Ken Clarke urges retention of EPP membership

David Cameron's commitment to take Tory MEPs out of the European Peoples' Party was one of the few bankable commitments of his leadership bid.  Earlier this week the new Shadow Foreign Secretary, William Hague, said that the commitment would be honoured but Ken Clarke has used an interview with BBC1's Politics Show to protest against the move.  Mr Clarke is close to many of the Tory Party's MEPs - two-thirds of whom are said to oppose Mr Cameron's policy.

The former Chancellor of the Exchequer attempted to reposition himself as less of a Europhile during his ill-fated leadership bid but he told BBC1 that he thought Mr Cameron's EPP policy was not wise.  It is a "head-banging" policy, he said, and warned Mr Cameron that he was in danger of looking more extreme on Europe than any of his predecessors.  Mr Clarke is worried that, outside of the EPP, Tories could have no choice but to ally themselves with the European Parliament's ultra-right.

Mr Cameron must have hoped that getting Mr Clarke to join his big tent by getting him to chair the Democracy Taskforce would meet Lyndon Johnson's "better to have him inside the tent pissing out, then outside pissing in" maxim.  Mr Clarke has found a way to be inside the tent and still urinate at his leader's policy.

Mr Letwin, also on the Politics Show, attempted to play down the importance of the policy.  Mr Letwin said that voters were much more interested in issues like climate change and social justice - two of the six challenges that his policy groups will investigate over the next eighteen months.  Mr Letwin did insist, however, that Mr Cameron would deliver on his EPP commitment.

Comments

[James Hellyer]

Ken Clarke's appointment to the Democracy Taskforce is a bad joke. In office, Ken Clarke was a natural and enthusiastic centraliser of powers.

His enthusiasm for the undemocratic European Union should disqualify him from heading any pro-democracy drive, and his traditional views on government will likely deprive the taskforce of any enthusiasm for original thinking about localism and constitutional reform.

Much like the environment taskforce, the choice of personnel here would seem to indicate the narrow direction it's likely to travel in.

[Frank Young]

As I understand it David Cameron's policy is to withdraw from the EPP and form a NEW grouping of MEPs much closer to the moderate euro scepticism which is in the mainstream of our party. I'm disappointed the KC has criticised this, while i consider myself a pro-european in the Clark/Heseltine mould I think we should wait and see the detail of this new grouping.

As for Clarke and the Democracy task force, KC used much of his leadership bid to talk about the role of Parliament/ Civil service etc. His apointment should, I think, be treated with optimism.

[James Hellyer]

"KC used much of his leadership bid to talk about the role of Parliament/ Civil service etc."

Clarke used his leadership bid to discuss how Blair's government had eroded the discipline of cabinet government, and had politicised the civil service.

In other words Clarke was championing the traditional governance model. What he didn't discuss were the respecitve roles of local and central government. It's here that his own political positions are likely to act as a roadblock to the sort of radical thinking offered by the localism and direct democracy agendas.

As education secretary, Clarke vetoed any attempt to devolve power to parents by introducing any sort of education voucher. Above all, while in office Clarke was consistently contemptuous of the performance and potential of local government. In all his senior posts, he supported centralisation with unabashed vigour.

None of this makes him the man likely to champion - or even consider - new localism. Clarke has demonstrated no grasp of how limited government works and shows no enthusiasm for spreading power downwards.

All of which are reasons to be concerned about his role in a democracy taskforce. In fact, all the taskforces announced so far - with the exception of the Social Justice portfolio - sound very 1997 in their thinking.

[James Hellyer]

And as far as the EPP is comcerned:

"Mr Clarke has found a way to be inside the tent and still urinate at his leader's policy."

Does this actually surprise anyone?

[Goldie]

Excellent!

Ken Clarke continues to play his essential role aiding the Enemy!

But this is good: it shows Nice Boy Cameron that in politics you cannot be nice all the time.

[Rob]

I think its time Clarke realised that he has lost 3 leadership contests and that his views on Europe are not needed. Cameron was elected by a 2:1 majority of the party membership with a promise to withdraw from the EPP, if Clarke cant accept that then maybe he should resign his seat.

[Mid-Atlantic]

But this puts Ken right on the spot, don't you think? Either the policy doesn't go ahead (pretty darned unlikely I'd have thought, as it would be tantamount to declaring defeat within a week of winning the leadership) or else Ken has to back down publicly. There will be very strong pressure, surely, even from his supporters for him to back Cameron, especially given the bounce we've just had. The feel now is very different from that at a similar early stage of the last few leaders. This might just be rather like Clarke's leadership campaign... the moment he looks down and realises he ran off the edge of the cliff a while ago, and his feet are just going round and round like a cartoon character before the long drop.

[Frank Young]

In defence of Ken...He's stated his case, its more sensible to stay in the EPP, which I quite understand the arguments for. But Cameron is the leader and has stated that withdrawel will go ahead. It would be strange for Ken to change the views of a life time, he doesn't need to re-cant or anything of the sort. He will put forward sensible, workable views on improving democratisation while William Hague will work on a sensible, workable withdrawal of our MEPs from the EPP. There's no row here, business as usual.

[elena]

Oh, fantastic. Only 5 days in and Clarke has to ignite another Euro row. Although I was an early supporter of his leadership bid, his comments today show that he is an extremely selfish politician. On BBC News just now they were taking the "already the Tory Party are divided over Europe" angle and that just isn't good.

[Derek]

Clarke is always going to stick to his views on the EU, which is why he could not have been party leader. In fact it is doubtful whether he ought to have any prominent role, as it gives him a bigger platform to promote his own views which are at odds with the party. However DC must have known all this when he appointed him, so he can hardly be surprised at this latest statement from him.

[malcolm]

I'm quite sad about this.I too supported Kens leadership bid.I did this for three reasons,firstly he is a very effective destroyer of New Labour in parliament,he made a commitment to honest,cabinet government and I thought he had taken a more realistic line on Europe.
Sadly it appears now the latter is not the case.Ken must be made to realise that his side has lost the European arguement within our party and lost comprehensively.I hope Cameron listens to Kens views with respect and then completely rejects them.

