David cameron

There’s just over a week to go until the crunch EU summit on 8-9 December, so David Cameron has to decide how best to play his cards — and quick. The problem, as Daniel Korski has pointed out, is that Britain faces the risk of ‘structural isolation’ in Europe in the short-term. To counter this, Cameron effectively has two options. First, work with allies on both sides of the euro divide to seek political assurances — formal or informal — against the formation of a two-tier Europe with a more integrated eurozone in the driving seat. Or, second, press ahead with UK-specific carve-outs from the EU structure. The former would

Chatting to people in Brussels last week, I couldn’t help feeling that David Cameron’s EU problem is one of timing. The PM will probably be able to piece together a repatriation package that includes measures such as a withdrawal from the over-implemented Working Time Directive and a reduction in the EU budget. But none of this is likely to be enough for his party. Indeed, I suspect the budget won’t be finalised until two minutes to midnight during the Lithuanian EU Presidency in 2013. Add to this the Tobin Tax, where there seems to be little leeway for the British government. Barosso, Merkel and Sarkozy are determined to introduce it,

If Roman Abramovich owned the Labour party, Ed Miliband would be toast by now. The floundering opposition leader gave the sort of inept, predictable and ill-organised performance at PMQs that would get a manager sacked in the Premiership. It scarcely helps that Mr Miliband seems to prepare for these sessions like a deluded psychic. He and his team of prophets at Labour HQ clearly believe they can foretell what the prime minster will say and how best to smash his answers to pieces. Referring to the rise in unemployment, Mr Miliband began by attacking the PM for scrapping the Future Jobs Fund in March. He boasted, rather weirdly, that ‘under

Yesterday, Fraser wrote that ‘reporting of European issues tends to ignore public opinion’. Today, Philip Stephens has neatly illustrated Fraser’s point in his Financial Times column. Musing on Britain’s possible exit from the European Union, Stephens writes: ‘I am not sure this is what the prime minister intends; nor, when it comes to it, that British voters will accept such an outcome.’ Stephens’ conjecture ignores the European Union’s own polling, which, as Fraser says, shows most Britons to be hostile to the EU. That said, Stephens’ article is substantial. He argues that ‘fiscal union carries its own remorseless logic: the progressive exclusion of Britain from Europe’s economic decision-making’. The magnitude of George

Someone forgot to pack his handbag. We heard yesterday that David Cameron has agreed to let Merkel pursue full fiscal union – and in return she will… drum roll please… let him repatriate parts of the Working Time Directive. There’s nothing official from Number 10, but the well-informed Ben Brogan suggests this morning that this could well be Britain’s price for agreeing to Merkel’s deal. If so, this would be an opportunity squandered on a massive – perhaps historic – scale. Let’s recap. Cameron is in an incredibly powerful position: leading a government which is, in defiance of public opinion, giving £9 billion of overseas aid to EU member states each year.

The expected triumph of the centre-right Popular Party in today’s Spanish elections promises to have some interesting consequences for British politics. The PP have been in close touch with the Tories here and plan to introduce an emergency budget based on the Osborne model: a clear deficit reduction plan combined with an increase in the retirement age. They hope that this will reduce the ever-upwards pressure on Spanish bond yields. Certainly, if the PP approach does succeed in gaining Spain credibility with the bond markets, it will bolster the coalition’s arguments about the importance of sticking to Plan A. As Matt d’Ancona argues in The Sunday Telegraph, the Tory argument

David Cameron and Angela Merkel were clearly keen to show that, whatever the tensions over the role of the European Central Bank, they still get on. I lost count of the number of times in their press conference that they used the word ‘good’ to characterise their relationship and their discussions. But there did not appear to have been any actual progress on how to deal with the current crisis. Certainly, there was no softening of Germany’s opposition to using the ECB as the backstop for the Eurozone. Merkel conceded that she had raised a European-only financial transactions tax with the Prime Minister but that, unsurprisingly, no progress had been

Governing is about choices. That goes for Europe too. The government says it can get everything it wants – that’s politics – but the reality is different. It actually faces a number of trade-offs, the biggest being a choice between staying in an EU that reforms but not as quickly or as dramatically as parts of the Tory party wants; or to pull out entirely from the EU.  In his speech at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet, the Prime Minister argued that he could both change Britain’s relationship with the EU but remain inside the 27-member bloc. But I can find no serious EU expert or mandarin who believes this is

David Cameron summoned all Tory special advisers to Downing Street for a meeting this afternoon. He wanted, I understand, to warn them that too much of the coalition’s internal workings were being briefed out to journalists. He made it clear that he wants an end to process stories appearing in the papers.   Downing Street has been infuriated by recent reports of tensions between Steve Hilton, Cameron’s senior adviser, and George Osborne and is keen to stamp on anything that keeps this — rather misleading — story going. There are also worries about the party being seen as divided again, a return to the old Tory wars stories of the

No columnist is closer to David Cameron than Bruce Anderson. The Spectator’s former political editor spotted Cameron’s potential back in 1992 during the general election campaign and ever since he has been an advocate of the Cameron cause. In 2003, he wrote a piece for The Spectator in which he tipped Cameron for the premiership.    The two remain in close touch and Bruce has, I’m told, been a recent guest at Chequers. So, it seems reasonable to assume that Bruce’s rebuttal of Cameron’s right-wing critics is, to some extent, a reflection of the Prime Minister’s own thinking.    Bruce’s main message is that neither Europe nor the economy can