EU is confidently moving forward every day, says Daniel Hannan: Campaigns for EU ‘in or out’ referendum in Britain

As nationalism rises, will the European Union fall? This was the question posed by professor Charles Kupchan, of Georgetown University and the US Council on Foreign Relations, in The Washington Post (29 August 2010).

Suddenly, we are offered a contrary view.

Should pro-Europeans and others, discouraged by the European Union’s descent into institutional confusion, intergovernmental bickering and lack of leadership, take heart?



Daniel Hannan, who sits in the anti-integrationist European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) Group in the European Parliament, sees it differently from Kupchan:


The EU doesn't just bound forward in great treaties. It's confidently moving forward every day, says Hannan according to BBC News.



Tory Daniel Hannan calls for 'in or out' EU referendum (8 September 2010, last update 09:47 GMT), we are told by the BBC.


Hannan, an MEP for South East England, is a high profile critic of the European Union, in the EP and on his Telegraph blog. He has now decided to campaign actively for an ‘in or out’ referendum in Britain, putting his energies behind the EU Referendum Campaign (EURC), which aims to take the United Kingdom out of the EU.

Norway (member of the European Economic Area, EEA) and Switzerland (120 bilateral treaties with the EU) are vaguely used by the EURC as examples of alternative relationships, but in my humble opinion the EU Referendum Campaign needs to do some serious work on what a British future outside the EU means and how it should be organised.



Tactically, Hannan has chosen a good moment. The coalition government between the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats has recently made a major breach in the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, by introducing the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill, which would lead to a referendum on a reform of the outdated system of representation.



Britain and EU


The United Kingdom first applied for membership in the three European Communities in 1961, but was twice vetoed by Charles de Gaulle, an inveterate nationalist himself.



Britain was finally allowed to join in 1973. In 1975 a British referendum endorsed UK membership by a margin of two to one (Wikipedia).



The United Kingdom has four opt-outs from the EU Treaties: the Schengen Agreement on the common travel area, the Eurozone, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (with an opportunity to opt in). (Source: Wikipedia)

Despite positioning itself squarely outside core Europe, almost half a century since the first membership application and nearly four decades after becoming a member, Britain has not come to terms with its role in Europe or the EU’s needed role in world affairs.



There is little dedication to promoting European integration and fair burden-sharing in the political discourse, the media treatment and public opinion in Britain. The UK level of trust in the European Union is low; uniquely low across the 27 EU member states, according to the latest Eurobarometer opinion poll.



Meaning of democracy?

The United Kingdom is a heavyweight in a European context, but we may ask how useful its reticent membership is for the European Union, given the EU’s weak structures, lack of full democracy and faltering political leadership.

Anyway, each member state is free to leave the European Union. Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) explicitly states the right of withdrawal, and the modalities of secession are outlined.

‘In or out’ is consequently an internal issue for Britain.

The dichotomy between official EU membership and negative public opinion leads to the question of political legitimacy.

Is it right for a “wise” political establishment to disregard public opinion, even if withdrawal would be short-sighted and against the national interest?

Are wise decisions the essence of democracy, or is democratic government fundamentally a question of legitimacy?

In a democratic society, people assume the consequences of their collective vote, but they later have the right to try to correct their bad choices.

Is trial and error the right way for Britain?




Ralf Grahn

Daniel Hannan’s quaint love of Europe

Languages other than English may be better suited, if you want to gain a deeper understanding of European integration, I argued yesterday.

Daniel Hannan MEP, while professing a love for Europe, misses few opportunities to punish a good word about the European Union, or even a suggestion for greater interest in European affairs generally.



At least Hannan rushed to diminish the Guardian article by Martin Kettle about being trapped by the Anglosphere, I mentioned in the aftermath of the Eurogoblin blog post on the roots of European integration.



In 2009 the current account of the United Kingdom with regard to the European Union was GBP 277 billion and with New Zealand GBP 1.35 billion, but Hannan seems to imply that his constituents are better served if they stay in their comfort zone, the Anglosphere:

The Internet makes it as easy for my constituents to do business with a company in New Zealand as with a company in Belgium. Easier, indeed, because the Kiwi company shares our common law, accountancy practices, commercial traditions and language.

Hannan prefers to look for “folk of our blood and speech” in the Antipodes, as long as he can bypass Europe.



If Hannan had used German, he might as well have said “Blut und Boden”.

The Internet will finally turn the United Kingdom away from Europe. This will democratise something Hannan leaves unmentioned.

Hannan has produced another quaint declaration of love for Europe.




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments has skyrocketed. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.

It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across borders and between linguistic communities. Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:

I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.



Antonia on the Euonym blog (Talking about the EU) tells us that the European Commission in the UK arranges a Day of Multilingual Blogging on 26 September 2010, and the UK Representation has been joined by the multilingual aggregator Bloggingportal.eu and individual Eurobloggers. Join the event page on Facebook, spread the word through social media and personal contacts, begin preparing your blog posts and start learning a new language.

Conservative Europarty hijacked?

The European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group in the European Parliament joins 54 members, which is well above the needed 25, but only three countries have substantial delegations: the UK Conservatives (25 MEPs), the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS; 15) and the Czech Civic Democrats (ODS; 9). In addition, there are five solitary MEPs from five member states, which brings the number of countries represented to eight. This leaves the ECR with a slender margin above the minimum of seven countries.




The anti-integrationists have now set things in motion to start working as a political party at European level (Europarty) and to establish a foundation (think tank): Founding of the “Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists (AECR)” asbl/vzw (30 October 2009).


