Eu

Jean-Claude Juncker delivered a speech to the European Parliament this morning. Its content was, from the British government’s perspective, provocative. Juncker had one watchword: integration: and a clear idea of how to achieve it. He expressed belief in: Tax harmonisation (especially on corporate tax rates) Integration of capital markets Energy integration and the diversification of energy supply 300bn euros extra spending and a commitment to the 'social market' A financial transaction tax No new member states for 5 years (how about that, Mr Salmond?) The euro as a unifying force across Europe Freedom of movement In some respects it was a slightly strange speech for Juncker, a man of the centre-right, to have given.

Politicians tend to get all the blame for immigration policies not working. But politicians are often doomed to fail on migration questions because there are deep-rooted problems with the way we all debate immigration and with what we expect of immigration policy. Following UKIP’s success in the European elections, and given the likely failure of the government to meet its net migration target by 2015, immigration is guaranteed to be a key focal point of public debate in the run-up to the general election next year. There is widespread agreement that Britain needs a ‘better’ immigration debate - but how can that be achieved? Over the past year I have been developing an online course on international labour migration for Oxford University which deals with this question.

‘Energy is the single biggest issue facing Jean-Claude Juncker,’ remarked a seasoned Eurocrat to me earlier this week. Europe’s energy infrastructure is decrepit and insular. Rates of cross-border interconnection, for example, remain very low – at just 8 per cent of their production capacity on average across the union according to the FT. The Commission’s 2030 energy package aims to raise the average rate of interconnection to 15 per cent — part of a string of targets designed to complete the single market in energy. Alas, it’s going to take more than a target or two. The level of investment required is enormous (more than 1 trillion euros by the Commission’s estimate, of which only 5.8bn has been found for 2014-2020).

Next week, EU leaders will meet to parcel out the top jobs in the next European Commission. So David Cameron doesn't have long to decide who he is going to nominate—and Berlin is already bugging him for his pick. Here's The Spectator's run down of the runners and riders. Andrew Lansley: Until recently the firm favourite. But in recent weeks support for him has fallen away. No. 10 has been irritated by the hints he has dropped about having been offered the job. It has also grasped that nominating someone as compensation for dropping them from the Cabinet is a recipe for getting a second-tier job.

The row over Jean-Claude Juncker was confected outrage which spectacularly failed to achieve what Cameron wanted. It was confected because the alternatives to the ghastly Luxembourg bureaucrat are scarcely less federalist than he is himself. But the real giveaway, the most significant moment, came in Angela Merkel’s statement, issued as a means of giving a sop to the poor old British. Don’t worry, she said, Britain can reach 'ever-closer union' – ie political union – at a slower speed. In other words, there is no question that we will eventually succumb, we’ll just do it more slowly than everyone else. Bring on that referendum. Rod Liddle's new book Selfish Whining Monkeys is available from the Spectator Bookshop for just £12.99.

It’s well known that David Cameron voted against Jean-Claude Juncker and tried to persuade his EU colleagues to do the same. Thanks to today’s Mail on Sunday, we know exactly how forceful the Prime Minister was in warning and rebuking his fellow leaders. According to leaked reports, an angry Mr Cameron threw Herman Van Rompuy, outgoing EU chief, out of Downing Street following an argument over Juncker: ‘If it is to be Juncker, I insist on a formal vote,’ said Cameron Mr Van Rompuy blinked: ‘I will decide how the vote is conducted.’ Mr Cameron: ‘You must guarantee there will be a proper vote.’ Mr Van Rompuy: ‘I have said I will decide that.

The results of last month’s European elections demonstrated an appetite for change in Europe among voters – all parties seem to agree on that. Which is why David Cameron went into the most recent set of EU Council negotiations with cross-party support to secure a candidate for Commission President that would make achieving that kind of change and reform easier, not harder. Today there is a widespread and profound sense of disappointment at David Cameron’s apparent failure to build an alliance to secure an alternative candidate for the role.

The European Council has nominated Jean-Claude Juncker to be the next president of the European Commission despite David Cameron’s staunch opposition. In the vote that Cameron forced on the appointment, he was defeated 26-2 with only the Hungarians joining the British in opposing the former Luxembourg PM. Junkcer’s appointment casts fresh doubt on whether Cameron will be able to renegotiate a new EU deal for Britain and whether this country will stay in the EU. In the coming weeks, we will have to watch and see whether other EU leaders try and come up with some kind of compensation package for Britain. When Cameron first came out in opposition to Juncker, he was pretty confident of success.

Is it a good thing that David Cameron now appears isolated in Europe as he continues to dig a hole that Jean-Claude Juncker almost certainly won't fall into? Jeremy Hunt tried to argue on the Today programme this morning that it was, saying that people would respect an isolated Prime Minister who was prepared to make the right argument.