Dr Charles Tannock MEP: Why we need to take the European Parliament more seriously

Dr Charles Tannock, MEP for London and Conservative Foreign Affairs Spokesman in the European Parliament, urges Conservtives to treat the role of MEPs more seriously.

The reselection of our candidates for the 2009 European elections continues apace, and I wish those shortlisted all the very best for the imminent postal ballot. I won’t comment here on the party board decision to top-list incumbent MEPs, apart from to say that as someone selected twice in open hustings I am the last person to complain about the party membership having the final say. However, the very fact that the top-listing compromise exercised so many of our blogging members would tend to suggest just how important they consider the job of an MEP to be. Or does it?

I should preface the rest of this article by stating that I am well aware of politicians’ tendency to assume an over-inflated sense of their own importance. I do not seek to argue that I am (or MEPs as individuals are) especially important but that the job of an MEP is important now and is likely to become more so in the future whether we like it or not. Nevertheless, I have lost count of the number of people who, on discovering my position, turn up their noses and dismiss the European Parliament as worthless, or if they wish to be polite or flattering ask me when am I going to apply for a Westminster seat.

Recently Alastair Burt MP visited Brussels to meet Conservative MEPs. On a personal level I was delighted to see him but I was somewhat frustrated to hear that his new dedicated role tasked by David Cameron is to ‘build links’ with MEPs, Council Leaders and Assembly members. He is not the first MP or PPS to the Party Leader to have been given this thankless task (although it is true to say he is the first to be given this as an exclusive role) since I was elected in 1999. As I pointed out to him, his predecessors had little success even though MEPs are now co-legislators on at least double as much UK law as MPs. If the lamentable Lisbon treaty goes through the European Parliament will acquire co-decision powers to veto or amend in over 90% of EU competences, up from the current 80%.

There, in a nutshell, is the problem. The Conservative Party seems to be in denial about the EU. On the one hand, we deplore the fact that two thirds of UK legislation originates not in Whitehall but in Brussels. However, when it comes to accepting that reality in practical policy terms, we largely go into denial mode. Most young aspiring and talented politicians I meet think only of Westminster as a serious career option. Brussels is still largely shunned as an opportunity for a serious political career, or at best seen as a launch pad by even those coming from parties committed to the European project as we have seen by the likes of the current leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg as well as his competitor Chris Huhne, both ex MEPs. Nevertheless I was pleased that my two former Conservative MEP colleagues who entered the 2005 UK parliament, namely Robert Goodwill and Theresa Villiers, had their experience in the European Parliament and talents recognised with accelerated promotions to front bench jobs.

Last October at party conference I sat next to a former member of the front bench. He asked me my role in the Conservative delegation, to which I replied that I was foreign affairs spokesman. This aroused his sceptical interest: ‘Why do we need a foreign affairs spokesman in Brussels?’ he huffed. This, to me, was another case of denial rather than ignorance – after all, this MP who had served as shadow minister in this area of policy would surely have known about the Common Foreign and Security Policy outlined in the Maastricht treaty negotiated by John Major. He may even know that as well as the EU being the largest multilateral Aid donor and controlling international trade policy that in future the European Parliament will control the budget of the external action service or EU diplomatic service. But it underlined to me that however influential the European Parliament becomes in making EU laws or scrutinising EU policy, the party back home sadly still prefers to think of MEPs as at best part of a powerless talking shop and at worst a waste of space.

The attitude in many other EU member states, and notably within other countries' Conservative parties, is starkly different. When governments change it is considered entirely normal, even appropriate, for an MEP of suitable talent to be extracted from Brussels to fill a senior ministerial position back home. The European Parliament contains a handful of former prime ministers and presidents and many former ministers. In this legislature alone several of my contemporaries have been drafted into government, where their knowledge of how things work in Brussels is considered invaluable. Bogdan Klich, a centre-right Polish MEP, was made defence minister last year; Toomas Ilves left the European Parliament when he was elected Estonia's state president. Of course, the British system in practice precludes non-Westminster parliamentarians from entering government - something that perhaps ought to change - but other countries see their senior MEPs in a much more positive light than Britain does.