According to the ECR press release, the directorships have been transferred to the following MEP's: Mr. Jan Zahradil (President), Mr. Adam Bielan (Vice-President), and Mr. Dan Hannan (Secretary-General).

***

Hijacked?



In New Europe, Andy Carling reports that the transferral may have been more dramatic than a casual reader of the above press release would suspect: “A Right Wing Coup ─ Tory Euro-skeptics power grab endangers ECR Group and UK Election chances” (25 October 2009).

***



On Conservative Home, Tim Montgomerie has presented a blueprint for Tory policy, when the Lisbon Treaty is finally ratified by the last member state, the Czech Republic: “The Tories will NOT hold a referendum on Lisbon but seek a 'manifesto mandate' to renegotiate Britain's relationship with the EU” (1 November 2009).

As we are waiting for David Cameron and William Hague to detail their official “we won’t let matters rest there” formula, the news concerning the Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists (AECR) has added to the number of question marks concerning the UK Conservative Party’s policies on Europe.

How far from the mainstream and influence are they poised to move?



Ralf Grahn

EU Lisbon Treaty: Honourable men

I come to bury Lisbon, not to praise him.
The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones;
So let it be with Lisbon. The noble Vaclav
Hath told you Lisbon was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault;
And grievously hath Lisbon answer’d it.
Here, under leave of Vaclav and the rest, -
For Vaclav is an honourable man;
So are they all, all honourable men, -
Come I to speak in Lisbon’s funeral.
He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
But Vaclav says he was ambitious;
and Vaclav is an honourable man.


***

Honourable men

Knowing that 27 member states have agreed and 27 national parliaments have approved the Treaty of Lisbon, as honourable men, David Cameron and William Hague would never rest their EU policy on sabotage against parliamentary authority by Czech president Vaclav Klaus, surely?


Knowing that national governments and national parliaments want the Lisbon Treaty, and that they make the most important decisions in the European Union, as an honourable man, David Hannan would never misrepresent them as Eurocrats, surely?


***

Sober analysis



Eurostein on Adjudicating Europe adds a sober reminder to the actors involved in the Lisbon Treaty ratification difficulties:

“Being too lenient on this kind of unilateral statist exceptionalism, which lacks any principled argumentative foundation, could bring about an avalanche of similar actions in the future.”



According to Czech Happenings, former President Vaclav Havel has said that Klaus with his attitude harmed the country, his arguments were anachronistic and unconvincing.



Ralf Grahn

Daniel Hannan froths about secondary issues

The headline of anti-EU UK Conservative MEP Daniel Hannan’s Telgraph blog post states categorically:

“EU breaks its own rules to funnel money into Irish referendum”



What the assertion boils down to is unverified information that lawyers in the Commission and Council legal services have expressed reservations, which is not the same thing.

Are these doubts official positions, or individual musings? We have no way to tell.

***

Hannan continues by wondering why “Eurocrats” wants the Lisbon Treaty so badly.

He twists the facts. Hannan knows full well that all 27 EU member states agreed on the Lisbon Treaty in order to improve how the European Union works. He is aware of the fact that 26 national parliaments have approved the amending treaty, in most cases by large, qualified majorities and in a number of member states by two houses of parliament. The European Parliament has voted overwhelmingly in favour of the Lisbon Treaty.

Of course they want the Irish to approve the Lisbon Treaty, and Ireland is the only EU country where approval is still needed.

Hannan should ask the member states if they oppose information from the Commission to the EU citizens about the Treaty of Lisbon or other EU matters.

***


If the information is correct, there is nothing to complain about.

If it is false, Hannan and everyone else is invited to show the errors.

Is Daniel Hannan afraid of informing the public about the Lisbon Treaty?

Daniel Hannan, the EU Commission and I share a common trait: We are not Irish. But the Lisbon Treaty is an issue of European interest.

Hannan clearly wants to incite the Irish to vote No in the Lisbon 2009 referendum (and to do the dirty work for the UK Conservatives), but he wants to restrict the free flow of information from the Commission (more objective information at that).

Double standards?



Ralf Grahn

Daniel Hannan admits changed mood ahead of Lisbon referendum

The irreconcilable UK anti-EU crusader Daniel Hannan admits that the mood in Ireland has changed ahead of the Lisbon 2009 referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

Hannan even conjectures on the reasons.

He only misses the most obvious causes for the latest reliable opinion polls:

The Irish voters are more knowledgeable because of information efforts and a longer debate. They are less confused by misleading assertions by No campaigners, because of clarifying guarantees and assurances by Ireland’s European partners. They realise that they are better off within the Eurozone and with the support of the European Central Bank, than outside on their own. They trust the business leaders, economists, academics, trade unionists and farmers’ leaders who believe that the Lisbon Treaty is in the best interests of Ireland. They comprehend that their country can make friends and influence people by participating fully in the European Union, rather than by rejecting the amending treaty.

The Irish may even see why Conservative English politicians are so keen for them to wreck the Lisbon Treaty.


Ralf Grahn

Daniel Hannan digs the US Constitution

The best things can always be briefly stated, were Daniel Hannan’s words about the US constitution:

“The Lisbon Treaty, say its advocates, is shorter than the old European Constitution. Where the previous draft ran to 349 pages, the new one is a mere 287. (As opposed to my copy of the US constitution which, with all 27 amendments, runs to a mere 18: the best things can always be briefly stated.)”

***

Briefly stated, perhaps the next European Constitution will start to propel the ‘Federal Republic of Europe’ towards the greatness achieved long ago by the United States of America.


Ralf Grahn

Source:

Daniel Hannan: Testing our intelligence with the Treaty; Telegraph blog, 2 January 2008;
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/danielhannan/jan08/lisbontreaty.htm