[Chris (Tory)]

YAY! The BBC is already saying its taken only 5 days for Europe to divide the party once more. I think bringing KC into a policy making role was a great idea, but he needs to respect our new leaders "manifesto" promises, you can't suddenly expected DC to turn around and say "Sorry everyone, KC wants it this way. By the way I won't do a complete u-turn again".

[Frank Young]

I think there is going to be an argument about this, most MEPs want to stay in - it gives the more influence - while some of the headbanger MEPs would advocate joining the hard right withdrawal grouping.

As long as Cameron can labour the point about "consistancy" it could in fact have the advantage of making us look honest rather than oportunistic. Remember Blair has sometimes used internal party arguments to make him look good and distant from the more extreme Labour elements.

[Chris Palmer]

I do find it rather strange that the Conservatives are in the same European Parliament grouping as other centre-right federalists, when clearly the Conservatives are not European federalists.

Clearly the Conservative MEP's feel that they will lose something (power I should imagine - that's usually what it is) if they were to leave the EPP. Perhaps David Cameron should come up with a new list of European Parliament candidates.

[CLARKE MUST GO]

Why Conservative MEPs should not sit with the EPP

November 10 2005

It is wrong to talk a good euro-sceptic story at home, then cosy-up to the federalists in Brussels

The EPP is not a centre-right party. It angrily rejects the terms right-wing, or centre-right, or conservative. It insists that it is a centre party. On employment and social issues it is often to the left of New Labour, and to the left of the Liberal Group in the European parliament.

The EPP calls itself "the motor of European integration". It wants an EU army, an EU justice system, an EU "FBI". It wants an end to the British rebate, and to the UK's permanent seat on the UN Security Council. It wants the euro and the EU Constitution. Just which part of this agenda are we Conservatives supposed to support?

It destroys the credibility of Conservative EU policies, and gives credence to the accusations of fringe rejectionist parties, when we say one thing at home and do another in Brussels.

Membership of the EPP actually reduces our influence in Brussels

It is often argued that we gain influence by sitting with the largest group in the parliament. This would be true only if we generally agreed with them. As it is, membership reduces our influence and prevents us from promoting a clear Conservative alternative in Europe.

The EPP wants us in, not only because of the funding we bring them, and because we help them in the Brussels "numbers game", but primarily because within the group they can keep us quiet. In many debates, only group leaders speak, so no Conservative speaks at all, and German Christian Democrat Hans-Gert Poettering speaks on our behalf. In a recent debate, speaking on behalf of the whole group including inter alia the British Conservatives, he said "No one, but no one, can be permitted to stand in the way of European integration".

To rub salt in the wound, UKIP MEP Nigel Farage has done a deal with his group leader to share speaking time, so often he speaks when no Conservative speaks.

Outside the EPP, we should have a Conservative MEP on the "Conference of Presidents".

The "Conference of Presidents" is a key committee of group leaders where we are currently represented by Poettering. It sets the agenda for parliamentary business. If we leave the EPP, and before we even form a new group, we will have a Conservative representative on this vital committee for the first time in living memory.

Membership of the EPP costs us £½ million a year

The EPP top-slices nearly half of the annual €68,000 per capita parliamentary funding that MEPs attract -- a total of well over £½ million across our 27 MEPs. They spend this on pro-integration projects, when we could and should spend it on Conservative priorities.

We can form a new conservative group that would have real influence

Other national delegations committed to free markets, nation-states and an Atlanticist approach are desperate to join us (and this absolutely excludes any hard-right or extremist parties). We believe we could rapidly become the third largest group in the parliament after the EPP and the socialists. Then we could set a genuinely conservative agenda. We should also have more influence with the EPP than we have today, as a despised and trouble¬some minority (we could hardly have less influence than we have today!). They would have to negotiate our support in key areas, and pay for it with real concessions.

My own experience as a "non-inscrit" member demonstrates the point

Since I was expelled from the EPP in June, I have had nearly four times the parliamentary "information funding" than I had before (€38k a year against €10k previously), more speaking time (several times as the first Conservative speaker in debates, ahead of delegation leader Timothy Kirkhope), more staff support, and more access to parliamentary facilities. Best of all, I am no longer "sleeping with the enemy", or living a lie as a committed euro-sceptic in a passionately federalist group.

David Cameron is right. It is time for Conservative MEPs to leave the EPP.

Penned by Roger Helmer MEP.

[Gawain]

Talk about "hoist with your own petard". They are trying to play a Westminster game in a Euro list system. Since the MEP's were all elected on the basis of a "list" system wouldn't it be a very simple process to change the list ? Conservative Party membership will, presumably, have to be withdrawn from those who oppose party policy ? Put it to a vote of members to decide if needs be. If so they would have to stand down as the electorate voted for a party not for them as individuals ? Having pigged out on the taxpers largesse for a few years I am sure the small minority who voted for them wouldn't object if someone else was given the opportunity to get their snouts in the trough. This solution would be the sort of modern, democratic approach with a very "European" flavour that I am sure Ken Clarke and his Democracy Taskforce would support !

[CLARKE MUST GO]

Rushcliffe Conservatives, how much more evidence do you need? Clarke is disloyal to Cameron on Day1 - He is an unreconstructed Europhile impervious to tales of Brussels corruption and croneyism. In short he is an embarrassment.

Please Rushcliffe Conservatives, let us suffer no more. It is time to deselect Ken Clarke. Someone must propose a vote of no confidence, and stop this creature of the past from wrecking the future.

He doesn't give a fig for your views, Rushcliffe. SO why bother being loyal to Ken Clarke QC MP?

He should of course be party leader - not of the Conservatives, but of the Party he is actually working for - Labour.

The joke is over. Clarke Must Go.

[Chris (Tory)]

"If so they would have to stand down as the electorate voted for a party not for them as individuals ?"

