David Cameron’s big speech on Europe last month was the culmination of months (actually probably years) of calculation and work. The speech itself was not the point, nor indeed was the policy of a referendum following a Conservative win in the 2015 general election – despite what many activists and MPs would like, and as I have said before, that single policy is not the thing that is going to win the next election. The point is the renegotiation and the opportunities it brings for a Europe that works better in Britain’s interests, but also in the interests of the rest of the EU.
Andrew Mitchell has written a piece for the Financial Times this morning pointing out that the really hard work is yet to come. He suggests some sensible starting points, such as policy development and advocacy work to ensure that European growth is rooted in the open, freer, bigger market that Conservatives know to be the only sustainable path to a future. He suggests particularly focusing on working with the next generation of European leaders, because with elections in 2014 and a new Commission and President, and NATO secretary-general, this is the ideal time to ensure that the people who will be in those positions in eighteen months’ time have a sensible, workable, deliverable suite of policies ready to go – and crucially, that those policies are in tune with the changes we know are needed.
Allied to this is the need to boost our existing European relationships – the outcome of the budget talks two weeks ago proves that the UK can make a case that appeals to other leaders. But it needs more than Nespresso and Haribos in a single all-night marathon of “bazaar”-like negotiations. As I’ve previously argued, there is a disappointing tendency with this Conservative leadership to think that saying something once will make it happen. They need to argue the case wherever there’s an opportunity again and again; they need to provide substantive options to talk about with the people who make things happen; they need to be clear about the argument they’re making and continually push and harry to make the case and then deliver it.
Andrew Mitchell clearly understands this. Doing all this behind the scenes work isn’t glamorous, it’s usually not even interesting, and it is an enormous task. But it needs to be done if we are serious about delivering that new relationship with a European Union that works in the future interests of all its members.
New blogpost: Haribo and Nespresso or hard work and persuasion? http://t.co/n2ct9Bn3
Haribo and Nespresso or hard work and persuasion? http://t.co/n2ct9Bn3
New blogpost: Haribo and Nespresso or hard work and persuasion? http://t.co/oKzHbr8Y
New blogpost: Haribo & Nespresso or hard work & persuasion? http://t.co/oKzHbr8Y
I like Andrew Mitchell’s thinking but I question whether a UK run commission can really reform the EU. The best (and hardest) way would be to lobby for this to be an EU wide initiative. I would aim at creating an American Constitution type document that sums up what being a part of the EU means in a short and simple form. Something that everyone can understand, something that the populace gets and feels in their guts.. The EU constitution ran to over 1,000 pages long and is impenetrable (the drafting committee was chaired by a Frenchman!).
There are no short cuts when it comes to reforming the EU. Facts only work if people are prepared to listen and most other EU countries will not listen if it is just a Conservative UK initiative.
So glad we moved from email to here to discuss this Nick!
I think that your final point is the key one: it IS possible to make a coherent case that other nations can support. But for there to BE a coherent case, there needs to be a lot of work before we get to it.
I don’t think he’s necessarily arguing that a UK-run commission would, itself, reform the EU. I think, if I read it right, his proposal is that if we seriously want to see x, y or z changes, we need to propose specifics not just do the usual ‘give us back our rights’. Also of course the proposals would be a basis for discussion and negotiation, not our bottom line.
(Also as an aside PLEASE PLEASE no constitution-type EU-wide effort. It would just stagnate for years and we wouldn’t be able to make any of the changes the EU so desperately needs in order to thrive).
Pingback: What really matters? | Platform 10
Interesting @JGForsyth on process of renegotiation http://t.co/CwzZu8793X – we underlined need for hard work on this http://t.co/mnDaR60TzB