The Tories' Clause Four moment
David Cameron did well in yesterday’s Commons tussle with Gordon Brown over the EU constitutional treaty. But the danger to the Tory position is evident from the way those exchanges have been received. People's eyes are already glazing over from the sheer complexity of it all.
The government’s dissimulation over this treaty is simply astounding. They are misleading the public virtually with every breath they take. They shamelessly claim that it’s not the same as the constitution mark one when it’s 90 per cent the same. One European leader after another has acknowledged that it’s virtually the same thing; the government denies these leaders have said this (as Peter Hain so brazenly did in response to me on BBC TV’s Question Time last week). They then flip the argument over by claiming that their ‘red lines’ will protect Britain from all the dangerous provisions of the treaty which no longer exist because it’s not the same. But as has been pointed out, these red lines aren’t worth the paper they are written on.
Take Brown’s assertion yesterday that the UK has secured a protocol which makes the Charter of Fundamental Rights non-justiciable in the English courts because it ‘does not extend the ability’ of the European Court of Justice or the English courts to find English law incompatible with the Charter. Leave aside for the moment the not uninteresting fact that the government’s position on this has slid from claiming that the protocol is an ‘opt-out’ to the coy admission that it is merely a ‘clarification’. Whatever it is, it’s worthless.
That’s because it conflicts with the general and overarching principle of the EU that its provisions apply to all member states, which have an obligation to abide by them. Does this protocol take precedence over that overarching principle? Interesting legal question and one that would have to be decided by a court. And which court would that be? Why none other than the same ECJ whose powers are allegedly fettered by the protocol; the same ECJ which over the years has itself unilaterally expanded so hugely the powers of the EU because it sees itself as the judicial arm of the ideological euro-federalist project. In deciding whether the UK protocol was worth the paper it was written on, therefore, the politicised ECJ would be acting as judge and jury in its own cause. And this is Brown’s ‘red line’!
The other red lines are similarly worthless. Our so-called opt-in over justice and home affairs crumbles upon inspection and in any event will be obviated within five years. Brown says the government will not agree to any more constitutional changes during this parliament and the next. Big deal! The treaty gives the EU the power to produce whatever changes it wishes without having to call an intergovernmental conference, thus leaving what remains of our powers of self-government at the mercy of temporary parliamentary majorities. And that’s before we even get to the loss of all the vetos and the areas of ‘shared competencies’ which mean kissing goodbye to our ability to run our own country. Above all, this treaty creates a constitutional chimaera, a bureaucratic state with its own legal personality to which it explicitly requires this country to subordinate its own national interest. That is simply insupportable.
So this brings us back to the politics of this thing. The treaty is about to be dissected in Parliament line by not so red line. The bankruptcy of the government’s position will undoubtedly be exposed day by day during this process. We don’t know how this will play out nor how it will end. Maybe the country will be inflamed every day by discussion of passerelle clauses and competencies. Maybe large enough numbers of Labour MPs will remember what democracy entails and inflict damage. Maybe the Liberal Democrats will be locked in a Commons broom cupboard for 30 days. But it’s a fair bet that the public will quickly become numbed by the detail, and that Brown will simply railroad this thing through the Commons with the usual brutality.
In the face of this, the Tories now need substantially to raise their game. They risk being swept away in this tidal wave of mind-bending arcania and parliamentary process. Crucially, they need to tell the country now that if this constitutional treaty is ratified without a referendum, they will still promise to hold a referendum on it after ratification. They should tell us now that it will be an election promise. To the objection that this would entertain the possibility of breaking a treaty, they should say that ratification in these circumstances would be constitutionally improper, that no parliament can bind its successor and that the need to preserve independent British self-rule overrides any treaty obligation.
William Hague’s current position is that he is not going to talk about what the Tories would do after ratification because he wants to concentrate on opposing this treaty. What he’s worried about is that, while the likes of Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine have not gone to war over the Tories’ current referendum pledge — presumably because they assume Brown will force the constitution through — they would go ballistic were the Tories to open up the post-ratification can of worms, thus enabling Brown to play the ‘Tory split’ card.
This caution is misguided. The Tories’ consistent mistake is to see themselves through Labour party eyes. We’ve seen from recent events that this grossly misreads the reality of public opinion. Brown was unable to deploy his ‘lurch to the right’ broadsides because — to the Tories’ astonishment — the public was already camped on this very territory, impatiently waiting for a political party to join them. So it surely is -- with knobs on -- over Europe. The public is relatively muted on the subject not just because it’s eye-glazing stuff but because, most crucially of all, they assume that the constitution is a done deal. They no longer have any faith that any political party will act in their interests.
