In a pre-conference interview yesterday, Ming told the FT that he doesn’t believe a referendum on the European Reform Treaty is necessary. I think he’s absolutely right: this treaty does not justify one of the very very rare occasions when the UK deviates from a system of Parliamentary democracy.

Firstly, for me it is clear that it is strongly in the interests of the UK to continue to play a leading role in the European Union. It seems to me massively in our interest to work together effectively with our neighbours on crucial issues such as cross-border crime, terrorism and climate change.

But this certainly does not mean that I think the EU is perfect. Indeed for many years I and we as a party have been arguing for reform of the EU to make it more accountable and effective. We have basically won the argument on many of these points, which are now actually embodied in this treaty. I think everyone should welcome these reforms and I very much hope they are implemented.

Clearly some anti-European groups do not agree and hence they have launched a campaign to hold a referendum on it, which they obviously hope to win.

And indeed there is perhaps a case to say that pretty much any time anyone requests a referendum on any subject, it should be held so that the public can have their say (which is not too far from the Swiss system).

Read the rest of this entry »

As regular readers of this blog know, I am passionately committed, almost to the point of obsession, about accountability and democracy, for example in local health services.

So why do I find myself opposed to a referendum on the European Reform Treaty? It seems rather a counter-intuitive, anti-democratic and an unpopular view to take so I think it needs a bit of explanation.

Referendums are clearly initially very appealing. It seems quite simple: if you believe in democracy, then you should be prepared to ask the public anything and everything, and get them to make the decision.

This seems fine until we look at the actual experience of what actually happens when you do put something to a referendum. And the general (if not universal) experience is that when voters go to the polls, they don’t actually vote about the question on the ballot paper - but instead treat it as a poll on how they think the government of the day is doing generally.

Referendums

The European issue itself provides some good examples of this. Read the rest of this entry »

In fact he also knows 33 other pieces of personal data about you, if you have taken a flight to the USA any time in the last few years.

How?

Well*, in the wake of 9/11 and as part of their attempt to prevent a repeat, US government agencies insisted on knowing a wide range of pieces of personal information about anyone flying into US airspace from Europe (the so-called Passenger Name Recognition, or PNR, system).

Read the rest of this entry »

Saturday’s meeting of the UK European Movement’s new national Council was a very heartening experience: after a very difficult couple of years, the EM has clearly picked up itself, dusted itself down, and is really starting to focus on the future.

The last meeting I attended elected Peter Luff as the EM’s new Chairman, with a strong team of others too to lead the organisation and they have obviously been working very hard since, both in sorting out some of the challenging practical issues, but also in pursuing ambitious but realistic aims. Many of these will be coming to fruition and becoming visible over the next few weeks and months.

There is already a major programme of meetings, run mostly by EM branches around the country, the Speak Up Europe project. This has taken off mainly thanks to the efforts of Margaret Daly, and is an excellent project (and part of an EU-wide programme).

Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve been trying to find time to sit down and try to read what runes exist about the approach that Gordon Brown will take to Europe, as Prime Minister.

I haven’t managed to get down to it properly yet, but Jon Worth has a very good analysis of a pamphlet by Ed Balls for CER, which may offer some interesting insights - I recommend it.

Next year it will be twenty years since Margaret Thatcher made her famous ‘Bruges speech’ . That event definitively marked the shift of first herself and then very soon afterwards the British public, away from being friendly to the European Community - in the wake of the 1975 referendum in which she played a leading part in the yes campaign - to the hostility to anything emerging from Brussels, to which we have become so used ever since.

And the following year it will be twenty years since the Berlin wall came down and the countries of eastern and southern Europe began their slow march towards membership of the EU which finally ended for most of them with accession in 2004 or at the start of this year.

Those two events have been the cornerstones of both the development of the EU, and Britain’s response to it, over those last twenty years.

Read the rest of this entry »

Another quite good speech from Blair on Europe. The problem has never been so much his words or his views on Europe - some of his speeches have been outstanding, even if as today his views are far from perfect - but his willingness actually to do anything about them.

I am persuaded that when he says things about improving Europe - and particularly about going out and making the case for it to the public - he does actually mean it. It’s just when it comes to actually doing anything about it, it never seemed to happen. Days from announcing his departure, he is hardly going to start now. British pro-Europeans feel extremely let down Blair on Europe - much more so that by Major, for example, who didn’t think of himself as a European as Blair does - and it’s entirely his own fault.

The next Prime Minister, by contrast, has made no pretence of saying the right thing about Europe - moving from being a decent pro-European when in opposition, to one of its loudest critics when in office. And despite some speculation, no-one seems to have the faintest idea what his approach will be from Number Ten.

A couple of weeks ago I attended an excellent one-day conference at Chatham House, organised by Stephen Quigley for the European Movement to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome. A lot of very eminent people - including Kenneth Clarke, Peter Mandelson, and Charles Kennedy - said mostly the same absolutely right things about the EU’s great successes.

There was much less - though some - discussion of what happens next in the story of Britain’s relationship with Europe. I think there is some chance that the logjam of a British public - and especially a British press - hostile to ”˜Europe’ might be about to start to break. I’ve tried to put my ideas together into an article setting out my view of the situation - which you can now read on my website here.