Europe

The Europhilic ghost of Ted Heath is stalking the House of Lords, upsetting the passage of the European Union Bill, the bill containing the coalition’s EU referendum lock. Lord Armstrong of Illminster, who was PPS to Edward Heath between 1970 and 1975, is trying to introduce a ‘sunset clause’ to ensure that the bill lapses at the end of this parliament. (He is working with Labour whip Lord Liddle, although Labour insists that this is not party policy.) Another amendment has been tabled to guarantee that referenda are binding only if turnout exceeds 40 per cent. This could mean that Britain succumbs to legislative creep from Brussels because only major issues (such as joining the Euro) are likely to attract sufficient turnout.

What do the TUC, heavy industry and the European Commission have in common? This is not the start of a bad joke; the answer is that they all oppose the government’s energy policy. Ten days ago, Tata (formerly British Steel) announced that it was to cut more than 1,500 jobs at plants in Scunthorpe and on Teeside. The directors later confirmed that their decision was influenced, in part, by the introduction of a costly carbon floor price at the last Budget. The floor price, which exists on top of levies imposed by the EU, has increased the burden of taxation on energy consumption to subsidise renewable energy research. In last week’s issue of the Spectator, Matt Ridley predicted how this policy will likely be an expensive fiasco.

As Obama and Cameron played table tennis yesterday, a considerably more furious game was being waged between the government and Tory backbenchers. It related to a Parliamentary motion tabled by Mark Reckless – and described here – that sought to stem UK involvement in any future bailouts for eurozone countries. All well and good, you'd think, until a rival amendment percolated down from on high to dilute Reckless's proposals. This new amendment would only go so far as to "urge the Government to raise the issue of the [bailout mechanism] at the next meeting of the Council of Ministers of the European Council". The green benches were set for a violent back-and-forth 'tween one side and the other. The outcome of all this was revealed yesterday evening.

The Tories are cock-a-hoop about the defection of UKIP MEP David Campbell Bannerman – positively crowing, in fact. “There’s nothing more satisfying,” said one CCHQer, “than UKIP suffering.” Activists and MPs alike reckon that the Conservatives could have won a majority last May if it weren’t for UKIP in the south-west. Vengeance is sweet, but is it of lasting importance? Campbell Bannerman has used a blog post to justify his action: David Cameron is an inspiring leader and an avowed eurosceptic. Perhaps it will become a salve for the right, increasingly seen as Cameron’s blind spot. Equally, the answers Campbell Bannerman gave to Total Politics’ Amber Elliott could be used in the tussle for wavering eurosceptics.

EU foreign policy Tsar Catherine Ashton has come under a lot of criticism, much of it unfair and/or put forward by those who want the EU to supplant the member-states. In this piece, I have tried to defend her. I argue that her realistic take on the EU’s role is in the UK’s interest: the last thing London needs is someone who ignores member-states to build an independent foreign policy. And she has managed to get Europe’s SAHEL policy in a better shape, worked closely with William Hague and Guido Westerwelle to coax Serbia into negotiations with Kosovo and helped to solve, at least for the moment, a crisis in Bosnia. For these reasons, she retains the support of David Cameron and William Hague.

Britain is going to stay in the EU for the next ten years at least. Of that I'm sure. But after that, when David Cameron's retired, William Hague has taken to writing books, George Osborne's had his chance and the 2010 intake run the party, the Tories are going to be more openly hostile to the EU. Labour will too; it has a larger reservoir of pro-EU sentiment among its ranks, but one that is shallower than it was. Focusing on the Tories, it is worth noting that nearly all of the names being bandied about as future Tory leaders have a visceral dislike of the EU. By and large they will, by then reflect popular opinion (if they don't already): as veteran EU watcher Charles Grant notes, there is a limit to how long an elite can cross the population.

David Cameron has a good relationship with Barack Obama, which will be on display when the US president visits Britain shortly. They speak regularly and frankly and their senior advisers are in near-constant contact. The idea that the Lib Dems would foist a more "Love Actually" policy onto the coalition has come to naught. Yet Britain's influence in Washington has waned. This is no fault of the Prime Minister. In fact, his personal diplomacy has probably slowed-down the process. Instead it has to do with structural changes in the US: the coming to power of a "pacific" President, the importance of US-China ties, the emergence of the Tea Party.

There is much excitement in Westminster at the moment about Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall’s campaign to end ‘discards’ under the Common Fisheries Policy. DEFRA and non-governmental organisations estimate that perhaps as much as 60 per cent of a catch will be returned dead to the sea because the CFP’s controversial quota system is based on the amount of fish caught. DEFRA has been pressing the European Commission to reform the quota system for years. At last, they seem to have succeeded. The commission is due to announce in July that the quota system will now be based on the amount of fish landed in port. With that apparently comes a concession to reduce discards significantly.