thetorydiary

EMS had already been expelled from the Conservatives after he fought a sulphurous campaign against Michał Kamiński. Today he has joined the LibDems. He'll be more at home in the party that has always believed in a European superstate.

Tim Montgomerie

Don't just take my word for it, David Davis wrote a super piece in yesterday's Evening Standard, speculating about the economic state in which we would find ourselves, had Britain signed up to the euro:

"Our already damaged economy would have been crippled by a fixed exchange rate set by the so-called "successes" of the financial sector. Instead, when our financial sector collapsed, the pound fell. Outside the euro, sterling has been trading at a competitive level in global currency markets. British exports remained at attractive prices while euro-denominated goods raced to all-time highs against the pound and the dollar in 2009. This is the main reason we had a record manufacturing upturn in January, and without the beginnings of that upturn we would have still been in recession. In Greece, Ireland and Spain, all in the eurozone, manufacturing is struggling. The biggest of these, Spain, is unlikely to see an economic recovery this year.

"So managing our own currency is critical to our ability to compete. Giving up our currency would also have meant giving up to the European Central Bank our ability to control interest rates. The ECB has kept interest rates significantly higher than rates in the UK. The Bank of England has kept our rates low and pumped money into the economy, allowing companies to absorb the shock of recession and start to recover. None of this would have been possible had we joined the euro."

It should never be forgotten that whilst the late 1990s were not the Conservative Party's finest hour electorally, the party's campaign against British membership of the euro was utterly in tune with the view of the British people, at a time when both Labour and the Lib Dems would have ditched the pound at a stroke if they could have got away with it. Without the Conservative Party's determined opposition to the euro during William Hague's time at the helm of the party, Tony Blair would have been able to abolish our currency and the consequences would have been dire.

Jonathan Isaby

The Left-wing press and political opponents occasionally try to continue propagating the myth that after leaving the federalist European People's Party, the Conservatives have now somehow lost the ear of those parties which remain in the EPP.

This is of course patent nonsense, not least as it is clearly in the interests of our European neighbours to be on good terms with those likely to forming the British government in the not too distant future.

But it didn't stop the BBC trying to suggest in October, for example, that relations were strained between the Tories and Angela Merkel's CDU.

Well, they are that strained, that - as today's FT reports - Shadow Chancellor George Osborne was afforded a warm welcome in Berlin yesterday by Wolfang Schäuble - the finance minister in Angela Merkel's Government.

Mr Osborne has also recently held two meetings with Christine Lagarde, the French finance minister.

As the FT reports:

Mr Osborne's team argues his programme of quiet diplomacy is proof that the channels of communication between the Tory opposition and decision-makers in Paris and Berlin are strong.

"I want to make sure the British government's voice is heard on important financial issues," Mr Osborne said. "It has been useful to build personal relationships with finance ministers. I hope to put them to good use if we win the election."

So can this ridiculous idea of ex-EPP colleagues giving the British Conservatives the cold shoulder be put to bed once and for all?

Update: Here is a photo taken yesterday of George Osborne and shadow Treasury minister, Greg Hands, with Steffen Kampeter MdB, Wolfgang Schäuble's deputy, taken outside the Bundestag.

Jonathan Isaby

In my post yesterday morning on the Right's reaction to the appointment of Herman Van Rompuy and Baroness Ashton to their new European Union jobs, I alluded to concerns among Tories in Brussels about the fact that it was likely that a Commissioner from France or Germany would be responsible for the internal market and financial services.

The French newspaper, Le Monde, has suggested that the appointment of Baroness Ashton was indeed only agreed by the French on condition that a French MEP, Michel Barnier, be appointed the Commissioner (and indeed a Vice President of the Commission) responsible for... the internal market and financial services.

As today's Independent reports, William Hague is demanding the Government explain what has been agreed behind closed doors:

"If Gordon Brown has done a deal that would mean a French commissioner being in charge of the economic issues that affect Britain the most then that could be a serious concern. Our French partners have a different view on market issues that touch on Britain's vital economic interests. I look forward to the Government taking this opportunity to be completely open about what has been agreed."

In a letter to the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, Mr Hague adds:

"The financial services sector is an area of extreme sensitivity for the British national interest. It is of crucial importance to the future of a pro-growth EU that there is no retreat from the principle of a free market within the EU."

Michael Fallon, the senior Conservative MP on the Treasury Select Commitee, echoed these concerns on Radio 4's The World Tonight yesterday evening (24 mins 30 second in, but only available on the BBC iPlayer for one week).

He said that the City would be "extremely alarmed" at the prospect of a "protectionist, anti-London and anti-market" Commissioner taking such a crucial portfolio and suggested that surrendering one of the big economic portfolios at the Commission (ie trade) for the position of High Representative on Foreign Affairs was detrimental to the UK's interests. He said that it was a case of "game, set and match to the French" in their desire to add to the regulatory burden on the City of London.

> Today's Times has a good account of the wheeling and dealing that went on over the allocation of jobs and suggests that a number of other British names were considered for the High Representative before Baroness Ashton, making here the fourth choice for the post.