Anyone remember a similar case with a certain someone called Robert Kilroy Silk? We'd end up losing half of our MEP's when they stood for re-election as "independent conservatives" a la Peter Law!

We need to sell the withdrawal policy to the MEPs not force it upon them. We need to realise there is a difference between being firm and being a bully. I'm sure if the MEPs were persuaded of the economic and policy related benefits by our excellent new foreign affair spokesperson we would get somewhere, without having the media crawling all over a massive split in the party. I'd far rather remain in the EPP than go through many more years of infighting that merely damages our reputation, I do however believe that with logical reasoning and adequate persuassion, we will get somewhere... maybe we could offer Sir Malc's seat to Timothy Kirkhope ;)

[BURST THE CLARKE HOT AIR BALLOON]

Clarke's not the MP for Rushcliffe. He's the MP for Europe. Who appointed him to work against his own country, his own party and his own constituency?

The Bildeburger Group? The BBC? Tony Blair? Does it matter? Just send him packing.

Make way for the future before the ego of Kenneth Clarke destroys us all.

[Editor]

I've just listened to Radio 4's Westminster Hour and the EPP row rumbles on.

Caroline Jackson - the only female Tory MEP - has said that she will quit the Tory grouping if DC insists on leaving the EPP.

Mrs Jackson's husband is Robert Jackson - the former Wantage Tory MP (succeeded by Ed Vaizey) who defected to Labour earlier this year.

[Editor]

A WARNING TO CLARKE MUST GO + BURST THE CLARKE HOT AIR BALOON: I do not like the fact you are using Roger Helmer's internet address. This is close to impersonation and I will ban you if you do this again. Please make your point without suggesting a connection with Mr Helmer... or anyone else for that matter.

[A H Matlock]

Let her go then. Her husband isn't missed and neither will she. These MEPs have got to take a long, hard look at themselves and consider to which group - the Conservative Party or the EPP - they owe their allegiance. I think the answer to that is pretty clear and if they can't work that out for themselves, then we can do without them.

[Jonathan Sheppard]

The problem is two thirds of our MEPs dont want to leave(as I understand it) - I agree with DC on this - but he has a battle to do it. Well William Hague does - and interestingly wasn't it Hague who joined our European Grouping up to the EPP? What's the solution?

[A H Matlock]

Jonathan. I thought it was Michael Howard? I agree that it isn't going to be easy, and it's not going to happen overnight. William Hague will need time to achieve this as amicably as possible, but Cameron has a clear mandate from the Conservative Party and it's members to undertake this and I hope our MEPs will respect that.

[James Hellyer]

"Caroline Jackson - the only female Tory MEP - has said that she will quit the Tory grouping if DC insists on leaving the EPP."

Fine. It will save her region the trouble of removing her from their list.

[Chris Palmer]

"Let her go then. Her husband isn't missed and neither will she."

Good point and too true. Many more where she came from I can imagine.

[Jonathan Sheppard]

You could be right - but isnt it interesting that Cameron got a clear 2:1 mandate - which is pretty much the ratio Tim Kirkhope got in his leadership election with Chris Heaton Harris. This one needs some careful handling. I'm sure DC is up to it - it just doesn;t help to have our own side going back to the Europe issue only days after a leader has been voted in.

[A H Matlock]

Chris. Indeed. I'm actually surprised that she has hung about as long as she has after he decamped.

[Jonathan Sheppard]

What I find frustrating is if we as a party let this issue dominate the coming days weeks - when we have rightly said time and time again - this is more of an internal party issue than one which the voters care about.

If only we could knock a few heads together!

[A H Matlock]

Jonathan, he did get a similar vote but on a much smaller scale and among a much more exclusive group. I don't think the two are really comparable. I agree that this needs to be handled delicately to avoid a rash of bad publicity so early into DC's leadership. In the final analysis, I think Conservative MEPs will have to respect the will of the leader and the membership of the Conservative Party or risk losing their positions.

[James Hellyer]

"This one needs some careful handling"

The best way would be to leave it until after the iminent regional list ranking meetings - all that has to be done is ensure that our current europhile MEPs are either removed from their region's lists, or are are ranked so low they've no chance of election.

That would be party democracy at work.

[Chris Palmer]

"Chris. Indeed. I'm actually surprised that she has hung about as long as she has after he decamped."

Perhaps she's staging some sort of covert operation and infiltrating the Conservatives in aid of the Labour Party?

I think that Conservative MEP's need to be quietly told that they are in fact dispensible and if they don't fall into line very quickly then they might find themselves out of a job.

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Oh absolutely - it wasn't a comparable group at all - but it does show a big difference in opinion.

It is interesting that in my region - East Mids - 4 of the MEPs elected were clearly standing on a Eurosceptics platform - Two UKIP and then Helmer and Heaton Harris.

For me it showed how out of touch the Lib Dems are on this issue.

I still think the issue cant be allowed to rumble on - or dominate the headlines. It would be shameful if a few people let all the good work which has gone on during the leadership campaign which has shown our party in such a good light - be undone by going back to internal fighting.

[Chris Palmer]

"I still think the issue cant be allowed to rumble on - or dominate the headlines. It would be shameful if a few people let all the good work which has gone on during the leadership campaign which has shown our party in such a good light - be undone by going back to internal fighting."

Again, another excellent point.

[A H Matlock]

I certainly agree that it musn't be allowed to dominate the news over the next several weeks, and I'm sure Cameron's media team are already at work to ensure it isn't. Delegating the issue to William Hague is one way of turning the temperature on the issue down a bit and it's only the intervention of Ken Clarke (who should know better by now) and Caroline Jackson (who should bugger off) that has put it in the news this weekend.

The worst publicity that could come out of this would occur were Cameron to backtrack on this commitment. It makes eminent sense and to be honest, I don't think ordinary people really care much which grouping the Conservative Party aligns itself with in the European Parliament. Naturally, this also means that we should not, under any circumstances, align ourselves with continental fascists or other unsavouries. We should simply sit by ourselves until we can fashion a new, moderate Eurosceptic grouping.

