Europe

What Portugal means for the UK

Last night, Portugal's parliament voted to reject its latest measures to deal with its deficit. It was the fourth time that the Portuguese parliament had been asked for more taxes and for more spending cuts. The result has been a further loss of confidence in Portugal’s ability to pay its debts. Market interest rates have risen to over 8 percent. European leaders are meeting this weekend to work out a path forward. The lessons for us here in the UK are starkly clear. First, it is better to set out all the difficult decisions needed to deal with the debt crisis, even if these take place over a number of years, rather than continually going back to ask for more. That the Budget was neutral overall shows that a clear plan is being followed here.

Cameron’s €4 billion Portuguese challenge

As if the budget and Libya weren’t enough, the UK Government woke up today with another major challenge on its hands – yet another flare-up in the eurozone debt crisis, which has been continuing to bubble away under the radar.   Yesterday, Portugal’s Prime Minister José Sócrates literally walked out of Parliament, during a debate on EU-backed austerity measures. The austerity package was subsequently voted down and shortly afterwards Sócrates announced his resignation. Portugal is now facing the prospect of being without a government for months, as its electoral rules require a 55 day break between the dissolution of Parliament and new elections.

Scouring the Budget small print

This morning's newspapers have a feast of analysis on the Budget. I've covered 15 of them, and what journalists normally do is spend the day trawling the small print of the Budget document hunting for stories. But this time, the stories seem to have migrated to the Office for Budget Responsibility's accompanying report, packed with new analyses and metrics — even disaster scenarios — which those with an interest in UK economics will find useful. The OBR document is now released with the Red Book, and speaks with the authority of government economists who (unlike the rest of us) have had weeks to chew over Osborne's claims. The OBR must now be considered part of the Budget's small print.

Nuclear hysteria

The above Japanese video - explaining the nuclear accident to children — makes a lot more sense than many of the hysterical reports we have been reading in the last few days. The figures are not out yet, but it's likely that tens of thousands were killed by the tsunami. Yet the newspapers were all focused on the nuclear meltdown — which injured 15 people. The irony is that, when a tsunami strikes, the local nuclear power station is pretty much the safest place to be. This is the argument advanced in the leading article for the current issue of The Spectator (subscribers, click here; non-subscribers please join us for £1 a week).

The winners and losers

In English we have an odd expression: “to have a good war”. The phrase was originally used to describe someone who was decorated or otherwise distinguished themselves, usually during WW II. Allan Massie, for example, wrote that author William Golding “had a good war, first as an ordinary seaman, then as an officer in command of a Landing Craft Tank (Rocket) on D-Day”. Today, newspapers and blogs have been quick to use the phrase for politicians. So David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy are said to have had a “good war” over Libya, so far at least, with Barack Obama faring differently. Organisations also have good and bad wars - with their experience either confirming their stature or predicting their demise.

The government has been the author of its troubles

In his Spectator column this week, James Forsyth painted a picture of a government taken by surprise by enemies who have, in effect, ambushed them - the civil service, the civil service's lawyers and the European Union in particular. Clearly the government is frustrated by the “forces of conservatism” and the “enemies of enterprise”, but the difficult truth is that a lot the government's problems are of its own making, and in its own hands to put right. When it comes to the civil service, the government hasn't simply inherited an uncooperative Whitehall. It has strengthened its position, as a conscious policy decision. Francis Maude said it in terms at one of Reform’s post-election conferences.

Clegg’s coup

Libya is not the only scene of conflict today. Nick Clegg has just won a powerful victory over the Conservatives, appointing a Bill of Rights commission which is certain to leave the ECHR intact. When you see the names Philippe Sands, Helena Kennedy and Lord Lester on the list — even alongside Tories — you know that this review is over before it has begun. Clegg is a firm believer in Europe, and has played his hand very well — outmanoeuvering the Conservatives who thought that a British Bill of Rights should supplant edicts from Strasbourg. Upshot: there may still be a Bill of Rights, containing various declarations inserted by the Tories on the panel. But what the BoR says will matter not one jot.

