EU Referendum: decision time
Saturday 29 September 2012
 It is settling into three choices, he said, to the agreement of his studio guest, Peter Mandelson: "you can join the eurozone and all that goes with that, the federal stuff; stay in a second tier with the single market but none of the eurozone baggage; or just extract ourselves altogether". Come the referendum, therefore, we have a complex situation to consider. Most likely, it will come after the "colleagues" have agreed a new treaty – which puts it in 2016 or even later. As it stands, Cameron could not possibly commit to a referendum before the general election. Apart from the fact that there is barely time, that would mean that the EU would then become an election issue, as the parties dovided over their response. However, if the referendum is triggered by a new treaty – as looks likely - and the "referendum lock" kicks in, Cameron will be obliged to ask us whether we approve the new treaty, inviting a straight yes/no vote. Under these circumstances, whoever is then the prime minister will not be able to recommend that the voters reject that treaty: that would amount to the UK blocking the treaty entirely. But, if it is left solely as a yes/no referendum, it will almost certainly be treated as a proxy for an in/out vote, with the risk – however slight - that the new treaty is rejected. To my mind, therefore, Cameron will have to offer us an incentive to vote "yes" to the treaty, if he is forced to offer a mandatory referendum. Then, the logical option would be the question of whether we stay in the EU. That would leave it open to have two questions on a ballot paper, with the possibility of voting "yes" to one question and "no" to the other. That, of course, assumes that the UK has been able to negotiate substantial opt-outs to the new treaty, but there might even be a situation where the "colleagues" apply to the new treaty to the eurozone only. In this case, as we surmised earlier, there will be no strict legal obligation for Cameron to hold a referendum at all. Nevertheless, such are the political pressures that, in one form or another, Cameron feels obliged to offer a referendum. And if he does, on behalf of the Conservatives, it is a pretty safe bet that Labour will follow. We then would be faced with a version of the 1975 scenario, with a choice of "renewing our consent" – as Cameron chooses to put it – on the basis of a renegotiated treaty, or looking for the exit. On current polling data, and with the benefit of experience of the way people behave in referendums, we can expect the "stay-in" vote to prevail, giving either Cameron or his successor very little to fear. Our best option, in my view, is to call their bluff, and argue that the renegotiations are not satisfactory, demanding that Article 50 be invoked to enable a better deal to be gained. The zealots, however, are unlikely to go with that, which means the "outers" will be split before we even start. One thing that came over yesterday from the Today interview with Mandelson is that he is not going to split the "stay-in" vote by demanding that the UK joins the core. This we face the danger of a divided opposition fighting a united alliance of europhiles and reformists. True eurosceptics, therefore, are going to have to make some decisions: whether they want to adopt a purist stance that will almost guarantee we lose the referendum, or whether we make some tactical compromises that get us out of the EU, albeit on less than ideal terms. Doing nothing here is not an option – at least, if we want to win. We have a lot of ground to make up, and we can only succeed if we agree a winning strategy. COMMENT THREAD Richard North 29/09/2012 |
EU Referendum: the shape of things to come
Friday 28 September 2012
Such are the expectation of the denizens of the pointy building in Westminster that, tucked into one of my recent pieces on the upcoming referendum, was the cryptic remark that, "… With Cameron planning a major speech on European policy next month, he may well take the opportunity then to commit to a referendum, contingent on renegotiations arising out of the treaty process".
Perhaps I should have made more of it for what has been common knowledge for some time has finally reached the ears of the BBC's Nick Robinson, who is breathlessly retailing the intelligence that Cameron "is considering making a major speech about Britain's future relationship with Europe before December's EU leaders summit". As to the timetable, October is possible, but November now looks more likely. Whatever the date, it was never the case that there was to be a "Europe" speech from Cameron at the party conference. Opening up the wounds in such a public venue was never going to happen. And, as we remarked a fortnight ago, with so many ramifications to the current situation, no decisions had been made. That remains the case, even if Nick Robinson has only just found that out, as well as discovering that there will be no party conference speech. The essence of the debate going on within party circles, though, is exactly that which we explored earlier, with the fear of "unforeseen consequences" that would have Britain forced into a referendum on a treaty "that many would argue would scarcely affect Britain at all since we are not members of the eurozone". This has not stopped the Daily Mail jumping the gun and reporting that Cameron has signalled that a referendum could take place to approve Britain's renegotiated membership, with powers returned in key areas. Also on the case is The Daily Telegraph, which has picked up the same vibes, reporting that Cameron may wait until after the next European Council on 18 October, and possibly until after negotiations on the EU budget begin later this year. But, in an interview with the Brazilian newspaper, Folha de Sao Paulo, Cameron has said that the eurozone crisis gives countries like Britain opportunities to pursue their own agendas, declaring that he would use the chance to reshape the relationship with the EU. The difficulty is, of course, that until the "colleagues" declare their precise intentions, it is difficult for Cameron to define his own strategy in detail and, given the growing indifference to Britain's membership of the EU, it would be very easy for him to overplay his hand. Thus, as events close in on Cameron, he is cast in the role of the spectator, waiting for others to make their moves before he can respond. This is not a happy position, and one which cannot be sustained forever. However, since Barroso has promised to come clean, with a proposal for a new treaty in the Spring of 2014, and Merkel will have had her "forum" up and running since this October, Cameron has plenty of time to get in with his own responses before the all-important euro-elections. What is coming clear, though, is that there is no longer any doubt that Cameron will be announcing a referendum in due course. The debate is about when, and the precise terms on which the referendum will be held, the odds being that it will be some time after the general election. COMMENT THREAD Richard North 28/09/2012 |
Posts
