EU Referendum


EU Referendum: not going to happen


19/12/2015




The self-delusion of the legacy media is rampant today, with the Telegraph, the Guardian and the Financial Times, amongst others, all saying that David Cameron has cleared the way for a June referendum.

The basis for this is incredibly thin, the media relying on the Prime Minister having stated that he believes "2016 will be the year we achieve something really vital, fundamentally changing the UK's relationship with the EU and finally addressing the concerns of the British people about our membership".

"Then", he said, "it will be for the British people to decide whether we remain or leave. It is a choice we will all need to think hard about".

Before going into the meeting, Mr Cameron said: "Our in/out referendum will be going ahead before the end of 2017", so here it is pretty obvious that the Prime Minister is playing games. He could have actually said that, all things being equal, he intended to put the question to a vote next year, but he didn't. Instead, he came up with this ambiguous statement which could be taken in so many ways.

In the context, the "then" in relation to the people deciding could mean "in 2016" – but not necessarily in June of even July. It could just as easily mean "afterwards", putting the referendum in to 2017.

With a statement so vague, the Prime Minister can deny that it ever was his intention to hold the referendum next year. In fact, he won't ever need to deny it because he has never said it, or even hinted it. This is entirely a matter for the media hearing what they want to hear and running a story with not the least substance.

Even the Express is untypically cautious on this, saying merely that, "if a deal is agreed at the next European Council summit in February, it would clear the way for a vote to be held as early as next summer", adding – without a scintilla of evidence: "The Prime Minister's preferred date for the referendum is believed to be June 16".

However, we also get from Reuters that Mr Cameron was "mindful that any failure to meet a self-imposed timetable could fuel opposition to the 'outers' who want to leave the EU". There was, he declared, "no rush", saying: "I've set the deadline for the referendum for the end of 2017. I've always wanted to give myself time to get this right, what matters is the substance".

As to the possibility of a deal in February, apart from the Prime Minister's own statements (which must be taken with a pinch of salt), all we have to go on are the Council Conclusions. These state:
The European Council had a political exchange of views on the UK plans for an (in/out) referendum. Following today's substantive and constructive debate, the members of the European Council agreed to work closely together to find mutually satisfactory solutions in all the four areas at the European Council meeting on 18-19 February 2016.
This must be read in conjunction with yesterday's Reuters report that had a senior official close to the talks saying that the "colleagues" will "coordinate to ensure the prime minister can show British voters he has secured a victory in negotiations to reform the bloc".

This official went on to say: "There's a certain orchestration to make sure that tonight things work out well for David Cameron, to make it look as that he is winning, because no one wants a Brexit".

We also recorded that Bloomberg had it that Mr Cameron must "be seen to fight for British interests and win some progress to take back home before the key February summit". Fredrik Erixon, director of the Brussels-based European Centre for International Political Economy, noted: "The worst thing he could do would be to make people think it's been a walk in the park".

Deconstructing the Council statement, there is clearly an agreement to work closely together "to find mutually satisfactory solutions in all the four areas AT the European Council meeting on 18-19 February 2016".

Specifically, that puts the Council in the frame in February, working together to "find" solutions. There is nothing there that commits them actually to succeeding, and indeed there can be nothing binding that commits anyone to actually achieving a solution.

If this gets close to (or is) sophistry, this could be the case. That is the way the system works. When the chips are down it will do whatever is needed to protect itself.

As to whether there is any chance of the referendum happening, nothing at all has changed. Apart from the Electoral Commission restrictions, the bigger picture prevails – where Mr Cameron needs a treaty change to enact the changes he wants. As before, the "colleagues" cannot promise to deliver until late 2017.

The confirmation of this is in the Council conclusions, for anyone who wants to read them. Totally unreported by the UK media, Friday saw intense discussions on the Five Presidents' report on completing the Economic and Monetary Union.

In that part of the meeting, the European Council confirmed its commitment to work towards completing EMU, asking for certain procedural steps to be completed by June 2016. Then, the "more long-term measures" – in essence treaty change – had to be further explored, with the European Council coming back to those measures "at the latest by the end of 2017".

That is the treaty timetable writ large. That it is what it is going to be. It is not going to change. Cameron is bound by that timetable unless he wants to go to the country empty-handed – whence he will lose. Personally, I am prepared to discount the proposition that the Prime Minister is ready to throw the game. I think he's in it to win.

With that, we already know how this is going to play. The media will go quiet over Christmas. Then we will start to see the chatter build through January, the peak in February coinciding with the Council Meeting.

Amid the crescendo of media prattle and speculation, there will emerge the fateful last-minute complications, stage-managed to achieve maximum dramatic effect. Then, at the 11th hour and 59 minutes, the "final" agreement will be delayed. It will be back on the agenda for the autumn, when we see the "play" repeated, and again in early 2017, with delays all the way to late 2017. 

By the time it comes to the actual referendum, the "leave" campaign will have been run ragged, leaving it confused, exhausted, dispirited and – crucially – desperately short of money. It will have emptied its coffers on running high-intensity campaigns, and will have great difficulty topping them up for the final sprint.

The public, having heard "wolf" cried for so long, will have long before switched off – bored witless with the endless repetition of the same facile arguments and progression of stupid Vote Leave videos. When presented with Mr Cameron's shiny new "British model", they will be more than ready to vote for if for no other reason than to get the whole thing over and done with.

In the meantime, we are in the grip of a media narrative from which there is no escape. Once it takes hold, it becomes unstoppable, like a tsunami All you can do is hunker down, wait for it to expend its fury and clean up the mess afterwards.