- Let’s be honest. There’s a clear link with Islam (£) by David Aaronovitch, The Times
- Intellectual property is an innovation killer by Joshua Lachkovic , KernalMag
- Dumb Idea Hall of Fame by Aaron David Miller, Foreign Policy
- Nadine Dorries threatens Cameron's Party Leadership by Nadine Dorries, Daily Mail
- Boris set for party leadership? by Traci Watson, USAToday
- Anti-Israel students deface Star of David at student conference by Jonny Paul, Jerusalem Post
- Jihadist Videos on University Facebook by Rupert Sutton, Huffington Post UK
- Skintland: Heads I Win, Tails You Lose by Alex Massie, Spectator UK
- Green tax on conservatories by James Slack and Tamara Cohen, Daily Mail
- Saudi princess: What I'd change about my country by Staff writers, BBC
The Coalition has never been stronger
Reports of the demise of the UK’s coalition are greatly exaggerated writes our UK Political Editor Harry Cole
One thing that united the swivel-eyed, frothing Europhiles with their more pragmatic colleagues across the political system last Friday was a genuine sense of shock.
There was mutiny in the air as the Prime Minister went to Europe; the country is used to our leaders swanning off across the continent and being mugged, but David Cameron’s veto has left him in his strongest position as leader yet. Though they are making noise, there is very little his enemies can do to detract from this in the short-term.
The Conservative Prime Minister has neutered the Liberal Democrats in his government and Christmas has come early, not only for his backbenchers, but the growing number of Euro-realists in his Cabinet and close coterie of advisers too. There are more Eurosceptic Members of Parliament than pro-European Liberal Democrats, and finally the concerns of their constituents about the European project are being listened to.
For the opposition frontbenchers there was a fair amount of anger thrown in for good measure. The simplicity with which Cameron stood up his fellow leaders has left Labour with a huge credibility overdraft.
Suddenly all those summits that saw Blair and the Brown limp home, buttered up, singing from the doomed hymn-sheet, when in reality that had been filleted and served up as tartare, look even more pathetic now. How they willingly gave up our rebate, further sovereignty and even our hard cash, for the briefest tickle of the European tummy, firmly places them on the wrong side of history.
However, as with so many issues of modern UK government, Labour barely feature in the debate given the real opposition in this country share the ministerial limos. Labour can hark on all they want about debating tactics, but the public are not foolish enough to believe the spin that Ed Miliband would have somehow negotiated a better deal. He can’t even negotiate with his own brother and if he thinks Britain should have signed the deal on the table, then he is not fit to run a bath, let alone the country.
So what of the opposition -- Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats? Well they are devastated, but also locked in to this government, neutered by their own poll-standing and certain decimation were they to face a public vote.
When you look at what the Liberal Democrats really believe, you begin to understand the pain and sense of loss they must be feeling now:
“Watching Germany rise from its knees after the war and become a vastly more prosperous nation has not been easy on the febrile British psyche. All nations have a cross to bear, and none more so than Germany with its memories of Nazism. But the British cross is more insidious still. A misplaced sense of superiority, sustained by delusions of grandeur and a tenacious obsession with the last war, is much harder to shake off. We need to be put back in our place.”
So said a young Liberal Democrat MEP called Nick Clegg, who was already being tipped for great things in 2002.
Like Blair before him, Clegg would have been first in line to lock us into a doomed project. He is blinded by a backward ideology that binds him to the EU, to the detriment of the UK’s national interest, because he wants to believe.
Though he is on the more sensible wing of his party, his 2002 article is a chilling insight in to his willingness undermine his country. He tried to act in the national interest by initially backing the Prime Minister, but his bearded party elders have clearly have different ideas.
There was fury when Clegg appeared to back the decision on Friday morning, and once again we have seen a major backtrack. It began with his aides dripping poison across their friendly papers, against the spirit and letter of the Special Advisers code, and culminated with the inglorious image of the Deputy Prime Minister having to personally take to the Sunday morning chat shows to distance himself from a decision that was nothing to do with him in the first place.
"A Britain which leaves the EU would be irrelevant in Washington and a pygmy in the world" Mr Clegg told the BBC. Irrelevant pygmies being an analogy close to his own heart.
It’s times like this that the true colours of the coalition show through. Clegg can give speeches and announce consultations until the cows come home. He can mess around with press releases, do just enough tinkering with reforms to buy the required votes in parliament, but when it comes to the big-boy league, the insignificance of his largely ceremonial position in the government is laid bare.
The Liberals are the ones blocking a referendum on the European issue, something that would settle the issue once and for all. But they will have to deal with the consequences of their stubborn devotion to the EU dream.
There will be a referendum one day due to the “triple lock legislation”, that the Liberals backed, that ensures any further collaborating with the Europe would require a plebiscite. They should be careful about getting too upset or they will run out of steam and moral indignation for the much bigger fight about Britain's relationship with Europe that is now seemingly inevitable.