[Jonathan Sheppard]

You are certainly right that people dont care - in the sense I cant rememmber it ever being mentioned to me in my election campaign.

Im sure DC is on the case - it just always seems like just when things get sorted our side start stoking the flames AGAIN....

[A H Matlock]

It does. I've always been well disposed to Ken Clarke, but his behaviour here is particularly disappointing coming at a time when, for the first time in years, we are finally gaining real momentum and traction.

He should simply have said something along the lines of 'My views on this subject are well known and I have nothing further to add to them' rather than handing the media exactly what they wanted - talk of a Tory split (however trival.)

[Clare Lewis]

If I were Michael Howard I would have had Robert Jackson shot when he moved to Labour. Seriously. He needed it. Howard is a high powered barrister with connections that could have seen Jackson with a gaping hole in his cranium.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

""If so they would have to stand down as the electorate voted for a party not for them as individuals ?"

Anyone remember a similar case with a certain someone called Robert Kilroy Silk? We'd end up losing half of our MEP's when they stood for re-election as "independent conservatives" a la Peter Law!"

Losing the whip does not mean an MEP has to stand down (a Conservative MEP had the whip removed earlier this year for repeatedly breaching the party line but still sits in the European Parliament and still proudly claims to be a loyal Conservative, see also the cited example of Robert Kilroy-Silk).

Regarding the threat of deselected MEPs standing as a threat against Conservative candidates, that isn't really a realistic prospect. It is far harder for independent MEPs to get elected because of the way the electoral system works for European elections. Also, because of the vastly larger constituencies, it is much more difficult for candidates to form a relationship with their voters, in stark contrast with the example of Peter Law in Blaenau Gwent, who was helped by the relationship formed with the voters as AM and by his personal battle with a serious illness.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Re: Robert Jackson - I thought he was the MP who made that strange defection to the DUP, although it would appear I'm mistaken. Can anybody tell me which MP that was - might prove useful in a pub quiz in years to come?

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Andrew Hunter??

[Clare Lewis]

Robert Jackson was the MP for Wantage from abouht 1983 (correct me if I am wrong). He achieved the peak of his political career as Higher Education Minsiter under Major. He was seen as very bright (Fellow of All Souls) and declared he would step down as MP for Wantage in 2005. After Wantage had selected Vaizey he decided to defect to Labour for about 3/4 months. This provided many column inches of criticism because he is seen as a moderate Tory.
All of the top of my head!! (Sad I know)

[A H Matlock]

Yes, it was Andrew Hunter, former MP for Basingstoke who defected to the DUP during the last Parliament.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Thanks ;-)

[Sean Fear]

Those who would defect and run against official Conservative candidates should remember what happened to the Pro Euro Conservative Party.

[BURST THE CLARKE HOT AIR BALLOON]

I am not using Roger Helmer's internet address when I send. I am using my own. The URL I am using is not revealed on the blog as far as I know. I will delete it with pleasure.

What is the URL for as it doesn't work? Your system keeps the URL on every time, and as it wasn't appearing anywhere I hadn't bothered to delete it. What is the URL for? I am as confused as you are.

I have not once claimed to be Roger Helmer. It was DVA who suggested that I was and keeps repeating that I am (he is clearly a Ken Clarke supporter). I have written at least two denials here. Is this an interesting example of how rumour mills work? Repeat something enough times, and people start to believe it.

If my email address is appearing your end as that of Roger Helmer, then we have a problem of tampering.

[Geoff]

Exactly, Sean. Where are they now, eh? I was a memeber of the selection meeting that chose Roy Perry to stand as an MEP in Hampshire many years ago. I manned the phones and knocked on doors for him because he then represented himself as Eurosceptic. However the moment he walked through that door in Brussels he went 'native', and I was happy when he subsequently slid down the list too far to be re-elected - I felt betrayed. There must be no Stalinist purge, but equally we can't keep offering a sinecure to people who don't share our more realistic view of Europe. Let Caroline Jackson find a party she feels more comfortable in, and wish her a cheery Bon Voyage.

[BURST THE CLARKE HOT AIR BALLOON]

As for the politics here, it is quite extraordinary how Ken Clarke has declared open warfare on Cameron about the EPP and all other European issues. What is the point of having a leadership election lasting months when as soon as it's over, KC sets himself up as a lone rebel with full and enthusiastic media backing trying to block Cameron's policies?

Cameron cannot sack Ken Clarke. But the voters of Rushcliffe can. I am merely suggesting that they get on with it this time and finish the job. Ken Clarke is a luxury the Conservative Party can no longer afford.

[Ted]

I have no problem with KC expressing his opinions but do have a problem with the language he uses - "headbanging" and all the talk about alliances with far right - he's no fool and if he uses those terms its because they will wound DC and the party.
As for the MEPs - they were elected on a Conservative list - not as individuals - so they should either toe the line on party policy or leave/be thrown out. Party discipline matters - rather than a long drawn out arguement tell them its Party policy to leave the EPP and thats it.

[Richard]

I supported Ken's leadership bid in 1997 and voted for him in 2001, this however had nothing to do with my views on Europe. I am and always will be a Euro-Sceptic.

The EPP-ED is a federalist body and a body that is happy to expel good and decent MEPs like Roger Helmer. I hope that our withdrawal from the EPP-ED will soon see Roger back in the Conservative fold where he belongs!

Ken Clarke is a popular figure and an important part of the Conservative Party, he should however realise that the people of Europe are moving away from the federalist idea (if they ever supported it in the first place) and that he is deeply out of tune with vast numbers of his Party and the country as a whole. As for those MEPs who say they will stay in the EPP-ED if we leave, let them. They should be kicked out the Conservative Party, let's see if they manage to get re-elected next time when they have to stand as Independents!

[EU Serf]

....Ken Clarke is a popular figure and an important part of the Conservative Party.....

Splitter that he is, If Clarke is still popular then I'm afraid it says very little that is good about our party.

[wasp]

I happen to agree with Ken here but Cameron has made the decision and that should be the end of it.

