Angela merkel

David Cameron’s statement on the European summit just now was an opportunity for pro-European politicians to tweak the Conservative party’s tail about the coalition’s stance on Europe. Ed Miliband told the PM that on Europe ‘we’re here to help him’ and ‘we’re prepared to ignore his previous convictions if he is too.’ Charles Kennedy welcomed the PM as a new pro-European. While Denis MacShane, the very communitaire former Europe Minister, said that there was nothing in Cameron’s statement he disagreed with. There was some grumbling from the Tory benches. Sir Peter Tapsell asked why if Merkel can get a Treaty amended can’t Cameron do the same and allow the country

The British media woke up this week, realising that Europe still exists. As David Cameron travels to Brussels, questions loom over what, exactly, he can achieve in Europe – at this summit, and more importantly, moving forward.   Much of the commentary surrounding the summit has focussed on the increase to the EU’s 2011 budget, which Cameron is fighting.  And for good reason. It’s insane that Britain – or any other net contributing state – should be forced to accept any increase to the EU budget, at a time of tough austerity at home.   Cameron has spent considerable time talking up the negotiations on the budget increase, so he

David Cameron’s first battle with the EU opens on Thursday. Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy hope to introduce a treaty that will deliver tough sanctions on eurozone members that break budget guidelines. Their success rests on David Cameron’s support. Europe is built on quid pro quos, so Cameron will ensure that the new treaty does not prejudice Britain whilst also seeking to repatriate competences. He will avoid the more avant garde suggestions of outspoken eurosceptics – he knows that a UK Sovereignty Bill and exemption from pan-European customs arrangements are unfeasible unless Britain rescinds its membership – and, in the delicate context of coalition, seek practical assurances instead. The regulation

The Coalition Government’s proposal for a ‘referendum lock’ on future transfers of powers to the EU has already been branded “worthless” by some Tory backbenchers . It’s easy to share their frustration at the Coalition’s lack of interest in EU reform so far. After all, the Government has chosen to opt in to the European Investigation Order; signed up for new EU financial supervisors; and chosen not to challenge the UK’s participation in the eurozone bailout (making British taxpayers potentially liable for up to £8 billion in loans to eurozone governments). However, the referendum lock is still significant. New crises, situations and politicians’ egos will always drive the need for

Iain Dale has news of fresh ruptures in the Tories’ controversial European grouping. Here are the details: This is an intriguing development. Perhaps the combination of being in government, the balance of the coalition and Cameron’s markedly improved relations with Merkel and Sarkozy (whose parties are aligned with the EPP) brings the need for fresh European alliances? Most of the controversy surrounding the CRG is unfounded but it certainly damaged Cameron at home and abroad. I’m told that the Tories have no intention of shifting allegiance, and that the original plan was for Kirkhope and Kaminski to share the chairmanship if possible. But even so, watch this space…

Gerard Baker has written the cover piece for this week’s magazine and it’s a must read. In it, he explains why ‘closer fiscal union’, as Rompuy terms it, is not to Germany’s advantage: ‘Any attempted fiscal union might well yield to Germany the biggest single vote in how much to raise in taxes and how to spend it. But it could still be outvoted by an alliance of smaller countries. Such a set-up would become an institutionalised mechanism by which German taxes will be siphoned off permanently to weaker European states. The nightmare for Germans is that an unholy alliance of Spanish, Greeks, Italians and Portuguese will be able to

Angela Merkel’s fall from favour is something David Cameron ought to bear in mind as he looks for lessons to guide his term in office. The German chancellor could do no wrong when she was first elected. A new “Iron Lady”, she was seen as a giant among pygmees. Tony Blair was leaving the scene, Nicolas Sarkozy had yet to be elected, the newspapers swooned, the voters applauded. Mrs Merkel was respected in the US and Europe. She made her unwieldy coalition with the Social Democrats work, almost singlehandedly picked the NATO secretary-general and ruled over EU meetings. Now, EU commission president Jose Manuel Barrosso is (rightly) calling her “naïve”

The Conservative Party’s departure from the European People’s Party came down to a choice of expediency over principle. If you are inclined to accept that Britain will stay in the EU and that membership helps this country – even if it requires some compromises – you will likely find the move unfortunate. If you are more concerned about the principles at stake – and feel that Britain’s loss of sovereignty has gone too far – and do not care about the loss of influence on the legislative process, you are likely to be in favor of the Tory move.   David Cameron is keen to keep the issue of Europe

A Conservative Party article of faith has been the belief that other Europeans are innately more pro-EU than the British. In the past, this has undoubtedly been the case. Poll after poll has shown that Britons see the EU differently than most other Europeans. But as I have argued before, times are changing on the continent. In an article in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (not a Europhile newspaper by any stretch), Germany’s new politics is explained. Nikolas Busse argues that the Greek crisis and failure of EU leaders to cobble together a plausible bail-out is the first major manifestation of Germany’s new role in Europe – that of a country

It seems there must be discussion about a potential European Monetary Fund, and an organisation to manage Europe’s economies that circumvents Maastricht, to avert future fiscal crises. So much for Lisbon, the treaty to end all treaties. Quite why no one, especially the treaty’s opponents, acknowledged the possibility of a member state’s financial collapse whilst Lisbon was being ratified during the recession is a mystery. However, all that is past. The question for the future is will there be a referendum this time round? Adrian Michaels, rightly, point out that the Tories’ eurowars are likely to be renewed at the most inopportune time for Cameron. But Cameron will offer a

In a few weeks time, a slew of foreign ministers will descend on London to attend a conference on Afghanistan. No.10 will use the event to sell Gordon Brown as a statesman, confidently dealing with the nation’s threats. The Conservatives, in turn, will probably try to score the usual points about Britain’s failure, alongside its NATO allies, to make any in-roads in the fight against the Taliban. Together with Tony Blair’s evidence to the Iraq Inquiry, the conference may create one of the few moments in the drawn-out election campaign when the three party leaders stop talking about the NHS and focus on national security issues instead. Too bad, then,

Is Greece too big to fail? When the Eurozone project was up and running, its taxpayers were promised: this was not a system where they’d have to bail out a badly-run country like Greece or Italy (or Brown’s Britain, were we members). But this rule (a clause in the Lisbon Treaty) is being torn up with various assurances from Germany and the ECB that they Greece is too big to fail – and they’d rather put their taxpayers’ wonga on the table than risk their precious promise. I made this point in my News of the World column yesterday (that bit not online). Here’s the story: 1. The Eurozone did