But below the radar, they are aghast. If the Tories were to say now, loud and clear, that this country has not fought so painfully throughout the centuries to keep itself free and independent in order to throw it all away now in a bloodless surrender to Brussels, and that therefore the people will be offered the chance to decide whether they wish to stay free or become a hologram state even if —particularly if —Brown goes ahead and sells out his country, they would find that the people would be with them. After all, they can’t now say the issue is nothing less than the loss of Britain’s capacity for self –government and then say that’s something they will just have to learn to live with, without making themselves look ridiculous. And if those prehistoric ex-big beasts Clarke and Heseltine start beating their mangy chests, Cameron should simply say to them — you are the past.
Previous
Blogs: Clive Davis | Stephen Pollard | Americano | Coffee House | Trading Floor
Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (18)
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Search this blog
Melanie's Published Articles
British education? Expletive deleted!
Why British judges are freeing terrorists
Reading the runes on selective amnesia
The curious case of the Waterloo files
Melanie Phillips is a Daily Mail columnist. She also writes for the Jewish Chronicle and is a panellist on BBC Radio Four's Moral Maze. Her most recent book is 'Londonistan', published by Encounter and Gibson Square.
For a complete set of Melanie's articles click here
Latest blog posts
sponsored links
Sky - Official Site
Build your own Sky package online. Sky TV, Broadband & Talk only £16.
IT Careers and Training at Computeach
Typical IT salary in the UK is £39K. Get fantastic IT training to find a career in IT. Apply today.
Sky TV, Broadband & Talk from £16 a Month
Sky TV & free broadband packages available from £16 a month. Choose from a standard free sky box, sky plus or sky hd.
Sky - Official Site
Build your own Sky package online. Sky TV, Broadband & Talk only £16.
IT Careers and Training at Computeach
Typical IT salary in the UK is £39K. Get fantastic IT training to find a career in IT. Apply today.
ROME CENTRE
PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique
City Breaks. ROME and PARIS
ROME and PARIS: over 350 holiday rentals apartments listed: visit www.romanreference.com and www.parisreference.com or call +39 0648 903612.
Jewellery. RUFFS (Estd. 1904).
Goldsmiths by Design Welcome to Ruffs! You have found a company of Goldsmiths that specialises in the manufacture, amongst other
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2008 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Lefty John
October 23rd, 2007 2:01pmI think Melanie that you're extrapolating the mood of the country here. My gut feeling is that it is more a mood of saying enough to state intervention. Whether that is through taxation or increased regulations. I would say that this applies equally or possibly more to Westminster as it does to Brussels. I personally think that parts of the treaty are worthwhile as they attempt to address the current imbalance towards the EU15 member countries. However, I would still vote against the treaty if there was a referendum. Sovereignty must remain in the hands of the people and at the lowest level possible. The Tories need to commit to more than a referendum, but a commitment to reverse the centralisation which they contributed to under Thatcher and Major. Commit Dave to giving powers back to the people.
Raymond Joseph Douglas
October 23rd, 2007 2:33pmThank you Melanie for another brilliant article.How I wish you were in government along with Janet Daley of the telegraph!Still the Tories can just find their courage,they have decent men on their front bench who could speak for the nation.
Peter Turner
October 23rd, 2007 3:21pmHere we have a man who is telling us a lie. He knows he is telling us a lie just as we know it is a lie. Furthermore this man knows that we know he is telling us a lie and yet he still continues to tell this same lie. How can we take a man like this seriously? How can we trust anything he says?
Ian Parker
October 23rd, 2007 4:23pmI am not sure it is correct to say that the public at large are numbed by the arcane arguments surrounding the treaty and hence not engaged. I think the real issue is that people recognise full well that democracy has been undermined to such a degree that their views or wishes are irrelevant to the government of the day. The fact remains, however, that this could indeed become the major single issue of an election. Certainly, that would be the case were the election to be called in the near future. It is perhaps the hope of Labour that, in twelve months time, other problems or issues will have loomed so large that we will all have forgotten that we’ve lost our sovereignty in an underhand deal. That said, I heartily agree with the fundamental point regarding the Tories. Do they have the backbone? With Dave at the helm, I’m not holding my breath.
Werner Patels
October 23rd, 2007 4:44pmThe treaty is simply a slightly watered-down version of the failed constitution, which is now being re-introduced through the backdoor against the wishes of a majority of EU voters. Clearly, this requires a referendum, rather than empty assurances that everything will be fine. In my view, Britain should leave the EU because this is not the organisation we joined in the 1970s. Then, Britain joined a free-trade area, but not an organisation that is trying to claim every last shred of sovereignty member states still have.
Verity
October 23rd, 2007 4:59pmI'm not holding my breath, either, Ian Parker. David Cameron is a low-key socialist one-worlder in his soul, and he is does not hate this Constitution with a passion. He will make a few cheeps because it is expected of him by desperate Tory voters, but actually, he rather likes the EU. Don't forget, it's a lovely retirement home for ex heads of government. Absolutely no loss of power - indeed, a net gain; more people to legislate over and more social engineering. And more money and perks from here to eternity. It would take someone of tremendous principle and patriotism to oppose this Constitution with all his heart, and that is not David Cameron.
arnoldo
October 23rd, 2007 6:18pmAlthough I am usually a sceptic on Europe, there is one question on the referendum issue that bothers me a bit:- "If the Treaty Amendment is, in fact, the same as the Constitution then why are the French and Dutch voters apparently prepared to accept the Treaty Amendment after decisively rejecting the Constitution in 2005?"
