11/06/2012
Having consistently opposed the idea of an in/out referendum - for the simple reason that we could not guarantee a win - as the eurocrisis deepened and a new treaty for the eurozone was proposed, we could readily see how the
game had changed. For the first time, we have
winnable options.
But, if it was obvious to us, then it was just as evident to the "colleagues". And we now see the fruits of their deliberations via their favourite son, George Eustice. This is the man who has recognised the danger and has moved rapidly into
damage limitation mode.
George does not want us to leave the EU, but he knows that sentiment is not shared by many in the party in which he squats. Unable thus to sell an unadulterated pro-EU message, he is trying to confuse the issues in order to weaken the force of the withdrawal lobby.
Previous methodology has been to introduce a spurious "third way" into the debate, the "renegotiation" option. But now that withdrawal has become a serious alternative, with a real chance of securing an "out", the mood has music changed.
Eustice now warns that Eurosceptics who argue for a referendum on withdrawal "should be careful what they wish for", citing the alternative-vote referendum, "which last year vanquished the campaign for electoral reform for a generation".
That has been precisely our concern â a lost referendum would neutralise euroscepticism for a generation. But that was before the "colleagues" decided on a new treaty. Skirting that, Eustice tells us: "While the time for a referendum may come, it must offer the public the option most want, which is to stay in the EU but under new terms".
If by this means he can turn a referendum into "renegotiate â yes or no", he will have served his purpose. And to aid him in his efforts, he has had
Open Europe intervene. The line here is that, when the Eurozone goes for its treaty, Britain can hijack the IGC and "stake out its own model for EU membership".
This we explored
on Sunday - arguing that the "colleagues" would be extremely hostile to the idea that they should break off from dealing with their existential crisis in order to address the British problem.
However, there is more to this. Since Lisbon, the IGC process has changed. Procedurally, the European Council will set the terms of reference for the IGC and it is now chaired by the council president, Van Rompuy. He controls the agenda and, in accordance with the terms of reference, can exclude material, on a majority vote if need be. And he will have a majority.
The UK's only option then is to wait for the final draft treaty and veto it â thus blocking the eurozone and a measure that he has approved. This is not a serious option â all the "colleagues" have to do is face Cameron down on something he has already agreed. Merkel made sure of that. They will get their way.
The boys and girls of Open Europe, therefore, are wrong. So is Eustice. There is no renegotiation option, not unless or until the UK has formally notified its intention to leave the EU. But, as even
Mary Ann Sieghart points out, this is the last thing that is wanted. The British public shall not pass. They shall not have their exit.
COMMENT: "OPEN EUROPE" THREAD
