Will the Cameroons accept the gift of British "special status"?
Peter Hoskin 6:44pmYou could say that pragmatism won out at today's Global Vision / Daily Telegraph conference on the future relationship between Britain and Europe. On the one hand, you had the pro-Europe voice of Valéry Giscard d'Estaing arguing that Britain should more or less be able to pick 'n' mix what parts of the EU agenda it subscribes to. And, on the other, you had a largely (moderate?) Eurosceptic panel arguing that - well - Britain should more or less be able to pick 'n' mix what parts of the EU agenda it subscribes to.
Of course, there were differences of emphasis. Giscard d'Estaing thought that Britain's "special status" should be enshrined in a power to "opt out" of future treaties. Whereas - I suspect - many on the panel would prefer Britain to opt out of some existing treaties too. But the willingness of both sides to sit and dine at the same table was still remarkable enough.
One can't help but view it through the prism of the Irish 'No' vote. Whilst the Lisbon Treaty endures (wrongfully, in my view), have the Irish forced Brussels to give more thought to allowing countries a more flexible relationship with Europe? Thanks to Ireland, is a looser relationship between Britain and Europe now more possible than ever? Giscard d'Estaing - with his talk of the need for a "new relationship" in the "aftermath of the Irish referendum" - certainly suggested so.
If, then, a looser relationship with Europe has gained political traction, would a Tory government act on it? I wouldn't bet on it. The Telegraph's Iain Martin - who was on the panel - recounted a conversation he'd had on the matter with "someone very close to Cameron". Their view? That forging ahead with a looser relationship "sounds like one for a second term". And as Iain pointed out, that's politics-speak for "Forget it, sunshine".
P.S. Daniel Hannan and John Redwood were also at the event. Read their blog posts on it here and here, respectively.
Previous
mitch
September 8th, 2008 8:34pm Report this commentNo thanks can we leave now?
Max Kaye
September 8th, 2008 8:58pm Report this commentI'd like a more forthright declaration of intent from Cameron, but in this instance (up and until the election of a Tory government) I'm willing to adhere to the old dictum: "slowly slowly catchee monkey".
Unheroic perhaps, but we need to fight guile with guile.
Searcher
September 8th, 2008 10:54pm Report this commentMaybe I'm slow on the uptake, but it's finally dawning on me that the main difference between now and a future Conservative government is that the ministers will seem less stupid and obnoxious. For a while, at least.
Fergus Pickering
September 8th, 2008 11:12pm Report this commentThe dictum is softly, softly, which is not quite the same thing.
Verity
September 9th, 2008 12:01am Report this commentFergus, you took the words right out of my mouth.
EUSSR GO HOM
September 9th, 2008 1:32am Report this commentEUSSR GO HOME.
Home Rule for Britain.
REFERENDUM NOW.
Fergus Pickering
September 9th, 2008 4:54am Report this commentVerity, I wouldn't dream of doing such a thing. Your words are pure gold, even when I disagree with them
EUSSR GO HOME
September 9th, 2008 6:36am Report this commentEUSSR GO HOME
cuffleyburgers
September 9th, 2008 7:46am Report this commentCan it be that the powers that be have finally realised that they will never be able to complete their supranational state with a recalcitrant Great Britain in it? And for them there is nothing more to gain. They have destroyed our fishing and farming, grievously damaged our trading links to the Commonwealth so in economic terms there is not much more to grab - the low hanging fruit has gone. We will continue to create trouble if we are in, and are largely incapable of creating trouble if we are out.
Logically it is the best thing for them.
Or perhaps someone told them that if we stayed in they would have to find a job for Gordon?
Max Kaye
September 9th, 2008 9:17am Report this commentFergus - thanks for the correction (Mea culpa. Post prandial lapse, etc...).
Tim Carpenter
September 9th, 2008 10:19am Report this commentWatch closely what GD'E is saying. We would, it appears, be bound by all the existing treaties yet not play a part in the future. This is just another play on the "Red Lines", which I have always called "Maginot Lines". To hold on to them means isolation yet a need to comply with whatever is decided.
No, a shift to EEA membership is better than this latest poison chalice.
James J
September 9th, 2008 2:04pm Report this commentLet’s hope we negotiate a better deal getting out than we did getting in. There seems to be a ‘Ratchet’ theory dominating thinking within the EU—they get more power and money from us –we never get it back. Reminds me of why they say we have a Foreign Office: to represent the interests of foreigners.
Back to top