Like it or not, the EU’s role in our lives is growing. Parliament has a chance to put a halt to that by refusing to ratify the Lisbon treaty. However, if, as we suspect, British MPs ratify the treaty and the matter is not referred to voters in a referendum as requested by our party and promised by Tony Blair, the European Parliament’s role will continue to grow. MEPs will extend their role as co-legislators across many more policy areas, and for all that the increasingly Eurosceptic Conservative parliamentary party in Westminster works itself into a frenzy MPs will have less legislative powers, although in fairness the Lisbon Treaty seeks to partially enhance the power of national parliaments in EU legislation. Also Theresa May in her discussion paper is right that we could do a lot more to increase the power of MPs over the executive in scrutinising what UK Ministers get-up to in the EU Council of Ministers as practiced by the Danish parliament which give specific mandates to vote one way or another to their Ministers.

I like most Conservatives am against the further ceding of powers to Brussels as embodied in the Lisbon treaty, without the express consent of the British people. However, even if the treaty is killed off the influence of MEPs is unlikely to go away. The party needs to accept this as a fact of life and to bring MEPs committed to fighting for British interests more into the mainstream. The logical consequence of relegating the work of MEPs and the European Parliament to the margins is to mentally withdraw from the European Union with a view to actual withdrawal at a later date. Much as that understandably appeals to many Tory party members, it has never been party policy and is unlikely to become so in the near future.

11am: Over at CentreRight Jim McConalogue has responsed to this piece.

Comments

[tory]

Spot on Charles! Finally someone speaking sense on this issue, rather than the usual loony rant from Dan Hannan and crew.

Your comments from the MP on your position as Foreign Affairs chair proves the ignorance of many in the party of the real role of the Parliament.

You also say that it has never been our policy to withdraw from Europe, how right you are. I just wish some of the other MEPs had your sense, and understanding of what the Conservative Party actually stand for in Europe.

[Tony Sharp]

Charles said: "But it underlined to me that however influential the European Parliament becomes in making EU laws or scrutinising EU policy, the party back home sadly still prefers to think of MEPs as at best part of a powerless talking shop and at worst a waste of space."

OK, Charles. United Kingdom MEPs comprise less than 10% of the 785 members in the European Parliament. Of the 78 UK members, if you include Sajjad Karim, the Conservatives have 28 seats - or 3.56% of the total European Parliament membership.

The percentage of UK Conservatives in the European Parliament is broadly the same as the percentage of the combined SNP, Plaid, DUP and Sinn Fein (if they sat) membership in the House of Commons. The amount of influence our MEPs can bring to bear is further diluted by being members of the federalist EPP and having to support its principles.

In a Parliament full to the brim of federalists, legislation is passed that is frequently alien to UK conservative values and generally out of sync with our policies; despite us having a number of noble MEPs who campaign tirelessly to promote and represent the views of the people who sent them to Brussels/Strasbourg.

So, while recognising the hard work and dedication of many of our Conservative MEPs, I would be interested to know just how our group in the European Parliament is anything but powerless.

[Tony Makara]

I suppose being a Conservative MEP is a bit like being a goalkeeper! The standard of MEP definitely needs to improve, still it would have to fall a long way to achieve the depths reached by Labour MEPs, the worst of which is intellectual nonentity Gary Titley, heaven knows where they dredged him up from, they must have won him in a raffle or something. Anyhow Mr Titley is now retiring because having milked the gravy-train he is now chicken scared of losing his seat.

Any prospective Conservative MEPs who feel like learning a foreign language should contact me and I'll show them my technique for learning languages, in 200 hours of study using my method you will be fluent!

[TFA Tory]

Perhaps Charles can demonstrate how Michael Howard's "Malaga" agreement has been delivered by the Conservative delegation - our own ED budget, secretariat and campaign on repatriation of powers from Brussels. In reality, he can't because our delegation, with a few honourable exceptions, sold out Howard and Cameron to the EPP. The Malaga Agreement was never implemented and the ED Group exists in name only. Given the chance, the Europhiles MEPs, their ranks enhanced by the Lib Dem traitor, will do so again over the formation of the new Group.

