Home What's New Speeches & Articles Newsletter - Apr 2008 Biography Diary Contact Information Photo Album Parliamentary Highlights Publications Links MEPs' Transparency   Conservative Party Latest News from Conservatives.com Conservative Party Website
		How long do we keep the EU on life-support? Lincolnshire Echo - July 18 2003 Nick Clegg is a good egg, at least by the standards of the Lib-Dem group of MEPs in the European parliament, so perhaps it is a pity that he has become disillusioned with the job he was elected to do for the East Midlands in 1999, and has decided not to stand again in next year's euro-elections. Certainly none of the candidates the Lib-Dems are fielding for 2004 are up to his calibre. I am almost ashamed to admit it, but over and over again I find myself agreeing with much of what he says. I remember a speech he gave recently, and the first three-quarters of it I could have given myself. He talked about the problems and failings of the EU -- the over-regulation, the disasters of the agriculture and fisheries policies, the fraud and mismanagement, the chronic lack of democratic accountability. It was the last quarter of his speech where we came unstuck. We agreed the diagnosis, but we disagreed about the prescription. Nick was saying, in effect, "We have dreadful problems with the EU, so the solution is to keep trying". I would say, by contrast, "We have dreadful problems with the EU. We have tried and failed to solve them over thirty years. So maybe the time has come to accept that the EU won't work, to distance ourselves from the project and take more responsibility for our own affairs here in Britain". More recently Nick wrote a thoughtful article on the Guardian web-site. Trying to explain why Britain, more than other member-states, has the greatest reluctance to engage fully in the European project, he offers us his own theory. Other countries, many newly free from evil dictatorships, saw the EU as a badge of democracy. Uniquely, we in Britain joined in a fit of depression. Today, we've almost forgotten how bad things were post-Suez, in the fifties and sixties. Our national self-confidence was at an all-time low. The unions had industry by the throat. We were the sick man of Europe. The Pound staggered from crisis to crisis. The Foreign Office was in a blue funk. We were ready to clutch at straws to save ourselves -- and the nearest straw was Europe. Nick points out, quite rightly, how Prime Minster after Prime Minster has sought to lead in Europe, to be at the heart of Europe, but has eventually retired hurt. Blair is just reaching that stage. But now, times have changed. Britain's economic performance, as a result largely of radical changes under the Thatcher government, is good. Continental economies, under the double whammy of the euro and the restrictive "European social model", are doing very badly. Nick's conclusion is that now we are strong enough to set the agenda in Europe. We must be confident Europeans, we must lead positively, and the other member states will follow. As ever in Europe, it's a case of jam tomorrow. Give up our currency, sign up to a centralising EU constitution, and we will end up on top, they say. The Lib-Dems were always dreamers, and here again we see the triumph of hope over experience. Sorry, Nick, it won't work this time either, no matter how much more control we give away. There is a more realistic conclusion. Yes, we are relatively much stronger than we were. We don't need to clutch at straws any more. We are big enough to govern ourselves. We are big enough to have our own currency, and run our own economy. The choice is a simple one. We can choose to give up democracy and self-government. We can sign up to the EU Constitution and become a mere off-shore province in the Peoples' Republic of Europe, governed by people we did not elect and cannot remove. Or we can remain a great, independent nation -- proud, free, democratic, trading and cooperating with Europe, but not beholden to it. Europe alone is too small for us. Unless we look outward to a wider world, with its opportunities for trade and investment, we shall not achieve the future which our children deserve.