Jonathan Isaby

In what is a most rare occurrence, the Daily Mail and the Guardian agree on a headline to cover the story of the appointment of the EU's new President and High Representative - "The Great EU Stitch-Up".

So how have the appointments of Herman Van Rompuy and Baroness Ashton been received by the Right and the wider Eurosceptic Movement?

Last night I noted the reaction of Shadow Foreign Secretary, William Hague:

"We congratulate Herman van Rompuy and Cathy Ashton on their appointments. We wish them well. We will work with them in the British national interest. We did not agree with the Lisbon Treaty’s establishment of these posts but they are now a fact. We look to the President of the Council and the High Representative to ensure that the EU’s business as an association of nation states is conducted efficiently.

“So I am very pleased that those of us across Europe who said that the President should be a chairman, not a chief, have won the argument. Gordon Brown spent a great deal of energy and political capital trying to secure the presidency for Tony Blair. The summit’s result is a defeat for him. Now that Britain will no longer have an EU Commissioner with a major economic brief it will be vital that the British Government, whichever party is in power, engages closely with the EU Commission to ensure that it keeps to a pro-growth agenda.”

Timothy Kirkhope, Leader of the Conservatives in the European Parliament, questioned Baroness Ashton's legitmacy, according to the BBC:

"We now have someone who has never faced the British electorate in a post created by a treaty that also never faced the British electorate."

And speaking to the Daily Express, he says:

“Most Belgian politicians seem to love high taxes even more than chocolate, beer and frites so it is no surprise Mr Van Rompuy wants new EU-wide taxes set by Brussels. If the EU were allowed to raise its own taxes it would be the master of the national governments, rather than ­servant. I want the EU to go cap in hand to national governments every few years for its money so ­individual member states can better control the process of funding.”

Conservative MP and Better Off Out supporter, Philip Davies, was singularly unimpressed at the appointment of Mr Van Rompuy:

"Top Tories" usually aren't "top" but they are a favourite tabloid describer of every "naughty" Tory.

If you want to become a Top Tory I suggest...

1. Get caught in bed with a goat.

2. Make questionable use of your expenses.

3. Wear inappropriate fancy dress.

4. Attack the party leadership again and again and again. This is the strategy being pursued relentlessly by Edward McMillan-Scott. The Guardian (again today) and the BBC have given him more coverage since he started smearing Michal Kaminski than in the rest of his political career. One of the most interesting features of EMS's pieces is the obsession with Dan Hannan. What can explain this? Jealousy? Fear? Paranoia? Hopefully even the left-wing media will get bored of Mr McMillan-Scott eventually.

Tim Montgomerie

> Meanwhile Paul Waugh blogs that Dan Hannan is planning a new pro-referendum campaign.

The Tory leadership is delighted that the announcement of the new Europe policy has gone quite so smoothly. Team Cameron will be disappointed at the hostility of yesterday's Daily Mail but there has been no significant upset from within the parliamentary party or from The Sun or Telegraph. To a very large extent the party appears to have recovered its once secret weapon: Unity. And, as expected, The Guardian and other left-of-centre media are largely content that the party has downed its Eurosceptic weapons.

The party was more worried about voters seeing Cameron as untrustworthy, because of his referendum shift, than they were worried at the anger of Eurosceptics. A poll of more than one thousand voters by PoliticsHome will reassure them:

PoliticsHome find that 52% think that David Cameron's new Europe policy is a "fair adaptation of a policy to fit new circumstances." 42%, however see Cameron as having broken a promise. 77% of Conservative supporters back the Tory leader's new policy.

Channel 4's 'Fact Check' team have also concluded that Cameron has NOT broken a promise:

"Cameron has campaigned so vociferously for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty that it's easy to think he gave a "cast-iron guarantee" to put the Treaty to the vote no matter what. But when he used that now-famous phrase, he did appear to be talking about the Treaty pre-ratification, rather than undoing the signed-on-the-dotted line that will now become an EU-wide reality."

63% of voters still want a referendum - very similar to the 66% of Tory members wanting a referendum (according to ConHome's own survey).

The first opinion poll after Cameron's European announcement found the Tory lead slightly up at 14%.

Tim Montgomerie

Live blog of David Cameron press conference from 4pm. Highlights, not verbatim.