[Chris]

Tell that to Clarke then, wasp...can he not keep his fat mouth shut for five seconds?
Such selfishness, vanity and arrogance - exactly why he was NOT the right leader!

[John Hustings]

Personally, I'm just pleased that Ken Clarke's political career is effectively over (despite Cameron making him head of a Democracy Taskforce) and that his failure to win the leadership pretty much symbolises the end of the Wet/Europhile dominance of the Tory Party that did so much damage in the Major years.

If there are to be any future splits in the party, it will be based on how far the "modernisers" are willing to go to purge the party of its core beliefs. If Cameron is sensible, and realises that he doesn't have to move to the left in terms of policy, -- and all he has to do is sound bright and chirpy (as he has done) -- then things might be okay. But I remain very nervous, and the A-List idea in particular leaves me feeling uneasy. I just hope it isn't the first step of many changes, and that it is just a one-off.

Cameron should not underestimate the extent to which core conservatives will fight their ground. And creating a needless internal war really would be foolish.

I am going to wait and see what he does with regard to crime, immigration and terrorism. If he decides to go "soft" on those subjects, then he really isn't very clever. And I doubt I would be able to remain loyal to the Tory Party.

Like many, though, I am trying to be as sanguine as possible: I hope that the vacuous drivel we have heard from Cameron recently is just a shrewd attempt to get the media on side. (I really hope he doesn't actually *believe* in Kyoto-style targets, for example).

The end of the Clarke generation presents a unique opportunity to unite the party. I hope he realises that. But the jury is very much out.

[Coxy]

Ken should have got the message when he crashed out in the first round.

The party is now clearly comfortable to be euro-sceptic, and has been since early in Hague's leadership. Most of the europhiles have got the idea and moved on to higher pastures (or the house of lords). Ken should do the same.

[Geoff]

It is an unfortunate precedent that ex-senior Cabinet Ministers usually get a peerage if they wish. I hope he doesn't get that soapbox-for-life in the HoL. If it's a choice between KC flying round the world flogging over-strength cigarettes to African kids or him having a permanently reserved seat on the Today programme to insult our policy-du-jour then I am ethically torn. But not that much.

[Peter]

You people are a joke when you attack Ken's stance. Remember that out of Cameron 116MPs at least 66 of them wanted to end the membership rights or like Cameron abstained. As been said here if you want to change which group we are in change the MEPs next time. Also through change how many choices we have to choose from as last time having only 5 in the south west was a joke and again showed how much the party nationally took members locally. I don't see Cameron saying he will change this, with that does he really care about the members rights or not?

[Peter]

I see also from the Shadow cabinet a couple of David Davis supporters have been dropped with that the new team has to be given a D grade for rubbing peoples nose in. At least he passes one test out of three so far?

[James Maskell]

I have a suggestion for the Editor. Could you write a 10-Point-Briefing on the issues around the EPP membership? Im not exactly following the discussion very well and I suspect some other readers here might not be able to either. Im not very knowledgable about this issue...

[Chris]

The underlying issue isn't really what is getting up my nose. Clarke may have a good point.
It's the fact that Clarke can't wait two minutes before beating a path to the nearest BBC microphone.
Why can't he (for once) make his case privately?
Instead we have yesterday's good opinion poll news spoiled.
Vanity and arrogance.

[Mark Fulford]

Ken Clarke, the ever-loose cannon! I hope Cameron sets Basher upon him.

[CLARKE MUST GO]

Editor - can you confirm that my address is appearing at your end as that of Roger Helmer? Are there some 'Black Artists' at work here - as well as DVA devilment? I think you know who I am - can you email me? This is not the first time that tampering with blogs is suspected.

[Frank Young]

The Conservative MEPs are part of the "Europe of Democracies" group which is itself loosely aligned to the EPP. The actual title of the co-allition is the EPP-ED. we form part of the ED bit which is very much in line with the centre right eurosceptic free market thinking in our domestic Conservative party. The ED alligns itself to the EPP for practical reasons - it allows ED members access to debate and position in the parliament which they would have no chance of getting on their own. The EDD is happy to have them in this loosest of loose alignments because it tips the blance of power towards them rather than the Euro Socialist parties, thus making them the biggset group in the parliament.

Both the EPP and the ED gain from this agreement while having very different views on Europe etc.

[Richard Weatherill]

Frank - can you point to the place(s) on the EPP-ED web site where the nature of this loose association and the non-federalist views of the ED are acknowledged?

[Frank Young]

Never let it be said that I don't rise to a challange!

""The Members (of the EPP-ED alignment) have the right to promote and develop their distinct views on constitutional and institutional issues in relation to the future of Europe."

"The ED is expressly committed to democracy, individual liberty, the rule of law, national sovereignty, free enterprise, minimal regulation, low taxation, private ownership, respect and security for every individual and a strong transatlantic alliance."

"Members of Parliament who wish to join the EPP-ED Group can apply to join either the EPP or the ED section of it."

[Richard Weatherill]

Frankly (no pun intended), I'm impressed! I suspect than many of us who advocate withdrawal from the EPP-ED grouping might be more content if the distinct views of the ED component (and the UK Conservative MEPs' membership of it) were given greater public prominence.

[James Hellyer]

But the ED has no staff or existance of its own. It's a paper grouping, whose aims and those of the EPP are mutually exclusive.

[Richard Weatherill]

Good point James - I must be going soft in my old age! It would certainly be better if the ED group did actually exist.

[Peter]

Do people agree through the main problem why we got to this point was the way members were restricted in how many choices we had to chose them last time and thats what needs to be changed first not what group we are linked to otherwise we may have another Stevens/Donnelly split?

[malcolm]

I would agree with that Peter.AAt the last Euro election I voted Conservative (after having toyed with the idea of UKIP) without the slightest idea of the individual views of those high on the Conservative list.
Wrong of me I know, but the same I suspect for thousands and thousands of voters.

