The European Union is the Labour party's future. Unless the European Constitution can be imposed, Labour is finished. Scotland will opt for a constitutional settlement where it remains on the best of terms with the rest of the United Kingdom, even settles for a commonwealth solution to who should be the head of state, but it will secede and apply for membership of the European Union in its own name.
If Labour can maintain this peculiarly unattractive half in , half out stance with the EU, that provides the imposed bureaucracies, the democratic deficit, the export of sovereignty, the massive immigration from poorer Europe towards the highest social wage on offer in the entire EU, but offers none of the benefits, the rule of law, the freedom of movement, the use of structural and other special funding, the upgrading and unification of transport connections, the economic integration benefits and, above all, the Euro, then it can survive.
The federal United Kingdom must be maintained while the federal United Europe is defeated.
As America's 'special friend' the UK cannot accept the new European Constitution. A European state with a European armed forces and a European foreign policy won't do at all; neither will the commercial, financial and monetary independence of Europe.
But as a federal state threatened with break-up into its constituent parts and the consequent consignment of an authoritarian, democratic centralist, permanent power holder -objective party to history's dustbin, Labour cannot accept withdrawing from the EU, encouraging a bid for independence and going it alone by Scotland.
Something has got to give, but why aren't the Conservatives calling for an English parliament, the reordering of our relations with Scotland, and a reordering of our relations with the European Union? Conservative survival depends on having a redefined relation with Scotland, more equal and more just for the English taxpayers and the English users of state-funded and state- delivered services , and a wholly commercial relationship with the European Union.
Actually, that's what most English people want. An advisory referendum is no where near enough, the Conservatives need to get onto the right battlefield.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
The dolorous stroke was the creation of regional parliaments, which is why I disagree with calls for another, English one. I long felt that the European strategy would be "divide and conquer".
The issue is of the greatest possible importance - how long did it take us to get the franchise? A vote for a USE is a vote to make voting completely ineffective.
I must stress that I don't write from a specifically Conservative/crusty angle: I've only voted blue once in my life, and that was when I'd seen Blair in action for a term and realised he had to be stopped. Thanks to the Boundary Commission and our voting system, my ballot was never destined to make an atom of difference.
I think it possible that the path we are treading in Europe is not towards a truly democratic Union, but a kind of Empire, Vienna-style. I think you're right to admire the American Constitution.
We are told we are to have a codified constitution S, and these things haven't been written ex novo since the 18th century; a pattern is always chosen and elaborated; so America has the best (though how I wish I'd payed more attention in Comparative Political Systems).
What I fear is an infinitely complex, therefore infinitely unclear discussion document, drawing on the kind of practice used within the European Union when making the rules for things.
And then, contemplate if you can bear to, the kind of mind of the Labour leader.
Conservative formally is Newmania really. I'm horrified to watch Labour setting up democratic centralism when every other country in Europe has spent the last decade throwing it out.
Perhaps it is a new Vienna-style empire on the way, but how can Labour fit in with that?
How Labour will fit in with Empire? I'm beginning to think that the real business of socialism in practice, rather than philosophy or propaganda, is gaining and retaining power. If Labour cared about the people it would enable them to enrich and liberate themselves, instead of caging and feeding them.
If you look around, you can start to think that there is an hereditary principle in relation to political offices and media organisations. Which is why it seems natural to be told that Peter Mandelson is a descendant of Herbert Morrison, as though political beliefs - and one's standing in political organisations - is inherited.
Perhaps certain families will become the political aristocracy and others will be the media courtiers.
We're overdue one of those Harold Macmillan-nexus charts that show how everyone is connected, whether genetically, by marriage, or by past/present business or sexual relationships. Private Eye does some of this, usefully. It would help us to understand the relationship between the BBC, the government, Europe and some strands in higher education and cultural organisations.
'..to understand the relationship between the BBC, the government, Europe and some strands in higher education and cultural organisations.'
There is more to the establishment than this lot, though, S; why are we getting no resistance from the army, the church, the financial elites, the landowners? Also, I'm not sure Europe is involved in the project; it is necessary to the project but the Europeans have queered the project's pitch repeatedly, brushing them aside because the kind of Europe the project wants is of no interest to the federalists (imperialists, if you are right).
Labour is in a bind because the kind of governance system it's installing is an anachronism in Europe; Europe offers real possibilities for independence for parts of the UK so Labour can't just withdraw or negotiate very loose links; it has to stay in, it has to accept the new constitution or Scotland will secede and join the full European programme alone.
HG, the logic of your Impending Consitutional Crunch thesis is impeccable and its account of Labour's bind:
but across a wide swathe of issues, both Blair and Brown have shown themselves shameless masters of keeping everything a fluid, unprincipled shade of grey: slithering under, over and past all the logical roadblocks (e.g. the referendum pledge).
Who is there to confront them with the contradictions inherent? The electorate? well, maybe, but NuLab fancies its chances with them (us), Brown has plenty of stunts and bribes up his sleeve. Murdoch? he's other fish to fry. Dacre? seems to be in thrall, he'll be the buyer of one or other of Brown's dummies. You already despaired of the "establishment". Cameron ...?
Boiling it all down: you are placing huge reliance on Salmond. Is he truly sea-green incorruptible, or just after the best deal he can get? (And are you sure the scottish electorate will give him what he wants ?)
Labour, ND, should be preparing for some kind of referendum on the new constitutional treaty, seeking the answer Yes. Then, as well as having the UK opt outs, they can continue to try to wreck federalist progress at all times - just as Labour has done for the last decade.
This route carries real rewards: it undermines the accusation that a promise for a referendum wasn't kept; it undermines the conservative position both by adopting a referendum policy and, in campaigning for a Yes, probably splitting the Conservative party over Europe all over again; it helps close down the development of Scottish devolution into full blown independence within the EU and maintains the Scottish Labour vote as part of the Westminster majority (and legitimises the position of the Labour leader).
The Conservatives need to jam a crowbar into this 'Impending Consitutional Crunch' fissure, and heave. Heave for a No vote in a referendum; no EU constitutional treaty ratification by executive act; no euro entry.
They need to have a policy for greater independence for Scotland, and a lesser, commercial relationship with the EU, and keeping sterling. As you say - Salmond can't do this without UK wide support - we need to be consulted too.
Post a Comment