Politics
Europe could give Labour a new sense of purpose
Published 13 March 2008
As the Treaty of Lisbon bill proceeds to the Lords, the government is looking in a strong position for the first time in months. Whether you accept Labour's assertion that the treaty simply ties up the loose ends of existing treaties, or see the 5 March Commons vote as an outrageous attempt to introduce a European constitution without the referendum promised in all three party manifestos, the fact is that the government played its hand well.
It fought off demands for a referendum from the Conservatives and from its own rebels, and the victory - by 63 votes - was conclusive. Labour's rebels did not turn out in sufficient numbers to damage the Prime Minister's authority and, a week on, both opposition parties find themselves in disarray over the issue.
The Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, is left with his peculiar policy of abstention knowing that a significant proportion of his party is against him. The Conservatives find themselves in the unenviable position of fighting a retrospective battle over a treaty that is all but on the statute book.
The Tories demonstrated the weakness of their position during the 12 days given to discuss the treaty. They had demanded 18 days of debate, but were so lacklustre that it became difficult to believe Tory passions were running as high as advertised. Day by day, ministers were able to flush out Tory xenophobia while presenting a positive picture of the benefits of participation in the institutions of Europe. Home affairs, energy, human rights, the single market, foreign policy, institutional reform, aviation and carbon emissions: one by one, all the controversial areas were discussed, without the Conservatives landing a punch.
But, more importantly, the lengthy debate also forced the government to put a strong case for Europe against the natural instincts of Gordon Brown. It became cheerleader for the European dream.
Consistently, ministers were able to present Labour as the party of principle, while opposition parties looked churlish. The Liberal Democrat walkout on 26 February expressed a genuine frustration that the Speaker would not allow a straight vote on a referendum on UK membership of the European Union. But it left the third party looking petulant as it left the chamber.
The arguments of the Eurosceptics should not be dismissed entirely. The most convincing were outlined by the Labour MP Gisela Stuart, who helped draw up the original European Constitution in 2004. The Lisbon Treaty does, indeed, bear a striking resemblance to the constitution. It would abolish the UK's veto on aspects of energy, health and foreign policy, hand over some powers to European judges and tighten EU guidelines on public spending.
But we have become obsessed with the details rather than looking at ways in which the UK should move forward within Europe. As the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, has consistently argued, Europe should be seen as the motor of progressive politics, pointing the way forward on the environment, employment and human rights. Labour ministers have for too long been nervous of putting the case for greater involvement in Europe.
On this occasion, Labour stood firm against the right-wing press. The Telegraph group, the Murdoch empire and Associated Newspapers are against Brown on this issue but he has shown he can stand up to them and to the forces of reaction in his party.
Now comes the hard part. He must take the arguments to the country. It will not come naturally to this Prime Minister to be an evangelist for Europe. It will require a new attitude. Brown cannot continue in the Blairite pretence of being an honest broker between Europe and the United States. The Bush government has demonstrated in recent weeks that it is quite happy to leapfrog Downing Street to deal directly with France's Nicolas Sarkozy and Germany's Angela Merkel.
Britain has to reassert its position within Europe, embracing the benefits it could win for British people - from protection of workers to the upholding of universal human rights. Such a purpose could provide the bold and optimistic vision that Labour so desperately needs.
A poem what we wrote
Just over a week ago the Independent began a daily mini-supplement on "the great poets". A few days later, it was joined by the Guardian, which offered booklets on "great poets of the 20th century". On the same day, the online Telegraph started its "week-long series celebrating the great poets of the English canon".
The poetry editors of each publication - if such posts still exist - must have been stirred to an unwonted busyness. For many years their duties have rarely extended beyond writing the odd brief commentary whenever the Poet Laureate dashes off a few embarrassing lines about some royal milestone or other.
But poetry is clearly now in. It's hip, and we're not talking about the modern poets of the street, rappers such as Messrs Q-Tip, Droop-E or Inspectah Deck, admirable though their oeuvre may be. We refer to those writers sometimes derisively known as DWEMs (Dead White European Males), men such as Milton, Auden, Donne, Wordsworth and Pope.
This interest in the fusty and the unfashionable is heartily to be commended, and to join in this celebration of the muse we at the New Statesman would like to offer our own small verse, on the NS's founders, Sidney and Beatrice Webb.
A batty old pair called the Webbs
Were anxious to comfort the plebs.
So they started a mag,
A socialist rag,
With no room at all for celebs.
Post this article to
We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.