Our colleagues here may remember the fuss that the delegation made about Marta Andreasen choosing the Conservatives to publicise the EU accounting scandal. In practice, Andreasen was let by the delegation who gave into pressure from the Commission and the EPP. What did Andreasen do? She became the Treasurer of UKIP. She regards the treacherous Tories in Brussels as the real fruitcakes and nutters.

This article is nothing but a smokescreen by another self-serving, quisling Tory MEP. We would not have suffer him if we realised that we are Better Off Out of the EU and well rid of the expensive talking shop that calls itself the European Parliament.

[Rod Sellers]

Predictable self justification from the 'its unavoidable' tendency. Clearly not a man of deep principle and the reason why so many of us distrust the Tory High Command. His argument comes down to 'we don't really like the EU - but what can we do ?'

Presumably, 70/80% of the electorate are also 'in denial'

Remember Edmund Burke. "Nobody makes a bigger mistake who thinks he can do nothing because he can do little"

I'm with Dan Hannan all the way.

[michael mcgough]

If MEPs were important you wouldn't have so many seeking to become MPs.MPs never seek to become MEPs but those that are kicked out by the public seek the power and money of a commissioners job.MEPs are in the EU and run by the EU.Votes in the EU Parliament are a joke.If this guy had any decency he'd be campaigning HARD for our denied referendum not writing this self indulgent ego inflated puff.

[George Hinton]

Charles makes the point well that the EU is in the driving seat and that the majority of legislation passed at Westminster is Brussels derived, therefore we should take more notice of Brussels.
However, in saying that Charles fails to recognise the fault-line with his argument, our government will not let that happen. NuLab are content to cede power to Brussels but will not let the electorate have any say in that decision. This removes the democratic choice from the first level, our Parliament, and the 2nd level, Charles and his colleagues at the EU Parliament are comprimised by their support and interaction with a body that has not been formally inducted into the British political structure.
So, yes, Charles is right to say we need to treat the EU with more care, they do rule over us, but that rule has yet to be formalised and ratified by the people, not a political elite.
The logical conclusion therefore to be drawn, is that we must seek our referendum and give the actualitie a legal imprimateur.
Can we rely on Gordo the Ineffectual?, well according to his Defence QC, NO.
So Charles and his colleagues will have to act a little more indepentantly, certainly more circumspectly and support the growing calls for a referendum, thus cementing their position and power.

[George Hinton]

Charles makes the point well that the EU is in the driving seat and that the majority of legislation passed at Westminster is Brussels derived; therefore we should take more notice of Brussels.
However, in saying that Charles fails to recognise the fault-line with his argument, our government will not let that happen. NuLab are content to cede power to Brussels but will not let the electorate have any say in that decision. This removes the democratic choice from the first level, our Parliament, and the 2nd level, Charles and his colleagues at the EU Parliament are compromised by their support and interaction with a body that has not been formally inducted into the British political structure.
So, yes, Charles is right to say we need to treat the EU with more care, they do rule over us, but that rule has yet to be formalised and ratified by the people, not a political elite.
The logical conclusion therefore to be drawn, is that we must seek our referendum and give the actualitie a legal imprimateur.
Can we rely on Gordo the Ineffectual?, well according to his Defence QC, NO.
So Charles and his colleagues will have to act a little more independently, certainly more circumspectly and support the growing calls for a referendum, thus cementing their position and power.

[John Leonard]

I have increasingly believed there is little point to having MEP's. This vacuous self-justifying platform does not provide one iota of substantive reasoning in support of the existence of such representatives.

Perhaps, instead of telling us what we should do for MEP's, Dr Tannock should explain what it is that MEP's have done for us that makes them so important to the national interest?

Of course Dr Tannock can't because MEP's are effectively powerless in the Oligarchy (which they are not part of) that is the EU.

Instead, Dr Tannock uses the arrogant justification of 'Tough, you're trapped now - we're here to stay so you better start liking it' is the very reason that I oppose the EU.

The image this argument creates for me is that of some debilitating disease inceasingly ravaging the body of the British political system. Its about time this disease was cured and we no longer had to suffer its symptoms.

Using his argument does he also believe that the British Government in 1939, should have turned around and said 'Well Hitler is in Poland now so we had better just accept it'?

I have been willing to accept the party's official policy of moving for the repatriation of powers and that the EU has some value. However, every time I read such Europhile drivel as this, I for one, move one step closer to the view - BETTER OF OUT!.