A Grim St Patrick’s Day

St Patrick's Day is often pretty grim, not least on account of the American habit of suggesting the poor old boy is actually the patron saint of uncooked hamburgers. It is St Patrick's Day or Paddy's Day and "Patty's Day" is an abomination. True, the pubs tend to be stuffed with insufferable amateurs today but in general Ireland is a decent place to pass St Patrick's Day and a better one than most. At least there are proper Irish people there. But this is not an especially bonny St Patrick's Day and not even a new government that can scarcely fail to be some modest improvement upon its predecessor can alter that drab fact. The Irish Times publishes a rallying leader today, arguing that solidarity and optimism can lift Hibernia from her present predicament.

Gaddafi’s coming victory is a huge strategic setback for the West

It now seems almost certain that Colonel Gaddafi will now not only survive in Libya but reassert control over the whole country. With the fall of Ajdabiya, there is no break between Gaddafi’s forces and the rebel capital of Benghazi. The window for international action is shutting rapidly, even if it has not yet closed. But, as so often, there seems to be no multilateral desire for action. Gaddafi’s triumph is a disaster for the Libyan people but also one of the biggest strategic set-backs the West has suffered in the post 9/11 world. Every dictator will now know that they can suppress a revolt with violence without fear of retribution.

The EU wants concessions out of Ireland

The mood in Dublin is febrile, despite the gloom of 14 percent unemployment. Everyone has advice for Enda Kenny on how to revive the Celtic Tiger. This morning, 17 prominent businessmen and public figures submitted A Blueprint for Ireland’s Recovery to the Department of the Taoiseach. The Irish Times reports that the authors propose deeper spending cuts and greater efficiency in the public sector. This is a different approach from influential Irish Economist Colm McCarthy, who argued on Sunday that ‘fiscal stringency is not enough to resolve the crisis’ because the banking restructure (contained within the IMF/EU bailout) is ‘impractical'. Enda Kenny, it seems, agrees with McCarthy, which is why he went to Brussels last week to renegotiate the 5.

How to deal with Bahrain

If you find yourself on the same side of an issue as Iran, it is wise to think carefully what path you have chosen to walk. Today, an Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman condemned the foreign military intervention in Bahrain to confront the protests as "unacceptable." To my dismay, I agree with what Tehran says; but, I suspect (and hope), for very different reasons. The grievances driving the Bahraini protests stem from years of discrimination by the Sunni elite of the Shia majority. Evidence of the problem is well-documented. Last year, Amnesty said that the Bahraini authorities had “failed to investigate alleged torture of detainees”.

Cameron’s call to the White House

David Cameron’s statement on Libya today reflected his growing frustration at the pace at which the wheels of diplomacy are moving on this issue. In his statement, Cameron warned that ‘time is of essence’ and that Gaddafi staying in power, something Cameron had previously called ‘unthinkable’, would send a ‘dreadful signal’. Time, really, is of the essence. If we don’t see movement in the next few days, it seems almost inevitable that Gaddafi will crush the revolt. One of the things that Cameron stressed is that Gaddafi continuing in power would be more than a moral and humanitarian disaster.

Another call for an in/out referendum

In or out? — that is the question that a new cross-party campaign would have put to the British people. And so they're launching their "People's Pledge" today. The idea is that voters would promise to support only those parliamentary candidates who back a referendum on our membership of the EU. The signatures will then be enumerated, presented on a website, and — it is hoped — shock Westminster into delivering the referendum itself. At the very least, it might persuade some candidates to face up to, and meet, the tide of public opinion on Europe. It seems we've been here, or somewhere like it, before now. Daniel Hannan, for instance, launched a campaign last year to collect signatures for an EU referendum.