• We cannot hold a referendum to stop Lisbon now that it has been ratified any more than we can stop the sun rising.
• The betrayal of voters on a referendum on Lisbon by Labour and the Liberal Democrats is akin to the expenses scandal for undermining public trust in politics.
• We will amend the 1972 European Treaty to give the British people a 'referendum lock' so that no further powers can be given away without their consent. This will be similar to what the Irish have.
• I don't think a "made up referendum" would achieve anything and wouldn't bare scrutiny. Our manifesto will give us the mandate we need. It would be a waste of time and money to have a referendum which would have no practical effect.
• A new United Kingdom Sovereignty Bill will be passed so that ultimate authority resides in Britain this is similar to what Germany already has.
• Parliament will have to approve any use of the Lisbon Treaty's ratchet clauses that can take more powers by stealth.
• We aim to renegotiate control of social and employment laws, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and criminal justice policy.
• William Hague is beginning detailed work on the complex negotiations that lie ahead.
• European integration must not be a one way street. We aim to establish the principle that powers can be returned to nation states as well as given up.
• I know that some people want us to go further but Britain is facing the most serious crisis in the public finances. Addressing that will be a Conservative government's top priority.
• I say to our European partners that we do not plan to sabotage the EU with these renegotiations but to put Britain's place in Europe on a proper basis that can command the confidence of the British people.
• People were told that they were joining a Common Market, but they joined a European Union. The new Conservative policy is a credible policy that voters who have been treated badly can believe in.

Here is a PDF of Cameron's remarks.

During questions Cameron says he will use accession negotiations and budget reviews to press his negotiating demands but rejects 'a six month war' over Europe in which he attempts to achieve everything all at once.

***
Before the press conference begins at 4pm I have just received briefings from Tory MPs who have just attended the special parliamentary meeting with David Cameron. This is what I have learnt:

• There'll be no referenda on Lisbon (we knew that), nor a referendum to achieve a mandate for a wider renegotiation (we suspected that and now know it for definite).
• If elected to government David Cameron will seek to repatriate powers on 'fundamental rights', social and employment law and on criminal justice policy. 
• There might be a referendum if Europe does not co-operate with renegotiations but no mechanisms were detailed as to how repatriations would be achieved.
• There will be a British Sovereignty Act to stop further transfer of powers and a promise to put all future Treaties to referenda will be enshrined in an amendment to the 1972 European Act.
• Apparently the Tory whips and key frontbenchers were coordinating applause for Cameron.

Up until now no big beast within the Conservative Party had stood up to demand some sort of new referendum pledge from David Cameron. That changes this morning with David Davis calling on the Tory leadership to hold a 'mandate referendum' even though the former Shadow Home Secretary agrees with Mr Cameron that there's no point in having a vote on the now ratified Lisbon Treaty.

Mr Davis - the man most trusted by the Tory grassroots to lead Britain's negotiations in Europe - makes his case in the Daily Mail:

"Referendums terrify the European Commission and the political elites who run Europe. They are clear statements of the popular will. They force issues to be stated in clear and unambiguous terms. They are impossible to ignore. That is why the European reaction to referendums is to make concessions. Look at the history. After Ireland's first rejection of the Lisbon Treaty, the European Council conceded legally binding protocols pledging to keep the treaty out of taxation policy, family and social issues (such as the right to life, abortion and euthanasia), and Ireland's traditional military neutrality. Denmark has obtained similar opt-outs after a referendum, and the defeat in the French and Dutch referendums led to the rewrite of the original European Constitution."

Mr Davis then goes on to list the range of powers that should be restored to Britain:

"The sort of things we might include are: recovering control over our criminal justice, asylum and immigration policies; a robust opt-out of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights; serious exemptions to the seemingly endless flood of European regulations which cost the UK economy billions of pounds each year; a recovery of our rights to negotiate on trade; exemption from European interference into trade in services and foreign direct investment rules; and an exemption from any restrictions on our foreign policy."

He calls for this 'mandate-to-negotiate referendum' to be "the first piece of legislation in the new parliament, and should be held within three months of the election."

ConHome's poll of grassroots members shows that most agree with David Davis. We found that two-thirds of Tory members want some sort of referendum.

Tim Montgomerie

6pm update:

William Hague has officially confirmed to Sky News that a Conservative Government would not hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. More here. David Cameron will be giving a news conference on the matter tomorrow afternoon at 4pm.

---

I never thought the day would come when I appeared on a radio discussion about Europe and that I would be the person chosen by the producer to be the voice of moderation.

I have been a staunch eurosceptic since I first started following politics in the late 1980s when Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister. I remember the day I was thrown out of a German class aged fourteen for arguing with the europhile teacher against her integrationist position.

And I fondly recall how I went to the summer conference of the youth wing of the French RPR party in 1998 and addressed an audience of 2,000 (in French) with my British Conservative vision of Europe (borrowing a phrase of John Redwood's in my assertion that "L'Europe est notre continent et pas notre pays").

Yet today I found myself in Simon Mayo's Radio 5 Live studio at the BBC arguing against Robert Oulds, a Conservative councillor and director of the Bruges Group, on the issue of the Lisbon Treaty.

Robert was arguing that it would be a failure of leadership on David Cameron's part not to give the country a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if he becomes Prime Minister next year. His position was virtually  theological in arguing that David Cameron made that "guarantee" in 2007 and that he simply has to follow through with it and hold a referendum.

Tim has already explained here the context of that guarantee and why, therefore, it is unfair to suggest that it should necessarily still stand. And earlier he cited the Spectator's James Forsyth who this morning provided an eloquent analogy which I reproduce again here :