Reuters/ The Scotsman are reporting that William Hague has rejected a compromise proposal on David Cameron's leadership pledge to leave the EPP. The compromise proposal was apparently proposed by Timothy Kirkhope MEP, leader of the Conservative group in the European Parliament. An unnamed source told Reuters that Mr Kirkhope had "floated the idea of forming a sort of virtual party now, but it would not actually come in to effect until the next European Parliament elections in 2009."
The Tories are apparently on course to form a new group in the European Parliament by June. The main partners will be the Czech Republic's Civic Democratic Party and Poland's Law and Justice Party. The Scotsman:
"A new group in the European Parliament requires 19 members from at least five different countries. Sources said the new group will have around 55 members with agreements already secured with at least 35 MEPs. These include nine from the ODS, 10 from Law and Justice plus four other Poles, four Latvians, three French, two Lithuanians and one each from Ireland, Italy and Sweden. The euro-sceptic Czech party is expected to win next month's general election, while the Poles are currently in government."
Editor's note: "The Tory leader must not think delivery on the EPP pledge will satisfy the demands of Britain's Eurosceptic majority. In itself it will do nothing to restore powers to Britain. 87% of Tory members want the European Union to return responsibility for fishing and aid policies to member states and, in good time, Mr Cameron's new grouping must lead calls for such repatriations of power. Taking Tory MEPs out of the EPP will, however, begin to show that people can take Mr Cameron at his word. Political honesty is, perhaps, one of the reasons why - very surprisingly - New Statesman readers made Mrs Thatcher their fifth most highly-rated 'hero of our time'. In his NS tribute to Mrs T, historian Andrew Roberts said this of Britain's greatest modern, peacetime PM:
"She was always true to her word. When she said the lady wasn't for turning, she wasn't. When she said the Falklands must be liberated come what may, they were. When she said that people would be allowed to buy their own council houses, they were, too. When she told European politicians that she wanted a rebate on the billions Britain overpaid the Community, she held out until she got one.
There's a downside to all this refreshing candour. The kind of permanent revolution she offered did not suit everyone, and eventually she was overthrown. But she went down fighting for her principles; no one was in any doubt about what she stood for and what she believed in. You might not have agreed with her, but you can't deny that hers was an honesty of the kind hardly ever heard from today's so-called leaders. That, I suspect, rather than her free-market ideology, is why New Statesman readers have finally acknowledged her heroism in this unexpected, if welcome, way.""
The Polish Law and Order Party compared Germany's deal with Russia for gas piping to the Nazi-Soviet pact...
I think Camerons making a mistake pulling out of the EPP. He needs to have policies on how to prove that this new grouping provides more influence, or similar levels of influence than they had under the EPP.
What will Cameron do with those Conservative MEPs who disagree with the new grouping and wish to remain in the EPP?
Posted by: James Maskell | May 19, 2006 at 20:57
Hopefully discipline them in a fashion that Roger Helmer has had to put up with for sticking up for the UK.
Posted by: Anon | May 19, 2006 at 21:05
"What will Cameron do with those Conservative MEPs who disagree with the new grouping and wish to remain in the EPP?"
The question we need to ask is what is the Conservative Party going to do with those MEPs who disregard the wishes of the Party leadership and think they can operate outside the boundaries of collective responsibility?
I am sure Brendan Donnelly and John Stevens can offer them plenty of advice on how to fight elections as independent "Pro-Euro Conservatives".
Posted by: Andrew Kennedy | May 19, 2006 at 21:12
Anon, in your opinion, would that be the mature thing for Cameron to do? I would think that would lead to some lovely headlines for Cameron to spin like "Conservative Party in Split over Europe" and "Cameron loses control of Conservatives".
Posted by: James Maskell | May 19, 2006 at 21:13
LOL Andrew. By that theory, Cameron could say whatever he wants and those who have been elected as Conservatives are stuck with it. Thats a dictatorship Andrew, not collective responsibility.
Posted by: James Maskell | May 19, 2006 at 21:19
James - I think its certainly a tricky one - it was one of Camerons clearest pledges during the leadership election. In this instance I think our MEPs can see how this will pan out. If certain MEPs do not like the decision - they they themselves have a difficult decision to make as to whether they accept such a move.
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | May 19, 2006 at 21:22
He's making the right move. If you don't agree you should get deselected.
There is no room for division over europe, if we form our own in the EU parliament we gain greater control over our stance and policy in that parliament. This is democracy at work folks.
Posted by: Jaz | May 19, 2006 at 21:36
The actual move out of the EPP will not do anything, but the impact could be huge. For the first time the EU will have a group which is, as a whole, fundamentally opposed to further integration and will be able to speak authoritatively about returning power back to Nation States.
The Christopher Beazleys in the EU should recognise they don't speak for the Party they represent and not put themselves forward for reselection.
Hopefully this will also see Roger Helmer return to the Conservative fold. A man who had the whip removed for doing exactly what I, and many other Conservatives, expect of an MEP.
Posted by: Martin Curtis | May 19, 2006 at 21:37
James M - normally you criticse DC for not being conservative enough, to the extent you left the party and intend standing against a Conservative next year.
Now you want DC to break his clear pledge and stay with the Europhile EPP. Make your mind up!
Cameron got his very large mandate in part because of this pledge. Many have doubted it would be achieved and I think it's a clear sign that DC can help the Conservatives maintain a broad coalition.
I hate the fact that my local Association is saddled with (Dr)Caroline Jackson as one of our MEPs; hopefully this might encourage her to think about her position. It will also allow loyal MEPs such as Roger Helmer to be back where they belong, in the Conservative grouping in Brussels. Once the new group is up and running I think other parties will want to express ther real opinions and not be tied into a federalist grouping just because it labels itsef centre-right.
This is a brave venture but if done properly could be very popular with those that care about being in Europe but not run by it.
Posted by: kingbongo | May 19, 2006 at 21:42
It looks as though Roger Helmer will not be re-joining the Conservative Group - they will be re-joining him!
David Cameron again this evening spoke (in Basingstoke) about the importance of creating a coalition in Europe to return powers to nation states.
Posted by: Richard ROBINSON | May 19, 2006 at 21:45
It would be good to see Cameron sticking to this. Europe desperately needs a counterbalance to the current centralising orthodox. The Conservative MEP's who support the EPP will learn that in the pseudo democratic "Euro" politics they inhabit they only hold their position according to their position on the party list. None of the electorate voted for them personally, apart from a few like Daniel Hannan, no one even knows their names. We voted for a party. They're faceless nonentities working in an all but invisible parliament. Dealing with any rebels will be easy, they will have to face the membership in the candiadte list votes for the next Euro elections, the members were the only ones who voted for them personally and are the only ones they are accountable to personally.
Posted by: Gawain | May 19, 2006 at 21:58
You decided to make comments about me here instead of on Guido's website...thanks for that!
As I have said many times before, Im no ideologue. Youve jumped to conclusions there. You assume that I would be supporting this, but its causing divisions in the Party and it doesnt guarantee that the Conservatives will have any more influence outside the EPP than they had within it. What happens when the Conservatives find their new group is struggling to hold together...how do we know itll even be worth it? This is a problem with coalitions...what happens in disputes? Youve got two different groups there and they have different needs.
If it goes wrong, the media will have a field day.
Posted by: James Maskell | May 19, 2006 at 22:06
"He needs to have policies on how to prove that this new grouping provides more influence, or similar levels of influence than they had under the EPP." - James Maskell
Would you care to provide us with some examples of where Conservatives in Europe have greater influence within the EPP than out of the EPP. I am intrigued by such a statement.
Posted by: Chris Palmer | May 19, 2006 at 22:20
This is great news. It is a small first step in the right direction.
I think it shows terrific leadership. Across the continent people have been crying out for a voice inside the EU machine, and now they might just get one.
We have given some great leadership and let's hope we get the changes to policy we want and need.
I think it shows great courage from DC. Even William Hague couldn't pull us out of the EPP - and he saved the pound!
Posted by: northwest | May 19, 2006 at 22:30
The reverse being, how does Cameron know that being out of the largest group in the European Parliament will provide him with more influence than being in it?
Your question is a theoretical one and you know it. No one on this site knows the answer to that one as no Conservative MEP is outside of the EPP. I commented earlier about Polands issues with Germany and Russia over gas supplies. That gas will eventually help Britain and other Western countries. What happens if Poland decides it wants to be tougher over that. Britain wont want to because itll benefit from this. has Camweron thought about how to ensure that the new grouping is united? What are the policies going to be? What makes Cameron think that a more euro-sceptic tone will ensure that they wont simply be sidelined?
Posted by: James Maskell | May 19, 2006 at 22:32
James
I must admit I share your reservations over this withdrawal - not because I think its the wrong choice in principle (I believe we are better served in a grouping with objectives our party believes in) but because as a Party we negotiated with the EPP the setting up of the EPP-ED grouping and made undertakings to the EPP parties.
Whilst I have many objections to Caroline Jackson and other's behaviour, support Helmers return and believe that the European Conservatives should follow the party line and adher to party discipline it is not good for our relationships with the broadly centre-right parties that govern many of our allies and neighbours to renege on a hard fought deal.
It is right that we should not sign up to the EPP goals - and the ED group does not. Unfortunately the agreement made put the ED at a disadvantage as the junior partner and left most of the groupings decision making in the EPP side. Both Fox and Cameron don't seem to have taken account of the discussions and work that was put into the deal and went for a populist unilateral promise.
However it can be argued that the selection of a new leadership changed the premise, and I cannot see that David Cameron can reasonably renege on his campaign promise. I doubt that the Tory MEP grouping had much influence in taking forward the eurosceptic agenda of the party though they have often fought, sometimes successfully, for the British point of view.
I can only hope that Hague is a good enough diplomat and negotiator to both deliver the pledge and soothe the understandable upset that a breaking of an agreement will cause with our EPP (and some of our ED) partners.
There are those of us who are not supporters of UK withdrawal nor europhiles are concerned that a good objective badly negotiated and delivered will damage this party and eventually this country.
Posted by: Ted | May 19, 2006 at 22:33
If this is delivered, then I agree, DC will deserve plenty of credit, as it was a clear pledge. You can't move the goalposts as delivery of promises is the one thing politicians are not so good at.
It will cost me a £100, but it will be worth it. And hopefully it will also kick into touch any further cosying up to the LibDems who will be horrified at this approach. Cool. :-)
Of course it is only a first step, but it is still a forward step. For me, the final step is a clear and simple referendum to clarify our aims for the next generation.
Come on Dave, just give us a referendum. Feel free to campaign to stay in, but you can give Britain the clearest direction on Europe it could ever hope for. Be brave. Be pro-EU if you want, but give us a referendum.
We are calm and rational adults. Give us the chance to properly debate the issue then vote on it, I'm sure the British people would reward you with the chance to become pm.
Posted by: Chad | May 19, 2006 at 22:43
87% of Tory members want the European Union to return responsibility for fishing and aid policies to member states.
No doubt that would be a good thing. But I agree with DC that the priority is to return employment and social regulation to national control (a point he repeated tonight in Basingstoke).
Posted by: Rob G | May 19, 2006 at 22:43
This is terrific news; I just pray that it comes to fruition. I really think it's about time that political honesty counted for more than some nebulous 'influence' that we're supposed to exert within the EPP. If this new grouping takes off, with the British Conservatives as the largest component, then we'll have considerably more influence than we could ever have under the dead hand of the federalist, pro-Constitution EPP. What's more, it will be influence that can help to point Europe in the right direction. Bring it on!
Posted by: Richard Weatherill | May 19, 2006 at 23:08
"For the first time the EU will have a group which is, as a whole, fundamentally opposed to further integration and will be able to speak authoritatively about returning power back to Nation States."
Don't such parties already exist? Isn't there one with some French Gaullists in that's opposed to further integration? I suppose the other anti-integrationist parties have been joined by either UKIP or Italian neofascists thus making it politically impossible for us to join them as well.
Posted by: Richard | May 19, 2006 at 23:20
At last some good news. We as a party have been crippled on the doorstep in many seats by being in the EPP and thus contradicting all the brave words that Michael Howard spoke.
With so much of our domestic law now dictated from Brussels [waste disposal and water supply being two current examples] we should be heading for the Exit door!! But this is a start and if carried forcefully through could restore some reality to the political debate. At present this continues as though the EU did NOT control us - the elephant in the room is invisible.
Posted by: christina speight | May 19, 2006 at 23:33
I find it odd arguing with those welcoming this news as I am basically in their camp but the key here is that Hague gets a relatively large new grouping of conservative parties and we don't just go back to the old EDG as it was in the late 80's.
The problem is that we aligned with the EPP because we were sidelined - we had absolutely no influence as against at least some by joining EPP-ED. Many of our potential allies are in other groupings and weaning them into a grouping with us is made harder because we have shown ourselves to be bad/difficult partners.
Richard is right "IF this new grouping takes off..."
We will always find it difficult to ally with the Christan Democrat type parties because though "right" they come from a different strand of political development - historically driven by the Catholic Churche's (and later Protestant & Orthodox) social agenda matched with opposition to secular communism & socialism and so supportive of the European social model.
So I'm pleased DC is delivering his promise, I'll feel better that we are no longer hypocritical in our approach but saddened we couldn't have found a better way forward than a unilateral breaking of agreements.
Posted by: Ted | May 19, 2006 at 23:45
"Your question is a theoretical one and you know it. No one on this site knows the answer to that one as no Conservative MEP is outside of the EPP." - James Maskell
Except, of course, Roger Helmer - who has said on numerous occasions that being outside the EPP has advantages above being inside. The EPP doesn't take a cut of his Parliamentary allowance, and he has greater freedom when speaking in Parliament. Listen to the Tory Radio podcast interview he did, as it tells all there.
Posted by: Chris Palmer | May 20, 2006 at 00:08
Why not join this lot: http://indemgroup.org/16/ ?
They're opposed to the European Constitution and further centralisation. UKIP is a member but the organisation is not merely an anti-EU entity, it is a coalition of eurosceptic parties not all of which support withdrawal.
Posted by: Richard | May 20, 2006 at 01:28
I for one would not have voted for Cameron without his pledge to have the Conservatives leave the EPP. Since we are currently being berated by Francis Maude in defence of the A List of Candidates on the grounds that that was one of Cameron's leadership election pledges then exactly the same must apply to the pledge to leave the EPP. Quite frankly if there are some Tory MEPs who have gone native and wish to stay in the EPP in order to preserve their own personal gravy trains then they should be deselected and replaced.
Posted by: Matt Davis | May 20, 2006 at 02:29
Cameron's commitment to leave the EPP-ED is pure folly. It’s is by far Cameron's biggest mistake.
We are already in a small grouping of MEPs in the European Parliament called the Europe of Democracies, the ED bit in the EPP-ED coalition. It is robustly euro-sceptic but is also aligned to the biggest grouping in the Parliament thus allowing far more influence on procedural affairs and discussion than a break away fringe group. The ED even had its own Vice-President thus ensuring an enormous amount of representation.
This is not only folly but the stuff of farce, we will (inevitably) have to re-join when the EPP-ED coalition at some point because MEPS, in years to come, will ask why the identical ED group is much better served.
I tend to shy away from provocative comments because the Conservative party as a whole is a coalition and I respect that, but I certainly give my support to those MEPs who will defy this absurdity and remain in the ED.
Posted by: Henry Edward-Bancroft | May 20, 2006 at 08:58
You decided to make comments about me here instead of on Guido's website...thanks for that!
I didn't make comments about you. I used you as an example of somebody who might mistakenly be believed to be a Conservative and whose opinion therefore reflects party activist opinion.
Cameron pledged to withdraw from the EPP. Either in or out MEPs have very little 'influence' on anything. I don't know if it will really have much impact but I can't see any great risk in it either. It should certainly mean tory MEPs not having to sign up to things that contradict the party's core beliefs.
Posted by: kingbongo | May 20, 2006 at 09:49
Im with kingbongo and others supporting Cameron. He was voted in on that pledge to leave the EPP, and he is now fulfilling that pledge. Fine by me. I know he expects to be constantly opposed before he is ultimately proved right, but he must get a bit cheesed off with the political anoraks on this site, who have not even reached their 30th birthday yet. What was it Mark Twain famousely said about his fathers increased wisdom, as he, Mark Twain, got older? Look it up. You should know that quote anyway.
Posted by: Annabel Herriott | May 20, 2006 at 11:28
The Helmer experience is instructive.
Once he was free of the Conservative (EPP-compliant) whip, he has been able to speak on far more occasions in the EU parliament -including his famous Sun Newspaper moment when he accused Blair of squandering the Thatcher legacy.
If he's been inside the EPP net, he would have to sit in silence, while UKIP's Farage played the lead role of opposing Quisling Blair, as he licked the boots of the corrupt.
Inside the EPP-ED (The ED never happened) Conservatives are silenced. Outside it we can at least speak. If we can speak, we might be able to coax the EU away from corruption towards free trade between sovereign nations. It will be our tragedy and Europe's tragedy if we cannot.
If we cannot, there is no doubt that we must leave the EU. At least, when we do leave, we can say that we tried.
