|

New Politics Network Speech: The European Treaty

This was to have been the year we celebrated the new Europe of 25 nations. Instead it risks turning into a backward looking period with people longing for the old certainties that came from a divided continent. With politicians eager to cling to the past rather than face the uncertainties and challenges of a different future.

So times are not easy for those of us who believe that progress and prosperity will come from a Europe that works together.

But this is exactly the right moment here in Britain to explain to our people what benefits Europe provides for them as individuals, their families and the communities in which they live.

The Prime Minister’s decision to hold a referendum on the European Treaty means that while we must continue to make the case for Britain in Europe, the time has come to put far more effort into making the case for Europe in Britain.

We will need to demonstrate that there is a patriotic case for Europe and the new Treaty in that Britain and its people stand to gain from the process.

If we get it right then it will allow Britain to enter a new and more positive stage of its relationship with the rest of Europe.

At no point in our long history has Britain ever been prepared to deny our responsibilities and interests in Europe’s future – we must not let it happen now.

Today, as a result of enlargement, East and West are now united in one Europe – bringing to an end centuries of conflict and division.

While this new Europe can bring peace and prosperity it must never seek to deny the fact that cultural and political identity is firmly rooted in the nation state.

I have no problem seeing myself as a European but I am British first.

I believe this to be the view of the vast majority of people. It is of crucial importance that this is reflected in the new European Treaty.

There will be those in the Tory Party and elsewhere who will seek to persuade the British people that Europe is a conspiracy working against us rather than a partnership from which we can benefit.

Labour must stop being defensive about Europe. This is the time to be strong and united in order to go out and put the positive case.

We will not persuade people of the benefits of constructive engagement with Europe through silence.

The jobs and prosperity of millions of Britons depend on the anti-Europeans being defeated.

The case for Europe is not based on a romantic notion of European unity but it is a hard-headed recognition of how we can advance our national interests in the modern world. Exploiting a single market of 450 million people in order to create jobs and boost living standards – as well as providing stability and protection through our collective strength.

Once we have the European Treaty agreed then we can make a concerted effort to dispel the myths and sell the benefits to the British people.

We will start as underdogs, but victory can be ours once the British people realise what is at stake. Whilst the narrow question will be for or against the Treaty, the implications go far wider.

We will need to decide once and for all whether our future is to be as a leader in Europe or are we to be relegated to the sidelines – still part of the club, but increasingly marginalised.

So let us make the positive case. In so doing demonstrate that the interests of Britain and its people are best served by being at the heart of European decision-making and that there is no conflict between being a good European and putting the interests of Britain first.

Michael Howard’s big idea for Europe outlined in his Berlin speech is ‘live and let live’.

Sounds good – who could disagree? But let’s just give some thought to what it would mean in practice.

‘Live and let live’ would mean only adopting those points of European Union policy that the Tories regard as being in the national interest.

So farewell then to the protection and benefits provided by the Social Chapter. Remember it was Michael Howard who insisted on the British opt out of the Social Chapter and he has made it clear since that he hasn’t changed his mind.

For workers it would mean the end of paid holidays as a right; to work the hours dictated by your employer; giving up rights to parental leave and once again allowing part-time workers to be discriminated against.

British business may welcome this – but not for long. The rest of Europe would not continue for all time to allow free access to their markets from what would be regarded as a cheap labour, sweatshop economy Britain. The trade barriers would come up and we would be denied free access to the vast European single market with disastrous consequences for employment.

Would ‘live and let live’ mean that Britain would no longer comply with the European environmental standards – seeing them as a burden on business whereas they have added much to our quality of life by giving us cleaner beaches, purer water, controls on car emissions and requirements on the recycling of waste.

Once again opting out would threaten our access to the single market.

So while we must strive to simplify these rules and reduce the bureaucratic burden so that they don’t reduce our competitiveness – opting out on the basis of ‘live and let live’ would have far worse consequences for jobs and prosperity.

‘Live and let live’ is a sound bite that sounds good at first but when applied in practice as a policy it would be a direct threat to British interests.

And of course Michael Howard is unable to say what changes to the Treaty would make it acceptable to the Party. He cannot do so because to admit that he might accept the Treaty at all would be unacceptable to large sections of his party.

‘Live and let live’ and refusing to discuss the details of desirable changes to the Treaty may work to keep the peace in a divided Conservative Party – but it doesn’t work in Britain’s national interest.

If we are to benefit then Europe itself will need to change. Europe will only maximise the benefits of globalisation – and solve its problems of low growth and high unemployment – by becoming more efficient and increasing its productivity - pushing ahead with the necessary structural economic reforms to promote sustainable growth and increase the flexibility of our labour, capital and product markets. This is particularly important for successful economic integration as new entrants seek to catch up with higher rates of growth.

Global Europe must be more aggressive in making sure that in its operation the single market does not shelter inefficient industries but does what it should do: forces them to be more competitive; fosters investment in key areas like R&D and infrastructure; and by encouraging new enterprise – and rewarding it properly – generates the growth, productivity and employment we need.

So having created a single market in theory, we should make it work in reality so we achieve lower prices for the consumer.

Since 1992, the single market has produced a gain equivalent to £4000 pounds for every household in Europe. Goods now move freely across Europe, whereas before 1992, internal customs borders meant that around 90 million forms were filled in each year, a massive burden on businesses and individuals. And markets have been opened to the benefit of consumers. In telecommunications, for example, the average price of calls has dropped since 1996 by around 30 per cent for businesses and 16 per cent for households.

But while the single market now encompasses 450 million people we have still a long way to go to secure for business and consumers the full benefits in commercial opportunities and consumer prices.

While in 1988 Cecchini estimated that single market liberalisation would add 4.5 per cent to Europe’s GDP, cut prices by 6 per cent and increase employment by 1.75 million, many of the gains have yet to materialise. And the single market is often more honoured in rhetoric than in reality.

Too often we have depended upon political fixes to make progress in our journey towards a single market. Too often, the aims of liberalisation and opening markets have resulted instead in increased regulation. So we need a new model for opening European markets and for removing barriers to competition. One that will bring real benefits to all the citizens of Europe.

Enlargement and the new Treaty present a new set of opportunities. Security and prosperity must still be at their core but what is now required is a different way of thinking – to have the self-confidence to recognise the crucial role of nation states and national identity and then to plan a future which is different from the past.

A European Union that started with a desire for a Europe at peace after centuries of conflict can now be a vehicle to generate prosperity in all parts of Europe as well as entrenching peace, human rights and democracy.

And Britain linked by geography, history and economics to Europe must play a leading role in determining a future that delivers for the people of Britain and the rest of Europe.