Though he did good, the Prime Minister isn’t home and dry yet. He doesn’t want a referendum now; it would destroy his first term. The veto was the “least worst option” (excuse the mangled English, but that's how his people described it on Friday evening.) This win is more symbolic than anything else and it’s vital to note that Cameron did not repatriate any powers, but he certainly put up a good defence of a further land-grab.
Cameron has bought some breathing space, he’s locked in his backbenchers, he’s locked in the country - polls range from 57 percent – 63 percent in support of the move - and he’s proven his mettle in the eyes of the technocrats.
The Guardian, the Foreign Office, the BBC, and Channel Four are furious. As they were that we didn’t join the Euro in the first place. Cameron is in a good place for the time being, but the crisis isn't over and it's looking increasingly likely the EU, as Britain knows it, is nearly over.
My generation's Berlin Wall moment suddenly doesn't feel such a distant dream.
Second to a referendum, a general election would settle this, but that’s not going to happen yet either. The Liberals don’t want to go to their death at the polls and the Prime Minister knows this. He doesn’t want to go until after the constituency boundaries have been redrawn and Labour’s inbuilt 7 percent head start removed. After a tantrum today and through the week, the coalition will plod on.
Andrew Marr hit the nail on the head when he told the Deputy Prime Minister "you sound like you're upset, you're angry but you know there's nothing you can do about it". The Prime Minister has got his party behind him again and the Liberal Democrats completely over a barrel.
Despite being on the wrong side of the argument - they will huff and they will puff, and there will be tears before bedtime - in reality, Cameron’s grip over his coalition has never been stronger. Though nor have the stakes ever been higher.
Harry Cole The Commentator's UK Politics Editor and the news editor for the Guido Fawkes blog
Print
And lo, the Europhiles attempt to rewrite history.
The safeguards sought by Cameron were utterly connected to the issue - they were needed to avoid the UK being sucked into the fiscal union that was being put forward and which the UK said it would support for the Eurozone.
What kind of person sides with a foreign leader pledging to make their country pay? Because that what Sarkozy promised to do, and that's why he introduced entirely unnecessary and unrelated issues to the discussion.
But he is not the target of the Europhiles' anger. One has to ask why they hate their own country so much.
There is a big world out there aside from the European Union and we import more than export - especially when our trade with Ireland is factored in.
Send the Europeans home and get the local population and members of the Commonwealth to do the jobs and if the Euro crashes we'll recover. I remember all this scaremongering over Black Wednesday and the ERM (admittedly a drop in the ocean by comparison) and the world didn't collapse.
What Martin above doesn't realise it it is over - the grand project where poor people's taxes support European banks is their problem. The public in this country are not being represented by the politicians up until now.
Isolation from a failure is a good thing and if the Lib Dem's (who I support) want to go to the electorate at an election they will become as irrelevant as Labour currently are...
Ah, Martin, what a genius you are. A true insight you have. "An issue unrelated to the agreement". Certianly, and absolutely nothing whatever to do with the crisis facing the Euro. Makes you wonder why it wasn't possible then, doesn't it (or have you not thought that through at all?). As for repatriation - no - nothing has yet been done to require repatriation. It was protection for the future that was sought on, as you so rightly say, an issue nothing to do with the crisis at hand. Starting to get it yet, at all? A little glimmer getting through? Real Politik. Not on the LD lexicon, I know, but the way of the world. One day, you guys are going to have to try to get a grip on this. You may not believe it (because it really is preposterous) but the big idea was that the City of London was going to help to bail out the Euro and the Euro mess with a big-revenue Tobin tax primarily hitting London. When told that the UK didn't think this was a great idea, Sarko spat his dummy. After all, why should France pay? Wake up.
Nothing to do with rewriting history, merely presenting facts.
The proposed agreement introduced deficit limits for Eurozone countries and potentially for countries who do not have an opt-out from EMU.
The agreement would not have affected the UK.
The agreement is going ahead without us anyway, but without any UK influence in how it is set up.
The new EU-26 group will be meeting on a monthly basis and will inevitably discuss matters of importance to the UK, but we will not be there to speak up.
The concessions that Cameron pushed for would have reversed previously agreed integration. Since he didn't achieve these concessions, this integration (which has been approved by the British parliament) is going ahead anyway.
I love the UK, so I hate to see our national interest play second fiddle to the interests of the Conservative Party.
Brett the UK already has a veto on tax issues. The Tobin tax can't be introduced (EU-wide) without our say so anyway.
Martin.
"The Proposals had zero costs for the UK as they related to Eurozone economies"
So in other words you have no idea what you are talking about right?
The Proposals would have required: a: A transaction tax on every financial transaction taken by the City of London, to go directly towards shoring up Greece and Italy, and most likely Spain and France as well. Because those countries would be locked into the Euro, they would never be able to devalue in order to work off their debt and so basically our financial service sector which is the powerhouse for our entire economy would be used to bail out four or more major European Countries for the rest of time. b: A requirement for us to send the Budget to Brussels for approval before the House of Commons. And if it were not to be approved, for it to be amended by unelected Brussels diplomats, or alternatively to face diplomatic and economic sanctions.
Yes, it would have been a real victory to sign on the dotted line.
Before you know it, China will be wanting to join the EU so they can start trading with us.
