The European Parliament in May 2005

Vive La France! Even though many of the French voted “Non” for the wrong, anti free market, reasons. Those who have been propelling the European Union towards a     tightly integrated federal destiny have at last been found out and undone by those whom they purport to represent and fear to consult. They drafted a document that went miles beyond the prescription given to them, and ignored those parts of that prescription they disliked, notably the idea that they should examine what powers might be returned to member States. They did the European Union a disservice.

 

Quite apart from the shortcomings of the Constitutional Treaty itself I was always wary of it because I knew so many of those who had hand in drafting it, and enthusing about it, in the constitutional Convention that drew it up. Perfectly good people in themselves, they were convinced that the kind of Europe they wanted was (a) much more federal (b) inevitable and (c) something that people would come round to eventually. When challenged about the legitimacy of what they were doing, they fell back on (c), as the founding fathers of the EEC did fifty years ago. As Giscard d’Estaing, the President of the Convention and chief architect of the document mourned into the microphone, one recalled the deadly description of him by General de Gaulle “His problem is the people”.

 

One of the likely losers if the Constitution dies is the European Parliament since it would have seen its powers increase. MEPs would have gained rights of co-decision with the Council of Ministers over agricultural and budgetary policy, and I doubt whether this is an aspect of the Constitution that ministers will now rush to rescue. Will we have a referendum here? On the face of it there is no point, especially if it is delayed to mid 2006, but I regret that, if we don’t, people here will not have the same crash course in what Europe is about that they have had in France. Visiting Normandy this month we were impressed by the level of public involvement in the issues, the quality of the debate and the general sense of people really taking part in politics, and not turning away in disgust 

 

The two main events in the Parliament this week were the debate and vote on the removal of the opt out from the 48 hour working week, and the debate on the censure motion put down against the President of the Commission, Mr Barroso.

 

The vote to remove the working week opt out would, if carried through in an eventual change in the law, mean the end of the British option that allows employees to agree to work longer than 48 hours a week. The move was passed by 378 votes to 262 with ALL the British Labour MEPs voting against the wishes of their own government. The Spanish Socialist rapporteur said that the vote marked “the start of a long march in favour of our social Europe”. It would of course also add to costs, reduce flexibility and make us less competitive globally. What the Socialists never seem prepared to accept is that such protective measures will not necessarily mean the sharing of more jobs in Europe, but the flight of jobs (the dreaded “delocalisation” in France) to much cheaper parts of the world. Tony Blair now has to fight this out in the Council of Ministers where Britain has some, but possibly not enough, allies.

 

The censure motion was launched against the President of the Commission for his refusal to come to Parliament to rebut the claim that he had been the guest of a Greek shipping magnate on a yachting holiday shortly before the magnate’s shipyard had received a hefty EU grant. The implication was that Barroso had been bribed by the holiday and perhaps by other gifts into helping his friend. This motion was tabled by Nigel Farage MEP (UKIP) with the support of those MEPs whose main aim is to discredit the EU and all its institutions. Conservative MEPs were specifically asked, though most of us needed little asking, not to associate ourselves in a general election month with a party that threatened our candidates. The motion could only come to the plenary if it attracted a certain number of signatures. The majority of us feel that it is high time to put the maximum distance between us and the nihilists of UKIP whose ultimate policy (exit from the EU) no sensible party of government should have any time for. Barroso, whom we have no reason to suspect of malpractice, is in tune with our free market ideas. Nevertheless 5 Conservative MEPs did sign the motion.

 

Having attracted sufficient signatures, the censure motion was debated this month and will be voted in June. Mr Barroso batted aside the allegation of implied bribery with ease. The grant to the Greek shipyard had been made by the previous Commission under Mr Prodi. The magnate was an old friend from university. They had often holidayed together. Nigel Farage then went into one of his practised rants against Europe assisted, in a staged question, by Conservative MEP Roger Helmer, who used his intervention to criticise the Conservative leadership. This proved to be an act of public political self disembowelment. The Conservative whip was immediately suspended from him, and Hans-Gert Pottering MEP, the leader of the EPP-ED group, to which we belong, booted him out of that too. Should I criticise a colleague? Why not. Roger has been a negative and destructive voice for some time. His election slogan, until censored by Central Office, was “in Europe but not for long”. He belongs to a tendency, best reflected in UKIP, that is prepared to see Britain out of Europe. As a party we believe our country’s interests are best served by remaining fully involved in Europe (a British foreign policy tenet for centuries), and working to reform it from within. The final vote on the censure motion takes place next month.

 

Otherwise our time was taken up with a variety of technical directives. We rescued you from more expensive water bills by defeating ambitious Green-inspired amendments to the revised bathing water directive, we “saved” the designation “Light” Ale from the inadvertent consequences of new proposals on nutrition and health claims on foods, and we adopted a law which will make it impossible to buy “bull bars” and fit them to a vehicle (they are already illegal as standard items).

 

One final comment on the General Election in the South West. No national commentator that I have seen has mentioned the fact that Cornwall is now a virtual one party state. All the MPs are Lib-Dem, and they run the County Council. It’s not only in the big cities that we need to start the fight back, it's here in the South West.