David Cameron: What does the Tory rebellion mean? Photo credit: Paumier
The eurozone crisis isn’t just a disaster for the monetary union, obviously – but any resolution of the sovereign debt crisis would be bad for Britain, commentators worry.
Sarah Lyall and Stephen Castle, reporting for The New York Times, explained the situation pretty succinctly: “There is looming recognition at 10 Downing Street that if the euro falls, Britain will sink along with everyone else. But if Europe manages to pull itself together by forging closer unity among the 17 countries that use the euro, then Britain faces being ever more marginalized in decisions on the Continent.” At the same time, UK Prime Minister David Cameron is facing critics in his own party who claim that this is an opportunity for Britain to reshape its relationship to the EU and to, basically, extract a high price for agreeing to any new treaty that would tighten rules on members’ finances.
As Cameron heads to Brussels for a two-day emergency EU summit meeting on the euro’s endangered future, the commetnariat are wondering: How can he balance the rebelling Eurosceptics in his Cabinet against increasing isolation from the EU as a whole?
Cameron’s support of the euro could be the end of him. Cameron’s backing of the euro may be in the national interest, but it’s not doing him any favours, acknowledged Peter Osborne, The Telegraph’s political commentator. “[C]urrency unions don’t work and attempts to defend them are doomed to failure,” Osborne wrote. But, “Again and again [Cameron] has thrown his reputation, and billions of pounds of public money, behind the European single currency. To his critics, including members of his own Cabinet, he appears out of touch, disingenuous and misguided.” And now, he faces revolt. His party would have him stop Britain’s “long journey into the heart of the European Union” and take back Britain’s sovereignty; but it’s in the nation’s best interest to see the euro survive. “The Prime Minister will this week try to head off, avert or delay an economic catastrophe that would have incalculable consequences. That means taking care, using guile and disappointing his supporters.”
How to measure success or failure? The BBC’s deputy political editor, James Lansdale, put together a “ready reckoner” to judge Cameron’s success in Brussels, based on the PM’s stated intention to “secure protection for the City of London against any new EU regulation of the financial services’ markets”, rather than dealing with “restoring national control over some social and employment laws”. A win for Britain would see Cameron secure “an explicit commitment from the EU for a new “emergency brake” that would allow the UK to veto any future financial services regulations that it does not like”; a total failure would see no deal on new rules for the euro, no protection of the City, and markets plummeting.
Cameron’s carting the wrong message. Cameron is headed to Brussels ready to use this opportunity to defend the City of London from attack, including a financial transactions tax. But he’s guard-dogging the wrong sector, claimed Larry Elliot in The Guardian’s business section. “If he is serious about rebalancing the UK economy, he might be better off agreeing to some of these ‘dangerous’ proposals, letting the City fend for itself (something it is perfectly capable of doing) and devoting some tender loving care to Britain’s manufacturers.”
This is going to make things worse for democracy. This whole economic meltdown has revealed Europe’s contempt for democracy as it continues to serve the banking sector over its people, Ian Dunt claimed at Politics.co.uk. Cameron heads to Brussels set against a financial transaction tax – “one small ray of hope in utter darkness” – in the hopes of preserving the City from its own mistakes, and unwilling to save Britain from the right’s fear of being folded into “an ever-expanded, monstrous technocratic super-state”. “Not only will he support the dismantling of European democracy, he will do so on the basis that he can promote the market’s dominance even further than the puppets of Europe would tolerate.”
