is hopelessly rigged, and shows no sign of delivering as promised. For this supposed benefit the British taxpayer throws huge amounts of money into a black hole while here at home our services crumble, in part, through lack of investment. People will start to react even more with their votes to make their voices heard. Instead of retaining broad support within his core vote, and attracting the floating voter who is longing for a front-line party to represent his views on this issue, Cameron may end up left with a small rump of die-hard Europhiles who refuse to see the wood for the trees and be unelectable for another generation. The choice of course is his, but he would do well to make a start by honouring his pledge to withdraw from the EPP, accept any consequences in the EU parliament (which in itself shows how undemocratic the whole thing is)and stand a good chance of achieving government in the UK where he really can make a difference. Is he man enough?

Rex wrote "...state clearly that the EEC is solely and purely a trading area and we will govern our own country and make our own rules." I think that we're about 15 years too late for this.

Since Factortame in the late 1980s we've been left with no doubts about who's in charge. Yes the European Communities Act could be repealed, but it would be economic suicide to do so. We're either in, or we're out. Any political ramblings about the evils of the EU and how Britain is going to stand up to Brussels sound good to the electorate, but it really is only hot air.

Malcolm is quite right about the signatory mix up and I do apologise.

To say that a political storm is not brewing over Britain in Europe is quite wrong though.

The Conservatives have beaten themselves to near death over this issue and are 'taking time out' from responsibility of this great Nation, as the Great British public wishes them to.

The EU is the greatest political experiment of all time and has given us more rights in 50 years that 150 years of trade unionism.
So why the fuss?

Gary

Cameron and Hague are sitting on the fence and not taking decisions. The EU and EPP are matters of import for many conservatives and this indecision is not good. There is the old anecdote about the tent and whether you are in or out and weeing. I regard the EU and EPP as the pig-sty and would like to move on. At present as a euro-sceptic i have no voice and representation, bar UKIP. Does this inactivity on the dynamic duo's part signal that they are OK with the EU, and on line for the great Federalst experiment?
We need to be told.

Why wouldn't a breach with our European 'partners' help Nick?

I don't detect anything nonsensical about the original post.

A "breach of relations with our key European partners" does constitute a slight problem for the Conservative Party - because there is something rather odd about us expending so much energy in pursuit of this objective whilst sometimes (at General Elections for instance) being emphatically against withdrawal from the EU. A much more tricky 'position' for the *governing* party to take...

More rational is a hardline or theological euroscepticism, meaning complete withdrawal, no more MEPs from any side, and quite possibly the collapse or near-collapse of free trade; you can't logically despise the European Commission only to support it when it enforces the single market rules (not therefore a spontaneous process). Intellectually: a plausible position. In practice: difficult to envisage ever happening.

If we want to keep Conservative MEPs in the Parliament, it is best to be essentially constructive.

Joshua Payne

We are frequently told that any attempt to remove ourselves politically from the EU would be economic suicide.
Would this be the same type of suicide that we endured when we dropped out of the ERM and did not join the Euro?

Euroskeptic....such a loaded label. Immediate negative connotations - by implication practically xenophobic. The vast majority of Tories against remaining in the EPP are EUskeptic, as are the public (as I'm confident a referendum on last years constitution would demonstrate). I dare say such people know a sight more about Europe having travelled or bought property on the continent than the parliamentarians couped up in Brussels!

Curious how no one even tentatively suggests adopting the Euro these days, it seems our EUskeptics were right on this one. Suggested pronounciation *U*Skeptics.

Rex wrote "...state clearly that the EEC is solely and purely a trading area and we will govern our own country and make our own rules."

to which Ian replied "I think that we're about 15 years too late for this....Yes the European Communities Act could be repealed, but it would be economic suicide to do so. We're either in, or we're out."

I'm sure that if we were offered the benefits of a Free Trade Area without the commitment to work towards Political Union most people in the UK would accept with alacrity. And would they be wrong? Would they just be following narrow self-interest? Their's is a pragmatic rather than an ideological objection to Political Union - it's not that the theory is wrong, but that the achievement is impossible, so we would be far better advised working towards something that CAN be attained, rather than wasting so much time and effort chasing dreams.