[Gospel of Enoch]

All MEPs should be required to study the wisdom of the Blessed Baroness, as published in Statecraft: "UKIP took votes from the Tories because they were seen to have a clearer and more principled position".

Unless and until the Conservatives address that, no one will take their EU credentials seriously.

[tory]

John Leonard you should join UKIP then they will be much more suited to your views.

[top of the shot]

Lets be honest, as far as the London list is concerned, most of the new candidates are not exactly the sharpest tools in the box. A gaggle of over inflated Councillors and one person on the short list does not produce a bean when googled !

Apart from Syed who is an excellent MEP who gets out and about in ALL parts of London (note that Charles), I am note bothered who gets ranked on the list.

[Gary Elsby]

Dr. Charles Tannock. Now there's a name for the future.
I say future, because he has no chance whatsoever of getting that kind of message over in todays Tory Noddy land.

Tannock, appears to be a winner. Today's Tories are yesterdays losers, and the day before, for that matter. Let's not forget today, also.

So what chance of Tannock scoring here? None.
Why? Because Tories of today still haven't a clue why they were kicked out in the first place.

When you're told, you don't listen. You still think that success is just anther Dave speech away, or a Georgie tax dodge away. It isn't at all.

A winning Conservative streak sees an official apology of the Thatcher past (EU excluded) and a little bit of remorse.

Then people like Tannock (who talks a semblnce of sense, for a Tory) may move the Tory Party forward.

You lot look like Dad's Army, barricading every cul-de-Sac in the Country.

Totally batty. No International vision. Isolationist (UKIP/BNP)and losers

[TFA Tory]

Can't we ban that Labour Europhile tosser, Gary Elsby? Feck off, as Father Ted would say, back to Labour Home with the rest of the morons like Recess Monkey.

[Treacle]

Nice bloke

Gone native

Should have been binned at re-selection

Denied the opportunity

Stitch up

[Gospel of Enoch]

If UKIP are so isolationist, Gary Elsby, why do we have supporters all over the world? (I'm currently in Switzerland, myself, and have family in Hong Kong, New Zealand, Canada etc.)

The UK would be far better off with a relationship with the EU akin to the EU's relationship with Switzerland.

[Sally Roberts]

"The logical consequence of relegating the work of MEPs and the European Parliament to the margins is to mentally withdraw from the European Union with a view to actual withdrawal at a later date. Much as that understandably appeals to many Tory party members, it has never been party policy and is unlikely to become so in the near future."

And very pleased I am to hear you say this, Charles! You are a credit to the Delegation and I am very pleased that you will be continuing your good work for us over in Brussels. I am delighted to see you writing such common sense in contrast to some others recently! I daresay I shall get "flayed alive" for that comment but frankly I am beyond caring!

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

I wish to thank Charles for this very thoughtful article. He is right to say that we do not treat the European Parliament with respect and importance, despite it becoming more and more powerful.

I was sad to note the people chosen for the London region (my patch) are, mostly, complete non-entities I would not even consider for a parish council, let alone the EP. The less I say, at least publicly, on this matter, the better.

Charles is a classic example of how a British Conservative MEP can stand up for Britain's interests in Europe and engage constructively with colleagues in and outside the EPP. How very different from the childish antics of Hannan and Helmer.

Gary Elsby, although a Labour troll, makes a number of points which it is impossible to disagree with.

[David]

Oh dear - people still believe it's possible to 'stand up for Britain's interests' within the EU.

The only MEPs we want are one's who want out.

[Martin Coxall]

@David:

Speak for yourself. The MEPs that I want are the ones who will DO THEIR JOB, and do it well. They are legislators, and that's what I expect them to do. Legislate, as Conservatives. I'm not sure that's too much to ask.

Sending people to what is rapidly becoming one of the largest and most powerful legislatures in the world to stand as symbols and act like spoilt, unpopular kids does nobody any credit. Not the MEPs, not the party, not the country.

Thanks, Dr. Tannock, for a thoughtful article and being a credit to democracy.

[Treacle]

I understand you were not at the selection interviews Justin so how can you comment on the quality of the candidates on offer? Or do you just react to agree with any europhiile sentiment like a dead frog touched by an electric current?

