A good number of the changes passed through what later became the EU were, in the early years, reasonably positive (even if the long-term underlying agenda was not), but there comes a point when forcing countries into an ever more intrusive union will exacerbate national tensions rather than soothe them.
Here’s a case in point, brilliantly illustrated by Daniel Hannan. Hannan’s post begins with YouTube footage of Guy Verhofstadt, a former prime minister of the Belgian failed state, a prominent member of the EU’s disreputable parliament and, naturally, a founder of the eurofederalist Spinelli group:
Take a couple of minutes to watch the above clip. Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister who now leads the Euro-liberals, is responding to the position of the British Government (and, though he doesn’t mention this, 11 other governments), viz that Brussels should not be whacking up its budget at a time when national administrations are trying to cut theirs. To remind you, Britain’s net contribution to the EU budget rose by an almost unbelievable 74 per cent in 2010. Far from being grateful, however, Eurocrats have pocketed the concession and are demanding more – demanding it, as you can see, in hectoring and contemptuous tones.
Listen to the sneering way that Verhofstadt keeps repeating the phrase “Her Majesty’s Government”. Listen to the way MEPs snigger and applaud when he says that the very fact that the UK opposes the draft budget is proof of its merit. Listen to the mockery in his voice as he says we should join the euro. (How’s that working out for you by the way, Guy?)
Listen, above all, to the reaction in the chamber when he finishes. Verhofstadt is not one isolated Euro-loon: he is the authentic voice of the European Parliament, which promptly voted by 468 to 134 for a five per cent budget rise. For what it’s worth, I doubt that such an increase would enjoy popular support in any member state – even Mr Verhofstadt’s Belgium. That, though, isn’t my business. What is my business is our national interest. Does anyone seriously believe that we advance that interest by subordinating ourselves to people who so plainly despise us?
Fair points all. The question is what should British prime minister David Cameron do about it. The EU is currently both very strong and highly vulnerable. The crisis within the eurozone represents an opportunity for Brussels to force through a federalizing agenda unimaginable just a few years ago, but many of those changes (which would primarily concern the eurozone and are, I suspect, essential for its survival intact) are likely to need U.K. assent. That should not be given without real, substantive, and irreversible financial, political and (most importantly) legal concessions from Brussels to Britain.
McDonalds’s Ray Kroc was famous for saying this:
If any of my competitors were drowning, I’d stick a hose in their mouth and turn on the water.
Cameron should be under no illusion. The institutions of the EU (and the Verhofstadts that empower them) are predators planning a hostile takeover of what’s left of the EU’s nation states, and they are none too friendly to the U.S. either. But they are predators who have run into a spot of bother. If Cameron is wise, he will do everything he can to make that bother worse, and worse, until he gets the concessions that he now needs to be demanding.
Over to you, Prime Minister.