Max Kaye
October 23rd, 2007 7:53pmDavid Cameron will have hit a very timely - and popular - note if he campaigns to 'return power to the people' - and keeps pressing at every occasion for a EU referendum.
If this means opening up old wounds with the old EUrophilic tories, then so be it. Cameron will find that since Brown's cowardly bottling out of both a general election and a EU referendum, people are sick of decietful politicians and are more EUrosceptic as a result.
And, talking of promises, this is a good opportunity for Cameron to confirm his EUrosceptic credentials by reafirming his promise to withdraw from the EPP.
Henry Kaye
October 23rd, 2007 8:36pmThere seems to be little use in posting demands for actions from our political leaders. There is an ever widening gulf between a remote disconnected political establishment and a population with a growing list of concerns its leaders refuse even to discuss. There is absolutley nothin we can do to remedy the situation other than to vote a new party in to power and it would have to be either the UKIP or the BNP. Otherwise we need an armed resurrection; it's an absolute waste of time saying or writing anything.
Verity
October 23rd, 2007 9:12pmHenry Kaye is right. There is a total disconnect between the electorate and the people in Westminster who have increasingly, by sly increments, made themselves their masters. It really doesn't matter what the electorate wants. It's what will further the careers of MPs and their cliques and the upper echelons of government departments. The voters are milch cows to provide the money to further their ambitions; that's all.
Huw Thornton
October 23rd, 2007 10:49pmA promise to hold a post-ratification referendum would lead to disaster for any Conservative government of the future. Yes, it would cause splits in that government and - if the vote was against the treaty - would create a real dilemma in what action the government would take next. If the party leadership were to adopt this position now, it could well be seen as tokenistic. This "Clause 4 moment" would have the same effect as the original "Clause 4 moment" - it would increase the credibility of the Labour Party.
jfrancishill
October 24th, 2007 12:46amMe thinks Europe if fashioning a fine noose for antichrist to strangle the world with.
Chad Noble
October 24th, 2007 7:54amGreat article. Many of us can see how this issue has become the litmus test of Cameron's 'repatriate powers from Brussels' line. If he ducks it, he will effectively be admitting that once powers are gone, they are gone forever.
sandy macalister
October 24th, 2007 8:35amArnoldo The Dutch and French people have not accepted the treaty amendment.Like us, they are being given no opportunity to give their views. The French President,Nicolas Sarkozy included support for the treaty in his manifesto,so at least has some democratic legitimacy for not putting it to a referendum. In Holland the Prime Minister, J P Balkenende ,says a referendum is unnecessary because the treaty has "no constitutional aspirations." Sound familiar?
arnoldo
October 24th, 2007 12:34pmsandy macalister - You are probably right. However, it tells you all you need to know about the worth of referenda!
Frank Pulley
October 24th, 2007 12:41pmWe are being shafted by both the Euro mafias and out own treasonous government - inexorably and comprehensively. In case any of Melanie's readers missed it, read William Hague's lecture to the Centre for Policy Studies. http://www.cps.org.uk/latestlectures/
B Wilkinson
October 24th, 2007 9:52pmIt is wildly optimistic to hope that the Tories will adopt a principled and sustained opposition to the EU Constitution. Accepting that Brown will railroad the Constitution through Paliament without a refurendum, the Tories' only logical response to demonstrate their true opposition to it would be to commit a future Conservative government to holding a retrospective referendum on the issue. And this they will not do. Because by doing that they would actually be committing themselves to allowing the country a say on the nature of the UK's relationship with the EU. In the likely even of a no vote, the Tories would have to think on their feet and redefine Britain's relationship with the EU, something which the party hierarchy will just not contemplate. The Conservative Party is a spent force, devoid of principle and whose only raison d'etre is power for power's sake. Hopeless in power and hopeless in opposition it is time to accept that the Conservative Party offers no hope for this country (remember Cameron and the Tories' standing before his supposedly wonderful conference speech, and all that he said on issues like taxation, education, family structure, crime, hoodies, the EU, etc...?). We can only hope that a new party emerges out of this quagmire and stands up for the interests and wellbeing of this country.
ROBERT CROSS
October 25th, 2007 12:07pmMadam , it is by no means "browns"country, he has absolutely no mandate to govern the English people,as he was elected in scotland, the only position that he can justifiably claim is to be leader of the "labour"party, and sign what he might, unless he seeks a mandate from the English people, i for one categorically refuse to recognise,or be bound by any "treaty" whatsoever that is implemented without my consent.