Posted by: William | May 20, 2006 at 12:28
As I understand it the only actual function of being a member of the EPP effectively is to qualify for certain access to committees and funds for running offices, so why not just pronounce whatever policies the Conservative Party decides to support and then leave it up to the EPP as to whether they allow the Conservative Party to remain a member or expel them, it's not as if the EPP is a direct rival for seats that the Conservative Party is standing for.
If the Conservative Party wants acceptable allies then why not try running a few Conservative candidates on the continent in places, in fact David Steel ran as a candidate for the European Parliament in Italy although for an Italian Party.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | May 20, 2006 at 12:44
An alternative to the EPP would of course be the Democracy Group:
http://indemgroup.org/16/
That or form a new group and invite other parties to join.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | May 20, 2006 at 12:57
Well, yes, YetAnotherAnon, but can you really see today's Conservative party showing that sort of independent thinking? After all, what would be the reaction of the BBC, the Guardian and all of the other Francophiliac luvvies that dominate our media? They'd be appalled!
Posted by: John Coles | May 20, 2006 at 17:43
Great news. It's really good to see some honesty - following through on a pledge.
There's a lot of talk about losing influence but frankly - what influence? The EPP might have a significant say, but how often does it represent our point of view?
Posted by: deborah | May 20, 2006 at 18:54
>>>>Well, yes, YetAnotherAnon, but can you really see today's Conservative party showing that sort of independent thinking? After all, what would be the reaction of the BBC, the Guardian and all of the other Francophiliac luvvies that dominate our media? They'd be appalled!<<<<
I think that eventually political opinion in the UK and among many other EU countries will swing against the EU, the EU will collapse anyway ultimately.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | May 20, 2006 at 20:48
That's my fervent hope.
Posted by: John Coles | May 20, 2006 at 23:14
Yes YAA. That's why we need to start constructing the next phase now by leaving the EPP, not allow a complete bloody mess on our doorstep.
Outside the EPP, we can start the process of building the relationships, the policies and the concept of how to adapt the EU conceived in the 1940's and 1950's (Churchill's 'let's create the United States of Europe' - which has in practice come closer to the Soviet model of central control than the US one of strong member states with a weak federal centre) into a new more devolved idea suited to the changes that have happened in the last sixty years - sovereign independent states free trading with the world, without barriers to each other's goods and services - but also without barriers to the rest of the world which has joined the world economy, and will in time come to dominate it.
Posted by: William | May 21, 2006 at 06:24
Dealing with any rebels will be easy, they will have to face the membership in the candiadte list votes for the next Euro elections. - Gawain.
If these MEP remain in the EPP (and therefore do not take the Conservative whip) the will not be eligible for selection for 2009.
Posted by: Richard ROBINSON | May 21, 2006 at 10:46
I agree with Willaim Hague's approach and some action on the European issue.
I am more puzzled at home why Conservative councillors who take the party whip particpate in and sometimes chair Regional Assemblies. Why are we allowing this to continue?
These councillors argue that they are limiting the damage caused. However most of the papers are written by officers with "guidance" from what was the ODPM and the presence of stakeholders on the Assemblies make it impossible for Conservative majorities to vote down bad ideas. Extensive damage is being caused.
The sooner we have a a stronger line from central office on participation in these undemocratic bodies the better.
It is difficult to hold to the national policy on the doorstpep when local councillors are acting in a contrary fashion.
Posted by: Nigel C | May 21, 2006 at 12:30
>>>>Outside the EPP, we can start the process of building the relationships, the policies and the concept of how to adapt the EU conceived in the 1940's and 1950's (Churchill's 'let's create the United States of Europe' - which has in practice come closer to the Soviet model of central control than the US one of strong member states with a weak federal centre) into a new more devolved idea suited to the changes that have happened in the last sixty years<<<<
It won't work, a number of EU countries are pushing ahead with an agenda of further extension of EU powers, certainly the EU will not allow any nation state to introduce neccessary Anti-Terrorist measures, even if a majority of states swing in favour there is enough opposition to any reversal to block any such. The EU will not let any nation state intern, execute or torture anyone as a matter of policy; it will oppose attempts to extradite Foreign Nationals who have broken the law where they will be tortured or executed by their home countries, it is hopeless.
The only solution is to withdraw from the Council of Europe entirely and look to building trading links more strongly internationally especially with the Commonwealth.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | May 21, 2006 at 15:35
Very interesting line up described in the Scotsman - particularly the "four other poles... hopefully that represents people from civic platform.
The Swede is interesting too - wonder if thats the former central bank bloke from the june list?
Posted by: Neil | May 21, 2006 at 19:00