As for Mr Elsby, I am hardly surprised you agree with him.. after all he is a member of your old party isn't he?

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Treacle - you give the impression that you WERE at the meeting, so I assume you are an elected Conservative official. It's just a shame that you don't have the balls to tell us WHO you are. You just carp endlessly from the sidelines using an AOL address. How sad is that?

I drew my conclusions having been to the available websites of some of the candidate and having viewed the CVs of others (at Westminster and GLA interviews).

[Martin Coxall]

Is there always this level of subintellectual UKIP whinnying any time the EU is mentioned?

That's depressing. It seems a far cry from the level of informed debate over on the Diary. Sad.

[John Wilkin]

Charles, There's a lot of invective in this thread which I'm sad to see and which I think devalues the arguments of the individuals concerned.

I don't think anyone in the Conservative Party is in denial about Britian's membership of the EU, the point is than not all of us are resigned to it. Whether it was your intention or not your article - in detailing just how Brussels role in our lives is growing - makes a very good case for secession.

For me, the Constitution Lisbon treaty was the treaty was the tipping point. If we can reform the EU from within then that would be brilliant. I would welcome the chance to vote in a referendum on the Constitution, however having seen how much respect the EU gave to the results of the French and Dutch referenda, I suspect that a No vote in the UK would simply result in Brussels trying to implement the terms of the treaty by other 'backdoor' means.

As long as we remain in the EU we will be fighting a continuous rearguard action against Brussels ultimate agenda - the creation of a United States of Europe. It's time for us to leave. As you say this is not currently Conservative party policy, however there are a lot of people in the Party who would like it to be our policy and who will do everything we can to make that happen

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

The last mainstream political party to advocate EU withdrawal were hammered, John (think 1983). Do you really want to go down that path?

Presumably you supported our Party after we supported both the Single European Act and the Maastricht Treaty - without referendums? This Treaty is 'small fry' in comparison. I suspect that, if we were in government, we would have signed the Lisbon Treaty, too. Opposition allows for grandstanding...

[Martin Coxall]

@John Wilkin:

I wonder how 'many' truly counts as many. However, I tend to agree that there's a poisonous atmosphere that has developed in Britain because many people think that the will of the British people has been ignored.

Now, that may or may not be true, since the people of Britain have systematically elected Europhile parties since the Common Market referendum.

Nonetheless, we need to lance this boil, and settle the matter once and for all. So, frankly, a referendum on Britain's continued membership of the EU needs to be called.

Now, I would expect the Conservative Party policy would be to campaign to remain as a member, but those who would rather secede would be free to campaign for that under the understanding that, whichever the British people decide, we will agree, as a party, to abide by it.

Which is to say, if we vote to secede, we immediately begin bilateral negotiations to establish a more Swiss-style relationship with the EU, and those in favour of EU membership will accept that decision for at least a generation.

If the people vote to remain a full EU member, the Eurosceptic wing will work to embrace EU membership for at least a generation and seek to work within its structures to obtain the kind of flexible EU of member states we've always claimed to want.

The important point being that, whichever decision prevails, we as a party will accept and abide by it, and our incessant flamewars and hand-wringing about the EU would come to an end.

Please let this happen, because all the whining about Europe makes me sick.

[Dale]

"Is there always this level of subintellectual UKIP whinnying any time the EU is mentioned?

That's depressing. It seems a far cry from the level of informed debate over on the Diary. Sad."

What was it that you said to me about resorting to rudeness?

Unfortunately Mr coxall, we are no longer living in the age of consensus. The mid nineties to the mid naughties was the era of consensus, The conservative party was living in a world of its own at that point so we didn't really notice it, while we were debating everyone else was agreeing.

People are starting to beleive that we should be living much more empowered lives and therefore like to express their views.

There are liberal Democrats that are passionately eurosceptic, nd never reach anywhere near the top of the party, but are still Lib Dems. There are
some conservatives that are eurosceptics does not mean they are contributing to a 'level of subintellectual whinnying'.

You must appreciate differences of opinion without resorting to petty attacks.

I agree with CharlesTannock's
assesment that the EP will continue to grow in power, and I beleive it will grow in proportion to the other EU institutions and so will still be comparatively weak.