“Watching Germany rise from its knees after the war and become a vastly more prosperous nation has not been easy on the febrile British psyche. All nations have a cross to bear, and none more so than Germany with its memories of Nazism. But the British cross is more insidious still. A misplaced sense of superiority, sustained by delusions of grandeur and a tenacious obsession with the last war, is much harder to shake off. We need to be put back in our place.” What. A. Load. Of. B*******.
Pete - please provide the lines in the communique that says that Britain, which has an opt-out from EMU, would have to send its budget to Brussels for approval. Also please provide the line that says implementation of a financial transaction tax would take place without unanimous approval by member states. Britain has a veto in this area.
Clegg, Ashton and their fellow travellers are defending their nice EU pensions. If you say something against the EU and its works you can lose your pension. Now Vince doesn't have an EU pension yet so he just promises to resign and then bottles it so he can keep his 130K sinecure and nice offices. None of them care about the UK, they prefer Bliar who gave away the rebate for french lies
What ever the supporters of the EU in then present state say they ignore the opinions of China. China has said the people of Europe have to work harder ( and longer ) and reduce welfare payments ( and also the public sector payroll).
Germmany rose after the WW2 by removing many restrictions on industry, spending little money on defence from 1945-1955( the UK fougth in Korea), receiving Marshall Aid and aid from the UK, working very hard , developing an extremely good tri-partite education system and developing advance manufacturing.The UK bankrupted itself by 1942, joined the Korean War,suffered from strikes and resistance from unions to new technology and introduced the comprehensive education system in 1965. In an age when maths has become more important,just compare a modern day A level in Further Maths compared to an Alevel of 30 years ago. Some 50-70% of a Further Maths A level today was in a Maths A level of 30 years ago.
If we copied the German education system, and regained our old fashioned attitude to work( if a job is worth doing , i tis worth doing well)we could have the best of both worlds , a German manufacturing capability combined with our existing financial skills.
The Liberal -and now LD- problem is that the spent the best part of a century telling all and sundry what they would do if they were in power.
And now someone offers them a real piece of the action, minister seats round the cabinet table... and some of them are hating every minute of it.
Saying what they would do if in power, when translated in to some real, actual power is horrifying to them.
I can recall someone at a Green Party conference (I used to be a member!) saying (with real disdain) when it was put to him, that the Green Party might start winning seats: "Oh! But I didn't join the Green Party for anyone to actually get elected!"
Clegg looked like such a spoilt child on the news last night, not turning up to the HOC then putting his best sad face on for an interview.
It's pathetic. Either support the governemnt or leave the coallition. Or is he too attached to his ministerial car and his position as DPM to do the latter?
Martin 12 December
We pay 50 million pounds a day to the EU.
We pay in the second highest amount, after Germany, into the EU budget.
50% of the proposed FTT would be paid by the UK (out of 27 countries)
Hardly a cost free option.
France has VETOed changes to their subsidies in the CAP for 30 years.
People like you do not have your country's interests at heart - why would you want us to pay even more into a dead project???
I have my issues with our country but self-loathing is not my position.
Martin - your question to Pete
A FTT was part of the new Treaty. It was when DC asked for that to be removed that he was refused that change. Barroso says it would be against the spirit of the Single Market to allow the UK an opt-out. The fact that France has had an opt-out on the CAP for as long as I can remember seems to be OK. Had he agreed the Treaty - he would have had no further veto of the Robin Tax (misspelling intended). The UK would have paid 50% of it out of 27 countries - I know you LD's want a USof E but surely you should have our best interests in mind.
A few other countries are now beginning to wonder if this all a good idea
RetiredDave - The UK would have retained a veto until the treaty had been actually drafted, at which point the UK could vote in favour or against.
No treaty has actually been drawn up as yet. The agreement last week was to start work on a treaty... so now this treaty is going ahead without us, but it will certainly affect us. Wouldn't it have been better to be in the negotiations pushing Britain's interests and then take a decision on the final outcome?
DC didn't ask for anything to be removed. He asked for previous integration to be reversed... actually his plan was half baked and hadn't considered all the consequences of undermining the Single Market by reversing QMV competences that Margaret Thatcher negotiated with Europe. Perhaps in the end it was a reasonable demand, but the way to get other countries on board is to engage in dialogue on your proposals over the preceding months, not turn up at the summit with an ultimatum.
That's right, continue spinning this amazing "success". These negotiations showed the Conservative's impotence in EU-affairs. - The proposals had zero costs for the UK as they related to Eurozone economies - Despite what everyone was saying, Cameron was attempting to repatriate powers from the EU on financial services. An issue unrelated to the agreement. - Their "veto" hasn't actually stopped anything from going ahead
This may have won the Prime Minister some short-term popularity, but when the consequences of our loss of influence in the EU become clear to the business community and the general public we'll see that disappear. Nice try to try and paint pro-Europeans as swivel-eyed, but it will soon become apparent that the PM wasn't acting in the national interest, he was purely trying to avoid another Conservative split. The only party looking after the national interest here are the Liberal Democrats.