[Peter]

The problem is Malcolm MEPs can lie at selection meetings you should have heard Jackson in 98 saying that she couldn't see us being in a single currency for 20 years and with that was put at the top of the list. Hopefully a few more people(and maybe even some from this blog) may attend next time as it was still poorly attended in 2002.

[James Hellyer]

"It would certainly be better if the ED group did actually exist."

The problem is that the ED is just a fiction to allow the Conservative party to justify associating with a group like the EPP, whose beliefs are so at odds with our own.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"I have not once claimed to be Roger Helmer. It was DVA who suggested that I was and keeps repeating that I am (he is clearly a Ken Clarke supporter). I have written at least two denials here. Is this an interesting example of how rumour mills work? Repeat something enough times, and people start to believe it."

"Are there some 'Black Artists' at work here - as well as DVA devilment?"

Don't drag me into this - the URL attached to some of your posts is for Roger Helmer's website, which is your doing NOT mine. As for being a Ken Clarke supporter, I backed Ken Clarke in the leadership election in spite of my European views not because of them.

[CLARKE MUST GO]

Sorry DVA, but you and others have referred to me as 'Roger' - I'm sure it was meant as a joke but the Editor seems to believe this is not so.

As for the URL, Roger's brief www.rogerhelmer.com/contrepp.asp is by far the best short article explaining the EPP issue to be found. The one posted today is quite long and academicky. Roger's is down to earth, understandable and brief. Why doesn't the editor ask Roger Helmer MEP for his views officially? It would clarify matters I feel.

I find that people who support Ken Clarke but think they are eurosceptic are naive in extremis. He's a eurofanatic who cannot even begin see the error of his ways. He prepared the EEC Enabling Legislation in 1972 and has been a faithful supporter of corruption and the destruction of Westminster as sovereign ever since. Strange that Cameron has seen fit to put him charge of reviewing the institution he seems hellbent on destroying. But such is the illogicality of British politics where the media dictate leaders' actions more than common sense.

I am convinced that the only solution is for Ruschcliffe to deselect Ken Clarke as he observes no limts to his outbursts and shows no loyalty to the party, and its choice of leader.

DVA has an eye for the ladies. maybe we should refer to him as DVLA! we all suffer from sense of humour it seems as well as firm political beliefs.

[malcolm]

I think,whatever your name is,that you seriously weaken your case with posts like this.I disagree totally with Ken Clarkes' views on Europe but am glad he is in our party as he is one of the most effective debators on the economy and other subjects.
You might also think about being brave and post using your real name.

[James Hellyer]

"I am convinced that the only solution is for Ruschcliffe to deselect Ken Clarke"

I don't think acrimony and public rancour are the best ways to deal with someone who will almost certainly be standind down at the next election anyway.

[Sean Fear]

I don't think deselcting such a well-known politician would be a sensible step.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"I find that people who support Ken Clarke but think they are eurosceptic are naive in extremis."

I find that people who let the European issue dominate their political outlook are blinkered in extremis.

"I am convinced that the only solution is for Ruschcliffe to deselect Ken Clarke as he observes no limts to his outbursts and shows no loyalty to the party, and its choice of leader."

Are there any limits to your outbursts? And what about loyalty to the MEPs' choice of leader Timothy Kirkhope, whom you are constantly slating? As for loyalty to the party - which MEP had the Conservative whip removed for breaching the party line?

"DVA has an eye for the ladies."

What an utterly bizarre assertion. You've clearly misinterpreted my point that, judging by his website, your beloved hero Roger Helmer is clearly a believer in promoting young female talent and that I'd be fascinated to know the recruitment and selection process for his political assistants.

[CLARKE MUST GO]

I can be as brave as you like Malcolm. I have run deselection campaigns before now to remove disloyal Conservative MP's, and in my opinion it does MP's the world of good to realise that they are failing to represent the views of their electors. I still believe in democracy, and will not bow down to media control. KC is using his position in the media to attack our new leader David Cameron. What exactly is it that pleases you about that?

We have a good chance of success now. Clarke with media backing can do a lot to damage the Party, and he is showing himself determined to wreak havoc. Cameron needs support as Daniel Hannan is writing today in his newsletter.

The only way to deliver that support as effectively as it possible to do, is to initiate a deselection campaign in Kenneth's Constitiuency Rushcliffe just outside Nottingham. We need a new Robin Hood to burst the arrogamce of an overmighty prince who protects the corrupt and deprives ordinary people of their democratic rights.

Malcolm, I will reveal my name if you will reveal yours! Meanwhile my views need the HEADLINE to get across.

DVLA - you have mentioned your interest in Roger Helmer's recruiting policy as regards his female members of staff. It amused me. I can converse on many political issues or others as you wish. The one in this thread is the EPP. I hope you don't want me to stray off topic. Clarke is dangerous to Cameron. Wake up guys (and girls) we have to do something if we want to win, not sit and wait while Cameron is roasted by the media for doing what's right. Rushcliife after Christmas for a deselection looks a racing certainty.

[James Hellyer]

Yes, I'm sure they'll deselect a popular sitting MP.

Meanwhile in the real world...

[CLARKE MUST GO]

Errr - the result of a deselection campaign is not a foregone conclusion I would agree. It is entirely in the hands of Rushcliffe Conservatives. If they are happy for Kenneth to be openly disloyal to David Cameron in the full glare of the media, while backing an issue that few Conservative Members agree with, then they can do nothing and the situation will continue.

But if on reflection they want to offer Cameron support, and bring Kenneth to heel, then they can call for a vote of no confidence and give their MP a warning.

If the MP shows no interests in the views of his constituents, then he knows he is treading on dangerous ground as he has been warned.

It all depends on how strongly they feel. The job of the deselction campaigners is to make sure the Rushcliffe members know they have it in their power to back David Cameron against their own MP's open and continuing disloyalty - popular, likeable, talented or not.

[James Hellyer]

"But if on reflection they want to offer Cameron support, and bring Kenneth to heel, then they can call for a vote of no confidence and give their MP a warning."

And generate more negative publicity and headlines about divisions over the EU.

