This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/23/cameron-speech-europe-not-brave-reckless

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Cameron's speech on Europe was not brave yesterday. He was reckless Cameron's speech on Europe was not brave. He was reckless
(1 day later)
As David Cameron entered the Commons at the end of a morning that began with his speech on Europe, his backbenchers did something they rarely do these days. They cheered him to the echo. Moments earlier the Conservative chairman, Grant Shapps, had announced on TV that the Europe speech had united the party. The sight of so many delighted Tory MPs, many of whom have become minor political celebrities by making the prime minister's life miserable, seemed to suggest Shapps was right.As David Cameron entered the Commons at the end of a morning that began with his speech on Europe, his backbenchers did something they rarely do these days. They cheered him to the echo. Moments earlier the Conservative chairman, Grant Shapps, had announced on TV that the Europe speech had united the party. The sight of so many delighted Tory MPs, many of whom have become minor political celebrities by making the prime minister's life miserable, seemed to suggest Shapps was right.
Looked at more carefully, however, it was a sight that brought to mind the famous words of Sir Robert Walpole, declaring war on Spain in 1739: "They now ring the bells, but they will soon wring their hands." Or a scene that recalled something Tony Blair was fond of saying in the more recent past: "The British people may have their prejudices, but they get very uneasy when their politicians start to share them."Looked at more carefully, however, it was a sight that brought to mind the famous words of Sir Robert Walpole, declaring war on Spain in 1739: "They now ring the bells, but they will soon wring their hands." Or a scene that recalled something Tony Blair was fond of saying in the more recent past: "The British people may have their prejudices, but they get very uneasy when their politicians start to share them."
Be in no doubt. Cameron will enjoy a turbocharged good press. His poll numbers will move up too. Much of the praise will be misdirected, however. This was an important speech about an important subject. The tone, especially in the parts dealing with the European Union's successes and failures, was practical and thoughtful. But the promise of an in-out referendum, far from being an act of great political mastery, could prove to be Cameron's career-defining error.Be in no doubt. Cameron will enjoy a turbocharged good press. His poll numbers will move up too. Much of the praise will be misdirected, however. This was an important speech about an important subject. The tone, especially in the parts dealing with the European Union's successes and failures, was practical and thoughtful. But the promise of an in-out referendum, far from being an act of great political mastery, could prove to be Cameron's career-defining error.
The first reason is the bad timing. Why do this now? There is no imminent climactic decision facing the EU. The terms of the post-eurozone crisis EU have yet to be set. There is an act of the UK parliament guaranteeing a yes-no vote on any large treaty change. And Cameron does not know the outcome of the 2015 election: he may lead a Tory majority government after 2015, but he may face another coalition. Cameron has made a rod for his own back because of a misread threat from Ukip.The first reason is the bad timing. Why do this now? There is no imminent climactic decision facing the EU. The terms of the post-eurozone crisis EU have yet to be set. There is an act of the UK parliament guaranteeing a yes-no vote on any large treaty change. And Cameron does not know the outcome of the 2015 election: he may lead a Tory majority government after 2015, but he may face another coalition. Cameron has made a rod for his own back because of a misread threat from Ukip.
Wednesday's pledge does not settle the European issue in the Tory party either. On the contrary. Everything is still to play for in the EU. Cameron has not said what his red lines are. He does not give details because he doesn't know the answer. Nor does he know what is negotiable and what is not. And he cannot answer the question that Labour's Douglas Alexander rightly keeps asking: what proportion of what you want would qualify as a victory that justified a yes – is it 50%, 70%, 90% or even 100%?Wednesday's pledge does not settle the European issue in the Tory party either. On the contrary. Everything is still to play for in the EU. Cameron has not said what his red lines are. He does not give details because he doesn't know the answer. Nor does he know what is negotiable and what is not. And he cannot answer the question that Labour's Douglas Alexander rightly keeps asking: what proportion of what you want would qualify as a victory that justified a yes – is it 50%, 70%, 90% or even 100%?
The referendum is five years away – a very long time. The coming vote will now infect everything Cameron does. He may present an appearance of indifference to the outcome – sure, stay in if we can, but hey, leave if we must. But his preference was clear. He wants Britain to stay in "heart and soul". These are strong words. I assume he meant them. But they mean he cannot afford to lose. So every large decision must now be judged according to whether it advances his chances of victory in 2018. Europe, meanwhile, knows it can play a tight game. Cameron has bought himself five years of battles. And for what in return?The referendum is five years away – a very long time. The coming vote will now infect everything Cameron does. He may present an appearance of indifference to the outcome – sure, stay in if we can, but hey, leave if we must. But his preference was clear. He wants Britain to stay in "heart and soul". These are strong words. I assume he meant them. But they mean he cannot afford to lose. So every large decision must now be judged according to whether it advances his chances of victory in 2018. Europe, meanwhile, knows it can play a tight game. Cameron has bought himself five years of battles. And for what in return?
