Eu

The rest of Europe has, predictably, reacted negatively to the suggestion that the UK should be able to impose some kind of cap on free movement while remaining in the EU. At first glance, it does sound as if David Cameron wants the UK to stay a member of the European club without subscribing to one of its founding rules. But there’s actually a very good argument for why the UK should be treated differently. As I say in my column this week, Britain is the one major EU economy that is never going to join the euro. This makes Britain a special case. If there is no limit on

Imagine if David Cameron actually meant it. Imagine if he really did follow through with his implied threat to campaign for Brexit in the absence of better terms from Brussels. You can picture the televised address. An oak-panelled background with a large union flag hanging sedately in the corner, the PM with that furrowed house-captain expression he sometimes does. The script pretty much writes itself. ‘All of you know how hard I tried to secure a new deal. I was often criticised for being too conciliatory, but it was my duty to do whatever was in my power to reform the EU. I have to tell you today that the

What a godsend to Ukip José Manuel Barroso must be.  On his recent short visit to the UK he not only managed to tell the British public that limits to immigration (desired by the overwhelming majority of the British public) would be ‘illegal’.  He also managed to tell us that if we left the EU, Britain would have ‘zero’ influence in the world. I do wonder who bureaucrats like Mr Barroso think they are going to persuade.  Are they simply relying on swaying or scaring us on the presumption that we have no historical knowledge or memory?  Because this latest message can’t possibly work, can it?  Most British people don’t

Everyone’s favourite unelected European was doing the broadcasting rounds this morning, popping up on the BBC’s Andrew Marr show to tell David Cameron that he can forget any plans to cap the number of EU immigrants in Britain. Here’s what José Manuel Barroso had to say:- “Any kind of arbitrary cap seems to be not in conformity with Europeans laws. For us it is very important – the principle of non-discrimination. The freedom of movement is a very important principle in the internal market: movement of goods, of capital, of services and of people. By the way, I remember when prime minister Cameron called me to ask the commission to be tough ensuring the

[audioplayer src=”http://traffic.libsyn.com/spectator/TheViewFrom22_16_Oct_2014_v4.mp3″ title=”Lord Pearson and Damian Green discuss Ukip and the Tories” startat=81] Listen [/audioplayer]I think I’ve cracked it. If you want to springboard your minor political party into the mainstream and take British politics by storm, then all you need to do is go on and on about helping the poor. You don’t need to do much else. You certainly don’t need to modify your policies so that they actually help the poor. This would be overkill. Nor, frankly, do you even need to be 100 per cent up to speed on who the poor are. Feel free to conflate them with the elderly or the skilled working class

The Tories will announce a big new policy on freedom of movement in the European Union, David Cameron told his MPs tonight. At a meeting of the Parliamentary party, the Tory leader promised what one Eurosceptic attendee described as a ‘big bang’ announcement on freedom of movement. Apparently this pleased those there no end, even those usually critical of the Prime Minister. MPs were also told they are expected to visit Rochester to campaign at least three times, and the cabinet five times, which is clearly an intervention from Lynton Crosby as the whips had decided at the end of last week that they wouldn’t bother. This was what one

Boris is at it again this morning. Revealing, that is, why he cannot be trusted with office. To be charitable, I wouldn’t trust many newspaper columnists with the keys to power.  But, of course, most Grub Street residents have no interest in being crowned Emperor. Boris does. Which is why his columns for the Daily Telegraph are so troublesome. You will remember the recent occasion when he suggested the burden of proof in criminal trials be reversed. That was revealing, but in a bad way. So is today’s column in which he proposes setting quotas for immigrants from other EU countries. As is so often the case you are left to wonder

An opinion poll to be published next week will reveal that Labour leader Ed Miliband is slightly less popular with the public than the vibrant Islamic State commander ‘Jihadi John’ and the late BBC disc jockey Jimmy Savile, and only two points more popular than His Infernal Majesty, Satan. The same poll will also put Labour slightly ahead of the Tories and therefore on course to be the largest party in a hung parliament come next May, with Ed Miliband as prime minister. This is but one reason why the next general election will be the most fascinating within living memory; the pollsters do not really have a clue what’s

Vince Cable’s speech today was loyal and funny. Cable was, unlike in some previous years, very much on message. He lavished praise on Clegg for having turned the Liberal Democrats into a party of government. He ended his speech by telling the activists that ‘there is a lot to be proud of and we must be proud of it’ to the delight of Nick Clegg, who was rather distractingly wearing jeans in the conference hall. Cable also attacked both the Tories and Labour. He joked that the Tories were turning into Ukip without the beer and Labour into Hollande-style socialists but without the sex. The most aggressive part of his

George Osborne’s promise to crack down on multinational companies’ avoidance of UK taxes by the use of impenetrable devices such as the ‘Double Irish’ and the ‘Dutch Sandwich’ certainly has the support of this column. I have long argued that the ‘fiduciary duty’ (identified by Google chairman Eric Schmidt) to minimise tax bills within the law for the benefit of shareholders has to be balanced against a moral duty to pay at least a modicum of tax in every profitable territory. Google, Apple, Amazon and eBay, as well as Starbucks and big names of the pharmaceutical sector, are among those known to use smart schemes which variously involve sales bookings