[Simon C]

"Rushcliife after Christmas for a deselection looks a racing certainty."

What odds are you offering & at what price - and what's your cut off for "after Christmas"?

[Frank Young]

Ken Clarke will almosty certainly not step down at the next election, he is very happy in the commons and wants to stay in there for quite some time. I suspect he has his eye on becoming Father of the House.

[simon clewer]

There's a very big issue here.

Europe is not going to go away.

Many of the educated and intelligent people who might be Conservative voters believe in the European project.

Many believe that the Euro is self evidently a good idea and that tax harmonisation is a state of grace. Most economists believe this and the thinking classes are mostly pro European.

Anybody fancy a proper intelligent discussion?

Subject being "Twenty first century Thatcherism loves the Project, loves the Euro, desires tax harmonisation"

Ken Clarke is saying what many educated people take to be self evident truths. He is surely reluctant to be disloyal, it only points out how big this issue is.

[James Hellyer]

"Ken Clarke is saying what many educated people take to be self evident truths"

No he isn't, and he's certainly not saying what you claim are "self evident truths". Probably because they are no such thing, and even an arch-europhile like Clarke can see that.

[CLARKE MUST GO]

I think there are two dimensions.

Does the leadership of the Conservative Party mean anything, or were the last three months just another piece of Reality TV of no consequence? What was the point in having a good long drawn out leadership contest, if as soon as it's over, Ken Clarke acts as if the whole thing was irrelevant. And despite having been the main loser, he now wishes to override the Party leader's chosen and advertised policies.

The other aspect is whether we are living in a democracy or not. If this is a democracy, then voters cannot become totally powerless while the big beasts play out their media games. Kenneth is certainly Goliath. But is there still a David who can fell him? Or are the Big Beasts who live not in Parliament, not in their constituencies but in the media now uncontrollable and able to do and say whatever they chose?

To me this is just bullying. It's like saying to all the 100's of thousands who have just cast their votes'I can push you around and ignore you so I will.' The only way to handle a bully is to show him that he too is vulnerable.

And that means his own Constituency has to hold meetings and decide what they feel in their own hearts. Do they agree with their MP quietly destroying his Party, ignoring their views and those of most Conservatives, overriding David Cameron their newly chosen leader and oublicly humiliating him? Or not?

The battle will not be fought in Parliament or even in the media. This battle can only be fought at street and constituency level and that is why a deselection campaign against Kenneth is inevitable.

After Christmas will be the best time I feel, when people have had time to reflect on how serious an issue this is.

[simon clewer]

James Hellyer
***Ken Clarke is saying what many educated people take to be self evident truths"

No he isn't, and he's certainly not saying what you claim are "self evident truths". Probably because they are no such thing, and even an arch-europhile like Clarke can see that.****

I was careful to only assert that many people (not necessarily myself) see the European project as a good thing. You may be right that there are no self-evident truths, but we all hold many things to be such. Do I recall a celebrated tract "These truths we hold to be self evident ......" - it then goes on about some things we all hold dear, life,liberty,pursuit of something or other.

I'm trying to make the point that this is a big issue, very big, and it won't go away, and that many educated and intelligent people are in no way Europhobic.

I assume (may be wrong) that likely Conservative voters are generally better educated and more intelligent than Labour voters. And the europhiles are also,in general, the more educated and intelligent sections of society.

This party is going to fight over Europe - it won't go away - no amount of blood letting will rid the Conservative constituency of Europhilia. The party itself is firmly in the hands of Europhobes - but the Tory constituency is not so pure.

Ken speaks for many whose vote we will solicit at the next election.

[CLARKE MUST GO]

'Ken speaks for many whose vote we will solicit at the next election' Simon says.

Whatever size the Europhile rump has left, it is greatly outnumbered within the Party at all levels by Eurosceptics.

There are also sizeable chunks that have migrated to other parties who would return if the Conservatives set out a properly modern European policy.

There are large numbers of Labour voters who want to stop the 'ever closer union' EU strategy of Tony Blair. In fact the few we will lose by changing and becoming modern anti-federalists, will be greatly outnumbered by the many coming back to the Party and those joining for the first time.

The dynamics have changed. Building a new concept for Europe is a big vote winner now. Clarke's past his sell-by date. His policies on the EU are palaeolithic.

[James Hellyer]

"I assume (may be wrong) that likely Conservative voters are generally better educated and more intelligent than Labour voters."

Actually due to the age profile of the party, a lower proprtion of Conservative members have degrees than would be the case in the other parties.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"DVLA - you have mentioned your interest in Roger Helmer's recruiting policy as regards his female members of staff. It amused me. I can converse on many political issues or others as you wish. The one in this thread is the EPP. I hope you don't want me to stray off topic."

Actually, you were the person who first mentioned my supposed 'eye for the ladies' on this thread, despite it being unrelated to the topic under discussion and despite the fact that we're clearly not acquainted - hence why I called it an utterly bizarre assertion. I suggest that in future, if you don't wish to discuss something, or 'stray off topic', then don't bring it up.

[simon clewer]

****** SIMON -"I assume (may be wrong) that likelyConservative voters are generally better educated and more intelligent than Labour voters."

JAMES -Actually due to the age profile of the party, a lower proprtion of Conservative members have degrees than would be the case in the other parties. ******

This would suggest that Labour voters are more educated than Conservative voters ?!*&?!!

It seems that there is some agreement on this blog that more intelligent and educated people tend to be less Europhobic - perhaps this suggests how we can regain lost voters from the thinking classes ( especially economists ). Personally, I fear terribly for us when economists no longer see us as their natural home.

***"There are large numbers of Labour voters who want to stop the 'ever closer union' EU strategy of Tony Blair. In fact the few we will lose by changing and becoming modern anti-federalists, will be greatly outnumbered by the many coming back to the Party and those joining for the first time."****
There are votes to be gained and lost either way round.Last time the people were asked (1975) they voted 2 to 1 to remain in the EEC.

A couple of points should be made.