But where we disagree, is that I beleive in the 21st century power should be being devolved to much lower levels and that a massive centralisation of power is not unnavoidable. I must confess that if the lisbon treaty is ratified, then I will not be able to continue supporting our eu membership, and although I wll certainly not vote UKIP, I may have to start supporting more eurosceptic groups within the conservative party.

[Dale]

"Presumably you supported our Party after we supported both the Single European Act and the Maastricht Treaty - without referendums? This Treaty is 'small fry' in comparison. I suspect that, if we were in government, we would have signed the Lisbon Treaty, too. Opposition allows for grandstanding..."

Two wrongs do not make a right Justin, besies, maastricht almost destroyed the conservative party.

[John Wilkin]

No Justin I didn't support the Maastricht treaty - there was a campaign for a referendum then too, which I was actively involved in.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Very good post, Martin. The Lib Dems are the only party to get this issue right. There is no need to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty; we should have one on our membership of the EU itself (this, after all, is what many euro-sceptics want -not one of a specific treaty). As you say, "we need to lance this boil, and settle the matter once and for all."

I would be very surprised indeed if the Conservative Party didn't campaign for a yes vote.

Tony Blair missed a very good opportunity to take us into the Euro. He could have easily have won one shortly after the May '97 election. It was a wasted opportunity.

[Martin Coxall]

It's clear to me that a lot of this party are still hung up on Maastricht because of the way it almost destroyed the party.

But You know what? I was 15 at the time. A child. I DON'T CARE.

You realise that there's an entire generation of voters out there now for whom the EU has always existed? For whom it is as much a part of the British constitutional settlement as Westminster.

Bear that in mind when you're dwelling in the past and obsessing about the shoulda/woulda/coulda stupidities of the battle to destroy the Major government that you failed at.

Reliving past defeats is no way to make policy for the future. It's ancient history. Let it go.

[Martin Coxall]

@Dale:

Yes, I was a bit rude, for which I apologise. But I'm sure at the very least there are a couple of UKIP trolls in this post. You can normally tell a UKIP member: paranoia, anger, limited grasp of language.

And they're so irritating that it's hard not to get tetchy.

I know, I know. DON'T FEED THE TROLLS.

[Dale]

"The Lib Dems are the only party to get this issue right."

Even though opinion polls show that they are wrong?

" There is no need to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty;"

Even though the public want a referendum, there is still no need?

"we should have one on our membership of the EU itself (this, after all, is what many euro-sceptics want -not one of a specific treaty)"

What about the many eurosceptics and europhiles and the vast majority of the public that want a referendum on the treaty?

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

They are misguided, fuelled by the red tops and others. How many have actually read, let alone understand, the Treaty?

[Martin Coxall]

@Dale:

I think you may have misread what Justin said. He said that what the people really want is a referendum on /EU membership/, not the Treaty of Lisbon. And the Lib Dems are the only party to be proposing this.

I think he's absolutely right, because I said it a few posts before him. :)

In any case, you have to accept that the Treaty of Lisbon will have been ratified by the time of the next Conservative government.

If you really want a referendum in the future, it's gonna have to be on continued membership.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

I actually made the point first, Martin, although you beat me to it on here! (-:

http://hunterandshooter.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-lib-dems-are-right-on-europe.html

[Dale]

"It's clear to me that a lot of this party are still hung up on Maastricht because of the way it almost destroyed the party.

But You know what? I was 15 at the time. A child. I DON'T CARE."

I too don't care about the maastricht treaty, I was 3 when it came into force.

"You realise that there's an entire generation of voters out there now for whom the EU has always existed? For whom it is as much a part of the British constitutional settlement as Westminster."

My generation is fairly eurosceptic, not because we oppose all that is european but because we see the eu as something counterproductive in an age suitable for edemocracy, we don't hate the idea of powers transfered from westminster to brussels, we hate that it is being kept away from us, we hate that decisions affecting our lives are not ours to make.

I don't know a sigle person my age (18) that supports closer integration, I know a few that support the status quo, most support repatriation of powers and a significant minority that think we would be better off out.

