In-out EU referendum: Cameron's hokey-cokey

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/23/eu-referendum-david-cameron-editorial

Version 0 of 1.

The man who once warned his party against "banging on about Europe" yesterday put the EU at the heart of all political discussion for the next five years. But David Cameron did not turn up to Bloomberg to pledge an in-out referendum in the stripy, boatclub blazer associated with the Europhobes of John Major's day. Instead, he turned up dressed for business – and deployed all of his eloquence to make his case in a tone of measured pragmatism.

There was a respectful nod to the historic achievement of drawing a line under Europe's war-torn past, and the PM went out of his way to avoid pull-up-the-drawbridge-at-Dover slogans, insisting that "ours is not just an island story – it is also a continental story". He targeted fire precisely where the European project is weakest – in particular, its failure to create any sense of pan-national people power across borders. Who could disagree with the Cameron verdict that there is no European "demos" to speak of? And who would disagree, either, with his commonsensical argument that Europe is in crisis, and that within every crisis are the seeds of wider change.

But dig down and this promising topsoil gives way to dust. After hailing "the ideal of co-operation", Mr Cameron suggested fighting crime as a promising application of that ideal. Listening to him, one would not imagine that his government is moving to ditch 130 police and justice measures, including the European arrest warrant, not because of any real argument about how they operate, but in pursuance of a slogan about bringing powers home. And while no one would dispute the priority of restored prosperity, one might have hoped he would explain the link to a reformed EU.

<strong>No prosperity plan</strong>

Explicitly, however, he said next to nothing to explain how his new Europe would create recovery. Implicitly, talk of "unnecessary rules and regulation" suggested that cutting EU employment protections would somehow create jobs. There may be circumstances where there is something in that, but a great recession – marked not by cost pressures, but sluggish wages – isn't one. It is the approach familiar on the domestic front from the dismal Beecroft report, whose "no-fault dismissals" most workers would regard as a plan for Britain to sack its way out of the slump.

Get-the-state-out-of-the-way economics always underlay some of the cant about sovereignty. Freeing up managers to "get on and manage" appears a self-evident solution to southern English Conservatives like Mr Cameron, but attitudes differ in parts of the country which faced a chronic dearth of industry before the present slump. Some northern communities have been saved by inward investment decisions, made as far away as Tokyo. For such communities, not to mention Scotland and Wales where devolved administrations voice different priorities, the worldwide perception of Britain as a plausible base from which to serve the single market matters more than any new freedom to hire or fire.

The speech's real concern, however, was not economics but politics – the politics of a restive Tory backbench, an insurgent Ukip and a mostly Europhobic press. Each routinely claims to speak for Britain, and the country is undoubtedly cross about Europe just as it is cross about Westminster and much else besides. But when voters are asked about their priorities, Europe barely registers. Despite Mr Cameron's claim that "public disillusionment with the EU is at an all time high", two recent polls have registered hostility receding.

Ed Miliband needs to keep this in mind as he settles Labour's response. Referendums are hard to resist, as it is always easier to demand that the people be given their say than to ask awkward questions about what purpose is served when no clear proposition is on offer. But in the house yesterday, Ed Miliband displayed some of the steel that has occasionally flashed through in tough moments before. Even though Labour's briefing later nervously sought to retrieve wriggle room, the leader's first instinct was to come out against an in-out vote – a sign that he is now thinking not merely about winning the election, but about what Labour wants to do in power. Two years dominated by a plebiscite does not appeal.

<strong>False promise</strong>

Behind in the polls, the calculation for Mr Cameron is different. He urgently needs the brief boost he can now expect. Beyond that, he reasons that Europe is so desperate to keep Britain in that it will to come up with something tangible for him to sell. He should not underestimate the hostile fury he will draw the UK's way by gratuitously instigating a fresh crisis when the existing one is exhausting enough. Paris could prove much more relaxed about a UK exit than he presumes, and while Berlin will no doubt haggle over non-treaty changes, Britain is not going to get a blanket exemption from everything it doesn't like.

Most likely Mr Cameron will be left securing cosmetic concessions. He then has to follow Harold Wilson in 1975, and claim these are something much more – or else actually start the march to the door. Either way, the promise of seeking a popular mandate for a radically reformed Europe disappears in the haze.