The president has spoken - by Richard... Saturday, April 03, 2010

The president has spoken - by Richard... Saturday, April 03, 2010

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/

One easy way of identifying a europhile is to talk of anti-EU feeling. He (and they usually are male) will immediately refer to "populism", the anathema to the ruling élites of Europe, who clearly fear those who are able to appeal to popular sentiment.

So it is with Herman Van Rompuy, president of the European Council, interviewed in The Daily Telegraphtoday, revealing himself as an unreformed authoritarian.

Given the opportunity to address the British people – or, at least, Telegraph readers, which is not quite the same thing - he instead addresses British politicians, a seemingly odd thing to do in a newspaper interview. And he tells those politicians that it is their job "to convince their population" [about the EU]. "They are elected, I am not elected," he says.

Waxing lyrical about the construct, he then declares: "Let's defend all this," informing us that, "People are keen to believe in something and hope ... when I talk to people [and] … speak in the language of hope, stressing not just the problems and challenges but also what we have achieved, then there is relief."

As one would expect, Van Rompuy is dismissive of eurosceptics, arguing that "you can always invent 30 arguments to demolish all this" [the EU], but: "The populist is for the easy solution. He needs no effort from the population." 

He thus puts the "rising tide of populism in the EU that had made Brussels a target" down to "a strong anti-authority feeling against all those who have responsibility, who are in charge, in the school, in the Church, in the government. They are rather easily discredited [and] … easy targets. Europe is a form of authority and Euroscepticism is along those lines."

Then you begin to see why he is talking to the politicians. He praises Gordon Brown, who "ratified the Lisbon treaty against stiff domestic opposition", and expresses admiration for his 2007 bookCourage, asserting that "Populism and courage are opposites."

Van Rompuy then offers praise for successive British governments for defying popular Euroscepticism. "I am not for criticising any British government of the past 20 or 30 years because the fact is they have approved the Maastricht treaty, the Amsterdam treaty, the Nice treaty and the Lisbon treaty," he says.

"Europeans cannot complain, British governments are working with us for the Europe as we know it today. Conservative governments, Labour governments: they approved the main treaties of the EU and they comply with European directives as well."

And there you have it. No populism from Van Rompuy. A member of the ruling élite, he speaks to his own kind, allowing us very graciously to listen in as they are given their marching orders. You must speak in the language of hope, he tells them, and all will be well. 

The president has spoken.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Only a blogger - by Richard... Friday, April 02, 2010

A rainy, cold Bank Holiday has a dynamic of its own. You don't really feel like getting stuck into anything serious, and there is not a great deal happening which leaves a sort of vacuum. There is also a sense of phoney war, the last break before the general election campaign starts, when we will have wall-to-wall politics until 6 May.

Thus wholly unmotivated, one scans idly the blogosphere, coming across a post onWitterings from Witney which in turn refers to a post by the great BBC sage Rory-Cellan Jones. He is asking, rhetorically of course because he's already made up his mind: "Does the blogosphere matter?" Jones has decided it doesn't.

He is, as one might imagine, referring to political blogs and names the "usual suspects". But what caught my eye was his comment, noting of the "more prominent bloggers" that "it's a while now since any them has produced a real scoop."

Not wishing to be accused of false modesty - to add to my many other sins – I would tend to regard myself as a "prominent blogger". And, as regards scoops, I think I can point to my December story on Tata Steel and its surplus carbon credits, the outing of Rajendra Pachauri, "Amazongate", "Africagate" and the WWF and REDD as qualifying.

But EU Referendum is not on Rory-Cellan Jones's radar because, in his tiny little, self-referential world, we are not a political blog, and most certainly not part of the claque.

To the likes of Rory-Cellan Jones, "climate change" is a peripheral issue, of only marginal importance. He would, for instance, never dream of visiting Watts up with that? Energy, and a host of other vital issues, does not even factor in his mental checklist. "Europe" – as he would term it – is something only "fruitcakes" discuss. He is into real politics.

And that explains why so-called political commentators get it wrong so often and why they will continue to get it wrong. Having so narrowly defined politics, and then retreated to their little bubble, they really do not have the first idea of what is going on in the real world.

But as to the question, "Does the blogosphere matter?" – I don't think anyone knows the answer. But if I didn't personally think it did, I wouldn't invest so much time and energy in it. My guess is that it is a lot more influential than Rory-Cellan Jones thinks, but in ways that he cannot even begin to imagine.

But then, what do I know? I'm only a blogger.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

The politics of politics - by Richard...

Blogging – or, at least, writing this blog – involves a great deal of heart-searching, not least to avoid falling into the trap of pursuing personal obsessions to the detriment of objective coverage.

The question I must constantly address in selecting a topic is whether the subject matter is objectively important, or important just because I think it is.

In that context, readers may recall my post late last month where I argued that a secure supply of cheap energy underwrote the very fabric of our civilisation, and the economy, making itthe most fundamental issue that any politician had to address.

Thus, it is of some comfort to see a letter to The Daily Telegraph from Miles Templeman, Director-General, Institute of Directors, who informs us of a survey of 1,800 business leaders last month.

Reflecting – and effectively vindicating – my own concern, the respondents identified "ensuring secure energy supplies" as the single most important issue facing the next government. Some 85 percent said that new nuclear power stations should be built in Britain.

Templeman goes on to say that political indecision, flaws in Britain's strategic planning system and the persistent threat of windfall taxes on the profits of energy companies have discouraged private investment in new capacity, and have left us dangerously exposed to power shortages over the next decade.

He concludes: "The next government must deal with this problem. If this results in a fast-track planning process and building lots of new nuclear power stations, so be it."

If we had grown-up politics, this would be a central issue in the coming general election. But, in the scheme of things, it is regarded as a technical, specialist concern, outside the run of mainstream politics. It is thus largely ignored by the political commentariat – a reflection of its lamentable superficiality.

It is not altogether untoward, therefore, to note the current focus of the Tories on their "big society" and then to point you to the comments of Gerald Warner, who is a tad dismissive of the idea.

The contrast, to me, points up the core ailment of contemporary politics. We have politicians sticking their noses in issues which are none of their business and where they can only do harm, while neglecting those issues where intelligent and timely intervention is essential.

It also points up another important aspect of our politics, namely that which politicians tell us is important (as a political issue) isn't necessarily so, while the issues they do ignore are not necessarily unimportant.

When, perhaps, we have the happy coincidence of politicians identifying and dealing with the really important issues, instead of what they think is important (to them), then perhaps we will have reverted to grown-up politics. In the meantime, I will continue to write about energy because, as a political issue, it really is important.

COMMENT THREAD