[Martin Coxall]

@Justin:

On its own, the Treaty of Lisbon is, in a real way, completely unreadable.

I have read what the TEU/TFEU/CFR become /as amended/ by the Treaty of Lisbon (courtesy OpenEurope), but I have a sneaking suspicion I'm in the minority...

Probably the government's greatest failing was in its poor wording of its "clarification" on the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which does anything but.

Despite common belief, the Treaty on European Union, Treaty on the Function of the European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights are not hard to read or full of impenetrable legalese. They're just long and most people are lazy.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Dale, I am 27.

[Dale]

"They are misguided, fuelled by the red tops and others. How many have actually read, let alone understand, the Treaty?"

I appreciate what you are saying Justin, but that is democracy. We are not living in a soviet state where an elite council decides what is best for the people. If you want to live ina democracy you have to accept what you may perceive as 'demogoguery'.

"I think you may have misread what Justin said. He said that what the people really want is a referendum on /EU membership/, not the Treaty of Lisbon. And the Lib Dems are the only party to be proposing this."

I understood what he said, but perhaps may not have been clear refuting his point, I meant that opinion polls show that the libdems position on a referendum only on membership and not the treaty is unpopular with the public. They would like to see a referendum on both.

[Martin Coxall]

@Dale:

I tend to agree with you. Is it not a case of being Eurosceptic, but something more fundamental than that: authoritosceptic?

After all, decisions taken in Westminster or your local council are not really any more 'yours' to make than those taken in Strasbourg or Brussels.

This party's mantra should be that of the new localism: only centralise where necessary, always decentralise where possible.

It's worth pointing out that the above mantra need not be incompatible with the EU. The Treaty of Lisbon makes "proportionality" an explicit aim of the commission, after all.

It'll be up to us to watch them closely and make sure they stick to it.

The biggest problem with Tories adhering to a principle of "decentralise where possible" is that for most Tory MPs it will mean breaking the habit of a lifetime.

[Dale]

"Dale, I am 27."

This may sound stupid but, Is there a reason you told me that?

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

They want both, do they? If they had the referendum that I suggest, then they wouldn't need the other. What are you suggesting? To reject the Treaty then reject Europe or the other way round? We can't have our cake and eat it!

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

"I don't know a sigle person my age (18) that supports closer integration, I know a few that support the status quo, most support repatriation of powers and a significant minority that think we would be better off out."

Posted by: Dale | February 13, 2008 at 16:54

[Dale]

"To reject the Treaty then reject Europe or the other way round?"

How about rejecting eu control over foreign policy and accepting eu control over trade by supporting the status quo and opposing the power transfers of the new treaty.

"We can't have our cake and eat it!"

I hate to tell you this but OFCOURSE WE CAN (within reason) why could we not have a two speed europe wherebye we could move further in or further out as we wish?

""I don't know a sigle person my age (18) that supports closer integration, I know a few that support the status quo, most support repatriation of powers and a significant minority that think we would be better off out."

Posted by: Dale | February 13, 2008 at 16:54 "

May I ask why you just repeated my comment?

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Because I am only 9 years older than you and support closer integration...

[Dale]

"Because I am only 9 years older than you and support closer integration"

In my defence, I did say people that I KNOW, and I dont know you. I also said people my AGE, (I rounded up to 18) and you are 10 yeas older than me and with all due respect, you are not a typical person, you have always been a political person even back in the days when you were giving advice about london's homelessness problems.

[Martin Coxall]

I think, Dale, that he's saying that we tend to seek out people of a similar mind, so you're not knowing anybody with a more pro-EU bent is indicative.

I consider myself neither pro- nor anti-Yerp. I see it as yet another tool to achieve our aims, albeit a big, scary, slightly alien and often unpredictable one.

I guess I like to think myself a Europragmatist.

[michael mcgough]

The arch EUrophiles and federasts who have for long insulted EUrealists by calling them xenophobes have coined a new term of abuse
NEOeurosceptics to insult those for whom the EU EXPERIMENT has thus far been acceptable but for whom the LISBON TREATY is a step too far.

On www.eureferendum.blogspot.com they have used the term 'formerly the UK' to describe our collection of regions post ratification.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

If you're 18 and I'm 27, that means I'm nine years older than you (-: