Brown’s EU Blues

James Gubb, 14 May 2007

Some time ago Tim Garton-Ash summed up Blair’s EU problems in two words ‘Rupert’ and ‘Murdoch’. Brown too will face these problems but with two additionally troublesome words, ‘Tony’ and ‘Blair’.
Much has been made in the media of the fact that Brown is essentially a domestic politician, has little inclination to engage himself unnecessarily with the politics of the Europe, and moreover that he enjoys running the UK economy too much to be willing to share it with the EU any further. This appears to be cause for optimism amongst EU-sceptics, but realistically Brown will be unable to just ‘dig in’ – the constitutional issue will not simply pass over-head and action WILL need to be taken, even if it not compelled by the actions of Blair at the EU summit on 22nd June.

The timing of the constitution’s reappearance only serves to make things worse for Brown. Not only will he be forced to peer above the metaphorical parapet, but he must do so at a time when he would prefer his focus to be elsewhere, and will have to do so under the scrutiny of a ruthless media and all in the run-up to a general election.
According to Sir Stephen Wall (formerly Tony Blair’s chief adviser on Europe), speaking at LSE last week, this leaves Brown three options:
‘Play for Time’ in the hope of delaying the need to make any substantial commitments until after the next general election – difficult as Blair may well have already signed him up before stepping down and such a move would create tension with those powerbrokers at the centre of the EU, not an ideal start for his foreign relations.
‘Up the Ante’ by supporting the reforms but calling for a delay in acting upon them until the new EU budget is agreed and can be dealt with more comprehensively ‘wholesale’, incorporating such items as CAP reform. Once again, not an ideal starting position for relations with his European counterparts and likely to result in a rather unproductive row, with the French at the very least, even under Sarkozy.
Finally and most likely – ‘Bite the Bullet’ has Brown conceding on the majority of constitutional points while championing the call for amendments to some of the less contentious articles. He could thereby present himself in Brussels as a willing negotiator and to the British electorate as the fearless lion tamer, standing firm at the center of the EU big top. The EU and circuses, now there’s an analogy that seems apt.
Whichever path Brown chooses to take he is sure to face considerable difficulties, but here Jim McConalogue (of the European Foundation) argues the only course available to him is outright rejection of the Consitutional Treaty:

Gordon Brown Must Reject European Constitutional Treaty
“On Saturday 12 May 2007, The Times wrote that, following Tony Blair’s announcement for departure, Gordon Brown had made clear his position on the European Constitutional Treaty. The Times issued only the following statement on Gordon Brown’s views: “…Labour was pro-European and it believed in a Europe of governments co-operating and that it would be some time before it was known what sort of arrangements would emerge from discussions between governments.” Of course, this doesn’t mean much, other than ‘watch this space.’
However, there was some sign of hope in the subsequent day’s small print of The Sunday Times. It confirmed that Brown held some scepticism toward Blair’s pro-European agenda – “Brown is not thought to be keen on Blair’s wish to sign up to a new European Union ‘mini-treaty’ which can be imposed in the UK without the need for a referendum.” In that sense, Bill Cash MP – Chairman of the European Foundation – hit the nail on the head with his public statement on Friday, when he said:
“The situation is a travesty. Firstly, there should not even be a Constitutional Treaty. Secondly, if either Blair or Brown does think it is necessary, it should not be signed behind the backs of the British people. It should be held to referendum. Thirdly, it is now time for Gordon Brown to take the reigns and pledge a referendum on the Constitutional Treaty and all other treaties.”
Following the French and Dutch referendums of 2005, in which both electorates voted against a European constitution, and a recent poll (commissioned by Global Vision) in the UK showing that 65% per cent of the Europeans want Britain to have a referendum demanding a looser relationship with the EU, Gordon Brown must take stock of the UK political climate and hold a public referendum on a Constitutional Treaty and all existing treaties. To not do so, would be to assume that the British people, by tacit consent, desire further European integration – that is simply not the case.
Although when Brown hinted at future arrangements, he must have clearly been referring to the European Council Summit on 21-22 June, it is essential that he does not inherit the undemocratic strategy or text of the Constitution as advocated by Blair. There is no justification for either Blair or Brown to commit to a new European Constitutional Treaty, and if New Labour must commit to such an undemocratic agenda on the question of Europe, it must at the very least hold a UK-wide referendum. The New Labour Party can only ignore Britain’s wishes on the European issue for so long.
Furthermore, it does not make sense for Brown to further ignore public apathy on this matter. For a future Prime Minister, who has promised not to open himself to “sectional” interest, and hopes to restore power to Parliament and public trust in democracy, it wouldn’t be a good start for his Party to back a Constitutional Treaty behind the backs of the British people. It seems important that Brown takes stock of the failed proposals of the Blairite philosophy – and its ten year pro-European rule – to pressure Blair not to sign up or commit to a constitutional process that might prejudice the UK position.”