Don't Underestimate Cameron on Europe

We had cause for great amusement this morning as we awoke to find that David Cameron has positioned the UK alongside Hungary, Sweden and the Czech Republic in resisting Franco-German moves towards tighter fiscal regulation in the Eurozone.

Amidst the hilarity of the notion of an Anglo-Hungarian Empire, there is the reality of what this decision means. My position on Europe is neither Eurosceptic nor Europhilic and I’m not going to outline it in full here, but regardless of your perspective on the EU it is hard to see this as a positive event.

In short, Cameron has isolated the UK from decision making in one of the most important economic groups in the world. By moving towards the Norwegian model, he has burdened us with the drawbacks of integration without the benefits of Euroscepticism.

However, it would be bananas to think that somehow this is a bad decision on the part of Cameron. Yes, it will be bad for the UK. But which Tory decisions aren’t?

Instead, we have to look at this move in terms of how it impacts upon the Conservative Party, and in truth it looks to me as if it will bolster their support. Unless this isolationism completely wrecks the British economy (which is somewhat unlikely) David Cameron will be able to consider it one of his achievements.

Firstly, David Cameron has appeased the City of London, who stood to lose from the EU’s implementation of a fair and progressive Financial Transactions Tax. The Conservative Party can’t afford to upset this group, as in the 3^rd quarter of 2011 it accounted for 60% of donations.

In the longer term the City may actually have cause to question the soundness of Cameron’s decision. But for now he has done their bidding, and he won’t be brought into Guildhall for questioning.

He has also thrown a few scraps to the Eurosceptic far-right of the Conservative Party, who have regularly expressed their displeasure with his actions since becoming Prime Minister. It’s unlikely that they’ll be pacified for long, but he would’ve faced outright rebellion had he acted differently.

Perhaps most importantly, it is difficult to see how this move could be received badly amongst the electorate. The Twitterati may express displeasure and amusement in equal measure, and bemoan Cameron’s foolishness, but kneejerk Euroscepticism is a far more powerful force amongst the public as a whole.

The country is not a Guardian-reading paradise. That Cameron’s decision is being turned into a Eurosceptic populist triumph can be seen through the headlines of rather more popular newspapers:

“We're on our own now! Cameron uses the veto for first time to opt out of new treaty to save the euro and give more power to Brussels” – The Daily Mail

“Who do you think EU are?” – The Sun

“CAMERON SAYS NO! PM REFUSES TO SIGN NEW EU TREATY” – The Daily Express

“DAVID CAMERON’S PLEDGE ON EU” – The Daily Star

David Cameron is presumably conscious of the threat posed by UKIP, and aware that Euroscepticism is only a vote-loser if it becomes an obsession. It is a perfectly sensible move in political terms for the Conservative Party to make anti-EU statements. At the very least it further moves the economic narrative towards blaming Europe and away from blaming austerity.

So how should we respond?

The first thing to take into account is that turning this into a struggle over British membership of the EU would be fighting the Tories on their own territory. Labour can’t realistically attack them from a Eurosceptic position because of the massive number of ultra-Europhilic members it has, and to launch into a pro-EU tirade would be political suicide.

Labour is best on Europe when it exerts a cautious pragmatism, as Gordon Brown did over the Euro. We should express some benefits of membership whilst not presenting an image of ourselves as Europhile metropolitan liberals out of touch with the concerns of ordinary people.

However, we can’t just let Cameron run with this. The negatives of his decision should be exposed and the narrative shifted away from kneejerk Euroscepticism. It should be emphasised that the Conservative Party’s goal isn’t to ensure British independence, but to ensure independence for the ruling class and the City of London.

Rather than focussing on whether the EU should have greater powers, Labour should demonstrate a more mature attitude towards integration by attacking Cameron on the specific issue which motivated his veto- the Financial Transactions Tax.

The FTT (which I’ll admit isn’t the be-all-and-end-all that some liberals would have you believe) is supported by about 65% of the public. This is actually larger than in Europe as a whole, where support is at 61%.

So Labour should attack Cameron for defending the interests of a tiny minority over that of the vast majority. We should perhaps clarify that there are circumstances when the use of a British veto would be appropriate- when the EU becomes a machine to introduce austerity and privatisation. The defence of entrenched elites to the detriment of the wider public is not one of those instances.

The Liberal Democrats can’t be expected to stand by their principles on this, regardless of Nick Clegg’s love of Brussels. Their support is dwindling and for the coalition to breakdown now would be hugely damaging.

Imagine the response of the electorate if the one issue which Liberal Democrats were prepared to rebel over was the EU- not the NHS, not higher education, not VAT.

David Cameron mustn’t be underestimated, and the response from opposition must be carefully considered. Yes, he’s ridiculous and he’s jeopardising relations with our most important neighbours. But he’s also a cunning political player, and he knows how to turn a failure around.

Peace and love,

Dan x