1: Eurosceptic popularity is probably over estimated, just as it was in 1975.

2: We risk alienating so much of our natural constituency of educated and intelligent voters with Europhobia.

I'm only trying to make the point here that Euroscepticism surely costs us dear, no matter what advantages it may also bring. We risk being pushed off the intellectual high ground by the bloody leftists - Now how can that be right ? They can't think, they're too bigoted and ideological and in love with themselves and in hatred of us to be able to think - they can only have the high ground if we abandon it.

We're losing out to leftists who get their jollies by making untruths into law then flaunting it.

If we drive away the thinking classes and especially the economists, then we leave the high ground to thought-police, interdictors and confiscators - and they've no place there.

I'm trying to make the point that quitting the EPP and other stuff is arguably (lets discuss it) cutting off our nose to spite our face, throwing our toys out of the pram. We risk surrendering the high ground in pursuit of an antiEU constituency that may no more exist than it did in 1975.

Engagement is enabling, disengagement is arguably (lets discuss) a cul-de-sac.

The Project is not going to go away, and this party is going to fight ... none us can stop either of those truths (lets discuss).

[John Hustings]

I don't care if being Eurosceptic loses the Tory Party some votes (I don't even think this is true). I care that being Eurosceptic is the *right* thing. And I believe it is.

Why do so many people seem willing to ditch any Conservative principle (even our national sovereignty for heaven's sake) for the sake of a few votes? Is this not the worst sort of opportunism?

[CLARKE MUST GO (QUIETLY PLEASE RUSHCLIFFE)]

It seems that the narrative has changed, John. Read Daniel Hannan's website and see his latest newsletter.

The talk is not of uroscepticism and urophilia - but of creating a more modern outlook for Europe - of modernising Europe. We don't emphasise the negative view of uro-corruption, bureaucracy, the wrecked economies and wasted lives. We emphasise new growth - the chance to create the free trading Europe that people voted for in 1975 - not the ever closer union, federalist state that was the only way imaginable to prevent future war in 1945.

Another 30 years has elapsed since 1975. There is a new generation with new possibilities which didn't exist 30 years and 60 years ago. David Cameron wants to seize the future not be locked into the past. That is the feeling of the young generation and it is more powerful than any other notion expressed here and elsewhere about our uropast.

Ken Clarke is a great act, but so are Oasis. It doesn't mean that new songs can never be sung. Imagine what it would be like if Gallagher campaigned in rage when Robbie Williams got to No 1.

Not difficult to make such behaviour look a bit out of date and stuck with its notions from the past - the pique of jealousy. ...hopefully Clarke will be retired before he gets even more embarrassing. His Constituency Rushcliffe should really be trying to help Clarke to find a new home, and allow the Cameron era to move Britain into the modern era. His time has come.

[Sean Fear]

Most people are eurosceptic to a greater or lesser degree Simon, even among the upper middle classes.

Economists have never seen us as their natural home - remember the 364 who signed the letter attacking Mrs. Thatcher's economic policies?

[Peter]

I think most people on this question miss the point which is do we want a democratic free party or a clone of the Labour party. I want to get out of the EU but we have to remember that the majority of MEPs want further intergration, with that both sides should be allowed to say something in my view not just the leader. My question is how many of you have been to a EU selection meeting in the past. I think the answer to that will prove a point on all this?

[simon clewer]

****I don't care if being Eurosceptic loses the Tory Party some votes (I don't even think this is true). I care that being Eurosceptic is the *right* thing. And I believe it is.
Why do so many people seem willing to ditch any Conservative principle (even our national sovereignty for heaven's sake) for the sake of a few votes? Is this not the worst sort of opportunism? *******

John - that depends on whether you're a Eurosceptic / pragmatist / Europhile. If Euroscepticism is absolute then indeed it would be mere opportunism, but if your views are more nuanced, equivocal, amenable or pragmatic then circles can be squared. I reiterate the point that hardcore Europscepticism costs us dear.

There are those who would argue that Conservatism is first and foremost about political power, all else is secondary.

****Most people are eurosceptic to a greater or lesser degree Simon, even among the upper middle classes.****

Sean - Yes indeed, though that also implies that most people are europhilic to lesser or greater degree. There's political mileage in that thar' Project.

****Economists have never seen us as their natural home - remember the 364 who signed the letter attacking Mrs. Thatcher's economic policies?******
Sean - Bedwetters, what about all the other economists? OK we can differ about where economists find their natural home ;-) Perhaps I was at an impressionable age (mid teens) when Mrs Thatcher and Keith Joseph stormed the high ground with common reason and economics.

*****The talk is not of uroscepticism and urophilia - but of creating a more modern outlook for Europe - of modernising Europe****
Henry (assume that's your name), dig the new spelling ... YES YES YES.

Lets fix it not break it.

If we can agree on that, there's loads to get our teeth into. The bloody Projects riddled with bloody leftists and their bloody leftisms, there is (to quote Mrs T.) "much work to be done".

So back to the original point I've been making all along ... we need to engage, not disengage. DC may be right to leave the EPP but only if we can offer something enabling instead, pure hostility will do us no good in the end.

[Yorkshire Tory]

Clarke, working for New Labour? A secret socialist? You've got to be out of your tiny minds!

Yes, he is a Europhile- but then again, so are model Thatcherites Quentin Davies, Bob Walter and Edwina Currie.

Clarke is an old fashioned, One Nation Tory- he is one of the reasons why I joined the party. The "Notting Hill" set make me want to vomit- they are so pretentious. Indeed, I thought that New Labour's shower of oily little schoolboys was bad enough- but the "Notting Hill" set are a load of two-bit, pimply, jumped-up, public schoolboys who have nothing better to do than whinge about WHSmiths selling chocolate oranges, and talk about their new conservatories.

I know that I'm going to be ribbed for my rant, but as a plain-speaking Northerner (albeit with a 'posh' voice) I'd sooner have ten Kenneth Clarkes in the PCP than the load of poncey nerds who've hijacked the party.