David Cameron didn’t betray the British national interest at a dinner last night. He betrayed it over two years ago, on 22 June 2009.
That was the day that he withdrew his party from the main centre-right bloc in the European Parliament – the European People’s Party, home of the parties of Nichola Sarkozy and Angela Merkel – and joined forces with a couple of dozen MEPs from various odd-job right-wing parties from around the EU.
It was the day he willingly and without reason isolated himself from the leaders of Europe’s most important countries.
And what a bizarre analysis of the situation it is to say that Cameron’s use of his veto (if we can call it that) was a sign of strength and success. Persuading his European colleagues of the merits of his (very reasonable) concerns would have been a success. Using his veto was Cameron’s last resort: an ultimate display of his weakness.
Britain’s interests in Europe are best served by being as influential among our fellow nations as we possibly can be. David Cameron’s ‘strength’ has resulted in us having the least amount of influence we have ever had over the course of our membership of the EU. Anyone who calls that a success needs their head testing.
What will happen now in the EU and eurozone is anyone’s guess. The only thing we know for sure is that Britain’s national interest has been severely and unnecessarily damaged by David Cameron’s catastrophic error of judgement back in 2009.
I don’t think our national interest has really been harmed. You need to look past the posturing… Merkozy will come back to the table once they realise they need the UK in on the deal.
But Merkozy don’t need us – that’s the point. Cameron made it easier for them now that they don;t have to pander to our demands. We are now on the margins of Europe
And where in all this was Nick Clegg? The most I’ve heard in a BBC report, almost an aside, is that he was ‘in the loop’.
My personal view is that we should not be in and never have joined Europe. I am, to some extent happy that Cameron has told them where to stick it. I am, however, very unhappy about his reasons for doing so, which are basically to protect his banker and investment buddies in London.
Did you listen to today’s Guardian podcast? Martin Kettle (I think it was him) said something similar to you. I’m still not sure how much this really mattered: obviously his decision to leave the EPP and join a bunch of “right-wing nutters” didn’t make him popular among Merkel and Sarkozy. But even if they were close buddies I wonder if there would have been a possible agreement that would have pleased Merkozy and the UK’s anti-EU lobby (Mail, Express, Tory-backbenchers) at the same time.
Perhaps the relationship was trashed 20 years ago when John Major negotiated an opt-out from the euro as part of the Maastricht Treaty. But it’s kind of hard to imagine Britain having been a supportive member of a all-EU single-currency zone.
‘But it’s kind of hard to imagine Britain having been a supportive member of a all-EU single-currency zone.’
But if we had joined the euro, we would not have allowed countries like Greece to join if they did not meet the specified criteria. Everyone knew that Greece was fibbing, and they went along with it … and that’s part of the reason for the current mess.
Let’s forget the economy and Cameron pretending to protect Britain’s economy for a second, and look at the bigger picture.
Could this be a feint, alienating the Britain in Europe; perhaps in the hope Europe will give Britain an ultimatum- get on board or you’re out; or maybe so that our alienated position in Europe gives the perfect excuse to say ‘OK, were out’; or maybe, even more sinister, an excuse to say ‘we have to get on board’ and integrate us ever further into the European Super State?
Remember, you read it here first!
I am a member of the Lib Dems for many reasons, but near the very top is because it is the one party within Britain that is constructive about the EU, believes in the EU, and wants to be firmly on the inside around the table.
Since the Coalition was formed, I felt that Cameron was a pragmatic Conservative who would ensure that Britain played a constructive role within Europe and would be able to do so because of the Coalition.
Two political things have emerged for me from the game changing moment. First is that Cameron is a proper Eurosceptic in the Tory sense, and not a pragmatic Tory with a troublesome party. Second, the question won’t go away about what the senior Lib Dems are doing. I shudder to think that Nick Clegg is jettisoning his europhile instincts and lib dem principles in government, and giving Cameron a free hand to take Britain into the wilderness.
“But if we had joined the euro, we would not have allowed countries like Greece to join if they did not meet the specified criteria. Everyone knew that Greece was fibbing, and they went along with it … and that’s part of the reason for the current mess.”
So you mean to say: if Britain, with its fantastic track record of healthy budgets, would have been part of the euro they would have managed to do what a dozen other countries did not? I simply don’t buy that.
Before governments begin making cutbacks they should check with the electorate that there are no sacrosanct areas where cuts would not be tolerated. David Cameron himself, writing recently in the Telegraph, said that the only areas he would not consider handing over to private management were Defence and National Security. Beyond that, it seems, everything is up for grabs. But though these are Cameron’s values, they do not represent the values of the nation he represents. Many people would rather see a national bank close down than their local library. There are those who rely on their weekly group activities which till now have been government funded, and which to them are more important than Trident. Others need regular care from public bodies; still others depend on affordable public transport.
Wow. These are clever comment spammers:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Before+governments+begin+making+cutbacks+they+should+check+with+the+electorate+that+there+are+no+sacrosanct+areas+where+cuts+would+not+be+tolerated%22
Not really ‘spamming’, though, is it? It may be plagiarism, but not spam.
It is the misuse of such terms, which have a very specific meaning in PC security that causes casual PC users to misunderstand and make the mistakes that proliferates malware and associated social engineering.
Sorry to go off topic, Nick but I felt it should be pointed out.