Promises, Promises
man who rightly distrusts the
Tory position on the EU
Sir Stuart Wheeler is well-known as a doughty fighter against the great behemoth that is the EU and, in particular, the continued membership of the UK of that deeply corrupt entity. In the past he has been a significant donor to the Conservative Party but now he is threatening to take himself elsewhere. He can, of course, do as he pleases. But is he wise so to do?
1. A promise that if the Lisbon Treaty is not law when they come to power, they will hold a referendum on whether to withdraw UK ratification.2. A promise that if the Lisbon Treaty is law when they come to power, there will be an immediate, massive renegotiation of the UK's relationship with the EU. If the UK did not get what it wants, the UK should pull out of the Union altogether.
As I say, it is his money and he is entitled to do with it what he wishes. Indeed, between 2001 and December 2007 he has given some £3,879,300.90, but not a penny since then. That is very much his choice.
Now he threatens not to pay any more but to take his cash elsewhere.
The problem is that, the Tories believe that to allow the word 'Europe' to pass their lips will cause the electorate to run a mile. Redolent as it is of the appalling divisions over Europe spawned by the refusal of the Europhile clique that had, post-Thatcher, seized control of the European Agenda at the top of the Tory Party and refused to hold a referendum over Maastricht, the present leadership is determined to be as opaque as possible over what its policy will be when it forms the next government. So getting a commitment of the specific kind that Sir Stuart wishes is, one suspects, not going to happen, for now at least.
But it cannot be long delayed as there is the small matter of elections to the European Parliament looming on the horizon in the summer of 2009.
So what then? The Spectator's Coffee House makes the point:
there is evidence that Wheeler's demands aren't politically toxic. Polling suggests that the public are massively in support of a referendum, and - after the Irish 'No' vote - it seems that even Brussels is inclined towards a new, looser relationship with the UK.
This is self-evident. The British people are overwhelmingly in favour of the holding of a referendum on the EU Constitution. Why, one might ask? It is not because they have a yen to do a little bit of voting but because they wish to have their say on a matter of fundamental importance: the nature of the UK's status as a sovereign independent state and upon the nature of our relationship with the EU. Thus the Tories actually have nothing to fear from the making of such promises. It is, one suspects the final sentence of Sir Stuart's requirements that will be at the root of their coyness about spelling out what, precisely, is Tory policy on Europe:
If the UK did not get what it wants, the UK should pull out of the Union altogether.
But, one must ask, how is the EU to be made aware that we are serious about any renegotiation of our relationship with it? If Cameron promises that 'not leaving it at that' means a reassessment of our relationship with the EU, then the EU must be made to understand that such negotiations are serious and a failure to deal seriously with them will have grave consequences. Thus to ensure that any such negotiations are meaningful and substantive, they must be backed up with the threat that, if the EU won't play ball, then the British people will be offered a referendum on withdrawal. Ian Dale reckons that Wheeler "must also know that the Party will not commit to pulling out in the way that he suggests". I think it is incumbent upon Dale to explain how the renegotiation process will be made meaningful in the absence of such a threat: i.e. how the EU will be made to negotiate seriously in the absence of any sanction for not doing so.
So, such a pledge as is demanded by Sir Stuart is no more than the setting out of a sensible negotiating position in advance. The problem is that the Tories are so afraid of Europe that they have utterly misjudged the mood of the British people who know only too well what the EU is (a dishonest and corrupt racket) and would wish to have the issue of our relationship with the EU addressed. That is not a 'doorstep' topic is not because of disinterest in it but because of , as Daniel Hannan points out, our sullen acceptance that the political elite don't want to go there.
So Sir Stuart may well find he gets not the answer he seeks.
The problem for the Tories is that the European Parliament elections are a fixture and the witching hour will come.
To borrow a chilling phrase of IRA-Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams: "We haven't gone away, you know!".
Cameron will have to decide: 'should I, as the British people want, make these pledges or do I risk losing a big chunk of the core vote essential to ensuring a working majority at the next election?'
It may be that he thinks that, at 52% (and a lead of 28%) in the polls, Europe can be safely put on the back-burner. Such would be a fundamentally bad idea because this issue will not go away: some of us are determined that it will be a core issue for the next Tory Government to address and we are not going to leave matters there.
