The Spectator

So why not give us a vote?

issue 29 November 2003

When former French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing referred to the writing of the proposed EU constitution as Europe’s ‘Philadelphia moment’, he was presumably referring not to the composition of the United States’ constitution in 1787, but to the popular brand of processed cheese. What emerges from the first two months of the year-long negotiations is less a crisp declaration of the rights and responsibilities of free-born citizens, more a soggy mass of indefinite form.

That is not to say that the European manner of writing treaties and constitutions is without method. Its genius is to allow each national leader the space to beat his chest over some patriotic issue, win some small concession, and so give the impression to the voters back home that he has somehow managed to outwit his fellow leaders and create a Europe in his own image. This is what John Major did when he negotiated Britain’s ‘opt-out’ from the social chapter of the Maastricht treaty ten years ago; only for employers later to discover that many of the provisions would in any case be slipped into British law under European health and safety directives.

Get Britain's best politics newsletters

Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.

Already a subscriber? Log in

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in