The second great reason for scepticism about Cameron's strategy is the likelihood of its destructive impact on the Conservative party. Think ahead to the four possible outcomes of the referendum he has now announced. None is without serious peril. If Cameron wins a stay-in vote in 2018, it will be a personal triumph. But a substantial rump of Tory diehard anti-Europeans will be devastated. They want the referendum because they want to leave the EU. They will never vote to stay. They also despise Cameron. After an in vote they will no longer have a political raison d'etre. They could split the party to the right, and perhaps join Ukip, or worse.The second great reason for scepticism about Cameron's strategy is the likelihood of its destructive impact on the Conservative party. Think ahead to the four possible outcomes of the referendum he has now announced. None is without serious peril. If Cameron wins a stay-in vote in 2018, it will be a personal triumph. But a substantial rump of Tory diehard anti-Europeans will be devastated. They want the referendum because they want to leave the EU. They will never vote to stay. They also despise Cameron. After an in vote they will no longer have a political raison d'etre. They could split the party to the right, and perhaps join Ukip, or worse.
But what if Cameron campaigns to stay in and loses? That outcome would mean the end of his career, the probable fall of the government and the likelihood of party civil war. There would be no love lost between the Tories' in and out factions on the day after Cameron lost the referendum. A split would again be likely, and even under Boris Johnson the Conservatives' chances of winning a new general election would be fragile.But what if Cameron campaigns to stay in and loses? That outcome would mean the end of his career, the probable fall of the government and the likelihood of party civil war. There would be no love lost between the Tories' in and out factions on the day after Cameron lost the referendum. A split would again be likely, and even under Boris Johnson the Conservatives' chances of winning a new general election would be fragile.
Alternatively, what if an angry Cameron returns empty-handed from Berlin and finds himself leading an out campaign to victory in the promised referendum? At least some moderate Tories would be likely to defect to the centre immediately. But this ultimate Eurosceptic triumph would quickly turn sour on the Tories. Without Europe, they would have no one else to blame. The voters would soon get buyer's remorse. Labour would immediately prosper. Electoral defeat and the political wilderness would beckon for the Tories.Alternatively, what if an angry Cameron returns empty-handed from Berlin and finds himself leading an out campaign to victory in the promised referendum? At least some moderate Tories would be likely to defect to the centre immediately. But this ultimate Eurosceptic triumph would quickly turn sour on the Tories. Without Europe, they would have no one else to blame. The voters would soon get buyer's remorse. Labour would immediately prosper. Electoral defeat and the political wilderness would beckon for the Tories.
Now suppose, finally, that Cameron leads a get out campaign but is defeated. The voters decide instead to stay in the EU against the advice of most of his party. The government could not survive – and Labour might then be looking at a 1997-style landslide in the unavoidable ensuing election.Now suppose, finally, that Cameron leads a get out campaign but is defeated. The voters decide instead to stay in the EU against the advice of most of his party. The government could not survive – and Labour might then be looking at a 1997-style landslide in the unavoidable ensuing election.
Cameron's speech was not brave. It was reckless. The brave stance today was Ed Miliband's, sticking to Labour's practical pro-Europeanism and refusing to follow suit. Instead, Wednesday marks the moment when Cameron's pragmatic centre-right political project finally bent the knee to the ideological fantasy about Europe that still grips the Tory party. It was a step back towards a past from which Cameron once promised to lead his party. It was a step away from the electoral middle ground of which he has always seemed a natural inhabitant. It is a big moment and, in its way, even a tragic one.Cameron's speech was not brave. It was reckless. The brave stance today was Ed Miliband's, sticking to Labour's practical pro-Europeanism and refusing to follow suit. Instead, Wednesday marks the moment when Cameron's pragmatic centre-right political project finally bent the knee to the ideological fantasy about Europe that still grips the Tory party. It was a step back towards a past from which Cameron once promised to lead his party. It was a step away from the electoral middle ground of which he has always seemed a natural inhabitant. It is a big moment and, in its way, even a tragic one.