Since its inception in 1956, what we now call the European Union has attempted to control events and, when that proves impossible, to ignore them. That strategy appears finally to have failed, to judge by the new panic over migration.
That failure raises two questions: does the widespread belief that the open borders policy is finished make it more or less likely that Britain will stay in the EU? And could the ideal of the EU itself survive such a repudiation?
Manuel Valls, the French prime minister, has made the obvious point that the EU cannot take everyone who wishes to migrate to it. He is under serious pressure at home, where Marine Le Pen threatens the old French political class. He has opened up a rift with Germany, criticising Angela Merkel’s unilateral decision to take a million refugees from Syria. The assaults by Muslim men on women in Cologne on New Year’s Eve has been widely reported in France, and resonated deeply – but not as deeply as in Germany, where Mrs Merkel is in trouble.
It is no wonder a deal on Britain’s so-called “renegotiation”, which is supposed to be completed on February 19, may be delayed. The referendum, which for the last month or so we have been led to believe would be in June, may therefore be postponed. For a Europe now riven by arguments about migration, Britain’s demands – footling and irrelevant though they are – are an additional pain in the backside that they could do without. With a world economic crisis brewing to boot, things are looking grim for the EU. I don’t know whether, as Mr Valls seems to fear, it will survive the migration crisis, but I’m sure it wouldn’t survive a British exit. This is in itself a compelling reason to vote to leave.
"I was told last week that Tory party donors who contemplated funding the 'out' campaign had been subtly advised not to view the honours lists with any sense of expectation"
The migration crisis has not changed the EU’s fundamental aim: the commitment to “ever-closer union”. The EU is determined countries will not, in the end, rule themselves. Look at its conduct towards the new Polish government, of which Brussels deeply disapproves. That government is unpleasant and not behaving well, but is hardly unique in deceiving voters about its intentions. Poles elected it just months ago. Poland is a democracy, and will have a chance to unelect it, which it may well take. It is not the EU’s job to destabilise or dictate to the government of Poland, however vile it thinks it is, not least because the European Commission has far less democratic legitimacy than the Polish government does.
But then wherever its influence pertains, the EU and the Queensberry rules hardly go together. Our own ruling party’s conduct appears to be corkscrew-straight when confronting those who wish to leave the EU. I was told last week that Tory party donors who contemplated funding the “out” campaign had been subtly advised not to view the honours lists with any sense of expectation. It was also alleged last week that the Tory party broke spending limits to defeat Nigel Farage in South Thanet last year by using central funds to ship in people for the local campaign. If true, by the way, that is a criminal offence, and the result should be overturned. What are the police doing about it?
Ministers who want out are awaiting their moment, though whether that will be February 19 seems in doubt. Mr Cameron might well punish, and perhaps sack, those who disagree with him, but that would be unwise. Tory MPs tell me they reckon 90 per cent of their activists are outers, and believe that, whatever the result of a referendum, their next leader will be a Eurosceptic. That is why I find it surprising that someone as rampantly ambitious as Boris Johnson has not committed to the “Out” camp, and so unsurprising that someone as rampantly ambitious as George Osborne has not yet ruled out doing so. Certainly, anyone who wishes to lead the Tory party should confirm his or her “Out” credentials, or forget it.
Mr Cameron is still trailing round Europe – he was in Prague on Friday – and there are sporadic attempts to whip up support for his cause. Whether it impresses the public – who mostly cannot afford to insulate themselves against the effects of mass migration – that Goldman Sachs has announced it is pumping money into the “In” campaign must be very doubtful. A European Union that exists to benefit multi-billion dollar corporations, many of whom contrive to pay very little tax, seems to invite the less-privileged to vote to leave it.
Many ministers grasp the truth about the futility of the “renegotiations”, the increasing climate of intimidation and deceit surrounding them, and – to echo Mr Valls – the crises gradually undoing the flawed European ideal. No wonder Mr Cameron, who can hardly criticise colleagues for making up their minds before the outcome is clear, wants to keep them quiet for as long as possible. He can’t do so forever.
Laissez un commentaire Votre adresse courriel ne sera pas publiée.
Veuillez vous connecter afin de laisser un commentaire.
Aucun commentaire trouvé