Europe

The British media woke up this week, realising that Europe still exists. As David Cameron travels to Brussels, questions loom over what, exactly, he can achieve in Europe – at this summit, and more importantly, moving forward.   Much of the commentary surrounding the summit has focussed on the increase to the EU’s 2011 budget, which Cameron is fighting.  And for good reason. It’s insane that Britain – or any other net contributing state – should be forced to accept any increase to the EU budget, at a time of tough austerity at home.   Cameron has spent considerable time talking up the negotiations on the budget increase, so he may have an ace up his sleeve to achieve a cash freeze tomorrow or in the coming weeks. But a 2.

David Cameron’s first battle with the EU opens on Thursday. Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy hope to introduce a treaty that will deliver tough sanctions on eurozone members that break budget guidelines. Their success rests on David Cameron’s support. Europe is built on quid pro quos, so Cameron will ensure that the new treaty does not prejudice Britain whilst also seeking to repatriate competences. He will avoid the more avant garde suggestions of outspoken eurosceptics – he knows that a UK Sovereignty Bill and exemption from pan-European customs arrangements are unfeasible unless Britain rescinds its membership - and, in the delicate context of coalition, seek practical assurances instead.

A quiet but important change to Britain’s political landscape took place in Brussels on Wednesday. The European Parliament passed a motion to increase the EU Budget by 5.9 percent, dashing, for the moment, government hopes that the EU might share in its citizens’ austerity. Labour’s MEPs were central to the motion’s success – 10 (one of whom glories in the name Michael Cashman) out of 13 voted against the Conservative-backed amendment to freeze the EU Budget.      As Alan Johnson took his feet and, like a gamey slim-line Falstaff, began to condemn public sector cuts, Labour MEPs saddled the over-stretched taxpayer with £900m in extra contributions – more than the odd nurse could have been saved with that tidy little sum.

Bill Cash’s amendment to the EU budget bill may not have been the victory that the signatories to Douglas Carswell’s more incendiary effort hoped for, but it is significant. It is exactly in line with government policy that seeks to cap the EU budget and search for cuts. As Treasury Minister Justine Greening put it in the debate last night: ‘I will not hide from the House the Government's frustration that some of our partners - and those in EU institutions - do not seem to understand how bizarre it is, when national budgets are under such extraordinary pressure, that the EU should be immune from that.’ The EU Commission proposes a rise of 6 percent, well above inflation, whilst the EU parliament's budget committee called for a 2.

Anyone who thought the new intake of Tory MPs were a bunch of automatons should take a look at the House of Commons order paper today. MPs have been asked to sign away 60 percent more of British taxpayers’ money to Brussels, in defiance of British public opinion. For years, they have done so without qualms. But the Conservatives, who were so rightly outraged at the way Labour whipped through the Lisbon Treaty, are challenging this. In an age of austerity, when we’re cutting child benefit and asking if Britain can afford to be a world-class military power, why should MPs sign off a 60 percent increase in the amount of money transferred from British taxpayers to the EU authorities?

It's twenty years, to the day, since the UK joined the European Exchange Rate Mechanism – a decision that would, of course, culminate in our withdrawal on Black Wednesday, 16 September, 1992. Subsequent years of strong growth placed those events in a fresh context, but here's The Spectator's take from 1990: The dangers of stageism, The Spectator, 13 October 1990 Give the European federalists and inch, and they will take a kilometre. Commenting on Britain's entry into the Exchange Rate Mechanism of the EMS, Sir Leon Brittan claimed that 'Britain has begun an inevitable move towards joining a full European Monetary System, including a single currency'. And the Guardian, which now outstrips even the Independent in Euro-enthusiasm, pronounced as follows: 'Be clear.

Vince Cable was on best behaviour at the European Parliament yesterday afternoon. The twinkle of opposition was back, and he assured his audience that they would not be receiving one of those dour Hibernian lectures of blesséd memory. He had come, he said, merely to explain the coalition’s government’s European business policy.     Europe is a point of contention within the coalition, but one that is exaggerated. The coalition agreement is quite detailed on European policy, particularly on competences. Naturally, economic policy is more fluid, but the government, essentially, seeks further growth in the single market and closer economic co-operation to counter competition from the developing world.

I ration my writing about Sweden. As CoffeeHousers know, I can extol its virtues with room-emptying conviction. But it's now a few days since its election, and as far as I can tell no English publication has told the extraordinary story of its conservative victory - and the economic turnaround driven by the largest tax cuts in Swedish history. It is now the fastest-growing economy in the West. I tell the story in the political column of this week's magazine (subscribers, click here), but I will summarise it for CoffeeHousers here. Normally, conservatives are elected in Sweden as a kind of light relief, to punctuate decades of leftist rule. They're usually thrown out after one term, and the social democrats get back to taxing the bejesus out of the country.

The Coalition Government’s proposal for a 'referendum lock' on future transfers of powers to the EU has already been branded “worthless” by some Tory backbenchers . It’s easy to share their frustration at the Coalition’s lack of interest in EU reform so far. After all, the Government has chosen to opt in to the European Investigation Order; signed up for new EU financial supervisors; and chosen not to challenge the UK’s participation in the eurozone bailout (making British taxpayers potentially liable for up to £8 billion in loans to eurozone governments). However, the referendum lock is still significant. New crises, situations and politicians’ egos will always drive the need for another treaty and further integration.

At least this government is honest. ‘There will be,’ Europe Minister David Lidington says, ‘no referendum on the transfer of competence or power from the UK to the EU during this Parliament’. The government will ensure that there are no more EU power transfer treaties; but, as Douglas Carswell, Tim Montgomerie, and Bill Cash all note, the Lisbon Treaty is self-ratifying. The EU has already picked the coalition’s lock and garnered new powers for itself – notably the extension of the EU arrest warrant. The EU could be an economic superblock with the muscle to influence the globe strategically and culturally. But its current political operation is unnecessary and deplorably un-democratic.