The coming war with Libya

If the West is not ready to intervene decisively against Colonel Ghadaffi, it needs to get ready for a post-revolutionary Libya, where the dictator and his bloodthirsty family seek revenge on pro-democracy activists and countries like Britain. Think of Ghadaffi's previous record: the Lockerbie bombing, targeted assassinations like in the 1970s, and attacks on US soldiers in Germany. Libya could in future represent a threat to Britain akin to al Qaeda. So, the British government needs to think how it will deal with Ghadaffi MK II. Its policy should draw on past examples of containment and isolation. Libya's neighbours will have to be incentivised to bolster European - and especially Italian - attitudes.

Cameron’s principled stand over Libya

Slowly, David Cameron seems to be mutating into a hawk over Libya. I've been increasingly impressed with the way he has made the case for a no-fly zone - knowing that it is an unpopular cause outside of the Arab world. Since the evacuation chaos, which he apologised for, he has pretty much led calls for some form of military intervention to stop Gaddafi bombing his own people back into submission. He was laughed at to start with; accused of making it up on the hoof. But now the 22-nation Arab League backs this position, as does Sarko. It may have been messy at first – but that’s how these things go. From the offset, Cameron was articulating a basic principle: we need to help the Libyan rebels, not sit and watch them get butchered.

The Arab League adds its weight to the calls for a no-fly zone

We're pushing for a no-fly zone. France is pushing for a no-fly zone. And now the Arab League is pushing for a no-fly zone too. The news fresh out of Cairo is that the organisation has voted in favour of restricting airspace above Libya. It will now push the UN to do the same, which is a considerably more proactive than the stance it adopted earlier this week. While one vote doesn't really seal anything, this is potentially a crucial moment. NATO has made regional support a key condition of a no-fly zone – and now it has it, officially. Those who have been sniffing around for alternatives to the UN and its resolutions will regard this as a positive step.

The growing clamour for intervention

In the last two days, Nato and European leaders have declared that Gaddafi must go, but both have baulked at taking unilateral action. Their reticence has sparked a response from those in favour of intervention. Speaking in Brussels today, David Cameron said that situation on the ground may be getting worse and that Europe and the West in general “must be ready to act if the situation requires it”. Liberal interventionist Bill Clinton went further. Speaking at the Women in the World summit, he said: “I wouldn’t do it if they [the rebels] hadn’t asked… [But] it’s not a fair fight. They’re being killed by mercenaries.

What the Libya crisis means long-term

The multiple crises in North Africa, from the revolution in Tunisia, through the protests in Egypt and to the conflict in Libya, has reinvigorated British foreign policy. In the last couple of years classic international issues have been pushed to the side by a need to focus on economic statecraft. Foreign ministers became less important as finance ministers gained prominence. This will now change, as leaders shift their focus onto the Libya crisis. The UN is again in focus, not the G20. The second change may be on East/West dynamics.

To strike or not to strike?

The situation in Libya is still uncertain, but the fog of war is clearing to expose a depressing picture. Forces loyal to the Gaddafi regime are conducting a successful offensive. The Times’ Deborah Haynes confirms reports (£) that Zawiya has fallen and rebels have been forced from the oil town of Ras Lanuf. William Hague has spoken to Mahmoud Jabril, Special Envoy of the Libyan Transitional Council. The Foreign Office has issued a communiqué on the conversation and some of Jabril’s emotional concern escapes the bland text. In the words of the Foreign Office, he wants ‘the West to act to hinder Qadhafi's ability to inflict further violence on the Libyan people, including through a no fly zone.

The British Bill of Rights stalls

A British Bill of Rights has long been the Tory leadership’s sticking plaster solution to the problems posed by the ECHR. The idea is that a British Bill of Rights would give this country a greater margin of appreciation in interpreting the convention. But this morning this plan is in tatters.   The long-awaited commission on the British Bill of Rights is clearly going nowhere.  Any commission which includes Lord Lester and Helena Kennedy, two of the Lib Dem appointees to it, isn’t going to improve the situation.   The failure of this commission even before it has started is a reminder that this problem isn’t going to be solved in coalition.