Opinion

Hugo Dixon

How Britain could win EU reform

Hugo Dixon
Mar 3, 2014 10:41 UTC

Angela Merkel’s visit to London last week has been viewed by many as a snub to David Cameron’s aim to reform the European Union. But it all depends on what one means by reform.

The British prime minister last year promised a referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU by the end of 2017. He vowed to renegotiate Britain’s relationship with Europe in the meantime – the idea being that, on the back of such reforms, he would be able to persuade a sceptical electorate to vote to stay in.

If Cameron focuses on subjecting the EU’s treaties to open-heart surgery, he will be disappointed. But if he puts his energy into making the bloc more competitive – something that would be hugely beneficial for Britain – the prize of reform may well be within his grasp.

That much was clear from the German chancellor’s day-trip. She disappointed some British eurosceptics by arguing against “fundamental reform of the European architecture.” She does want revisions to prevent another euro crisis. But, for her, treaty change should be “limited and targeted.”

What’s more, Merkel is only one voice among 28 leaders, albeit the most powerful. Every single country has to agree treaty changes. This means that trying to revamp the treaties to suit the desires of British eurosceptics has zero chance of success.

UK Tories mishandle EU relationship

Hugo Dixon
Jan 23, 2014 10:16 UTC

A year after David Cameron promised a referendum on EU membership, the British prime minister and his Conservative party are alienating potential allies across the Channel. He needs to pitch reforms that benefit the whole bloc, not just pander to eurosceptics. Otherwise an “Out” vote looks more likely.

Cameron promised to hold a referendum by the end of 2017, assuming he’s still in power. His original hope was to first renegotiate the terms of Britain’s EU membership sufficiently so that he could then sell the advantages of staying in to a sceptical electorate.

In such a scenario, the expectation was that much of Tory press would rally round – or at least mute their criticism. Meanwhile, business would campaign to stay in, alongside the Liberal Democrats, the junior partners in Cameron’s coalition, and the opposition Labour party.

Cameron, UK hurt by Syria vote fiasco

Hugo Dixon
Aug 30, 2013 09:26 UTC

Rarely has a UK prime minister done so much damage to himself in a single week as David Cameron has with his mishandling of a vote authorising military action against Syria. Cameron may cling onto power after his stunning parliamentary defeat on Thursday night, but he will cut a diminished figure on the domestic and international stage. In the process, he has also damaged Britain’s influence.

Cameron’s litany of errors began with his decision to recall parliament from its summer holidays in order to give the green light to British participation in a military strike designed to punish Bashar al-Assad’s murderous regime for its alleged use of chemical weapons against its people last week. The decision to get parliament’s approval was right, even if not constitutionally necessary. The mistake was to rush things before all the evidence of Assad’s culpability had been gathered and published. In France, which is also contemplating military action, the parliamentary debate is scheduled for next week.

To be fair, Cameron tried to achieve political consensus. He initially persuaded Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, to back military action. He also got Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister and leader of the Liberal Democrats, to sign up. Both of these are also partly to blame for the fiasco. They should have attached many more conditions to their support.

UK faces five years of limbo-land

Hugo Dixon
Jan 23, 2013 11:33 UTC

The UK faces half a decade of limbo-land. David Cameron’s promise of an in/out referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union by the end-2017— provided he wins the next election – means an extremely long period of uncertainty for business. That will be bad for investment. It also heightens the risk of an eventual “Brexit” – a British exit from Europe – which would be even worse for the economy.

An in/out referendum is neither desirable nor necessary. Of course, if the UK was planning to hand further powers to Brussels, it would be a good idea to get the people’s consent. But no leading British politician of either left or right is contemplating such a transfer of sovereignty. Cameron has been driven to promise such a referendum because of the pressure from eurosceptics within his Conservative party as well as fears that UKIP, a fringe political entity which wants Britain to leave the EU, could take votes away from the Tories in the 2015 election.

If Cameron had been promising a quick referendum, the uncertainty for business would be manageable. But he has decided that he first wants to see if he can negotiate a “new settlement” based on a competitive, flexible and fair single market. That’s why the referendum could be nearly five years away.

The EU speech Cameron should make

Hugo Dixon
Jan 7, 2013 10:05 UTC

David Cameron is planning a keynote speech on Britain’s relationship with the EU later this month. Here is what the UK prime minister should say.
 
 The euro crisis is forcing euro zone nations to rethink how they wish to run their currency union. It is also forcing European Union countries that don’t use the single currency, such as Britain, to rethink their relationship with Europe.

We have three main options: quit the EU; move to the edge as the euro zone pushes towards closer union; and seek to stay at the heart of Europe and influence its development in a way that promotes our interests.

There are members of my own Conservative party who would like Britain to quit. There are others who would like us to move to the periphery. But I am determined to make sure that we stay at the centre.

Hara-kiri, British style

Hugo Dixon
Dec 12, 2011 04:21 UTC

The opinions expressed are his own.

The UK’s self-immolation beggars belief. The government’s clumsy attempt to extract concessions from euro zone countries in their time of need has set off a chain reaction which could undermine Britain’s interests and even drive it out of the European Union.

It’s not clear what David Cameron thought he was doing at the European summit in the early hours of Dec. 9 when he demanded vetoes on financial regulation in the EU. Was the prime minister asking for something he knew was unacceptable so that he could return to Britain and parade as a hero in front of the euroskeptics in his Conservative Party? Or did he just vastly overestimate his negotiating position, thinking that the euro zone countries were so desperate to save their single currency that he could bounce them into accepting the British demands by presenting them with a take-it-or-leave-it offer in the middle of the night? If it was the former, Cameron was cynically putting his personal interests above those of the nation; if the latter, he was just extraordinarily inept.

Cameron did little to win allies for his position, not even circulating his list of proposals in advance of the summit, according to Reuters. Even worse, he put Britain in the position of seemingly being prepared to blow up the single currency if he didn’t get his way. In fact, Cameron didn’t have the power to stop the 17 euro zone countries from agreeing to sign a new treaty committing themselves to fiscal discipline. They just sidestepped the existing EU treaty. What’s more, they got all nine of the other countries which are part of the EU but not the single currency to sign up too. So all Cameron achieved in the middle of the night was to irritate Britain’s partners massively and isolate the UK 26-1.