Return of the nasty party

Obviously, David Cameron does not read Peter Oborne’s columns. The commentator has taken Number 10 to task for not putting family-orientated policies back in Whitehall bureaucracy that New Labour so assiduosuly stripped in favour of individual rights (at the expense of social cohesion). On another occasion, the prime minister was in defiant mood when he said there could be no comparison made between the summer rioters and the financiers who had laid low the world economy (that’s right Dave for the latter were far more destructive). His target was the BBC but The Telegraph ran it under Oborne’s byline too. And then on Thursday 8th December, Oborne said that Cameron was a strong leader because he had inner reserves of strength to be weak and not rock the European boat, that the PM was standing up for the UK’s national interest and not his own, let alone his party’s. He affirmed his genuine Eurosceptism through being critical of the Euro but in such times no-one could begrudge that. I wouldn't say he's always right - who is - but he is definitely respectable.
Yet Dave caved in to the Europhobes and their self-appointed leader Boris Johnson. Britain was the only one not to sign up to a communiqué, not a treaty but a sense of direction when all 26 other members did. Cameron’s argument that Britain was not in the Euro so had no need to attend Eurozone finance meetings lost weight when Nick Robinson (secret lemonade drinker as well secret Tory supporter?) pointed that only 17 members of a 27-strong union had the single currency, yet nine non-members still signed up. The PM just blathered about it was right that Britain was not in the Euro, ducking the question altogether.
The thing is Cameron has not just been out-manoeuvred by President Nicolas Sarkozy (with whom many will agree, when he talked about Britain holding everyone up over financial regulation when it was financial regulation that led us to the impasse), who wanted to exclude the UK from the proposal, but also by his parliamentary party. Cameron thinks he has avoided a referendum on Britain’s relationship with the EU, in which he would be in the invidious position of having to defend but if you appease an aggressor they just want more. The Europhobes are delighted by the prospect of a two-speed Europe as if gives them the option to try and force a vote on Britain’s changed status anyway. They are like the inter-war US isolationists that were so damaging to American foreign affairs and ultimately the world. The consistent references to Norway and Switzerland - international non-entities -highlight their true aim – complete withdrawal from the EU. Both countries have far smaller economies allowing to focus on one industry alone – Norway will still gain massive North Sea oil and gas revenues long after British fields have run out and the Swiss have world-famous banking. Indeed, Norway and Switzerland are part of the Schengen free borders arrangement. What do you say, Fraser Nelson; let’s give up our border controls and be like Norway and Switzerland?
As for the financier who said that being isolated was like missing the Titanic as it left dock, first of all he would say that given that his business would have suffered (I wonder how much tax he actually pays as well or is he a non-dom) and secondly one does not run a foreign policy through quips unless you are Robert Mugabe or Muammar Gadaffi. The Archbishop of Canterbury has already called for a financial transaction tax, variously called the Tobin tax or the Robin Hood tax. Bearded leftie some would say, but how could you expect Prince John and the Sheriff of Nottingham (Cameron and George Osborne) to endorse it. The PM says he could not possibly adopt it unless it was worldwide (i.e. it’s pie in the sky) but let’s see how hard he presses for it at the G20, where a worldwide agreement could largely be enforced. Then his true colours will emerge.
The future of Britain lies either as a servant of the USA or as a partner with European colleagues. Unlike Thatcher or Major, let alone Heath, Cameron has pushed us to the periphery. Oborne seems to believe that Cameron has done well, nay, been ingenious, insomuch as he’s avoided a party split and/or the fall of the coalition government by not going the whole hog and demanding repatriation of many ‘powers’, while allowing other EU countries to try and save the Eurozone if they want. The PM will most enjoy reading Oborne’s column today should he choose to do so. Maybe Oborne is happy that Cameron doesn't pay attention to him, given his subsequent fulsome praise. But I think Cameron is storing up trouble, for by feeding the xenophobic beast, he has merely whetted its appetite. Moreover, the phrase “if the whole world is wrong and you’re right, it’s time to look in the mirror,” while not always true, looks particularly apposite, given that four of those who signed up, promised to let their parliaments examine the ‘deal’ before giving the go-ahead. After the backbench rebellion on EU membership last month, that prospect would have terrified Cameron. To reiterate, this was not a treaty, just an agreement on a future direction. Oborne believes Cameron has achieved what was thought impossible, an idea which may have influenced his previous article affirming that the PM should side with the national over the party interest. British influence is permanently reduced and the rules drawn up will still affect us (now with no-one to even defend the indefensible actions of The City and get a compromise) - I wonder how many times US presidents will be calling Number 10 after this? We shall see how all this plays out for the future but the fat cats and their Tory friends have got an early Christmas present. Too much chocolate makes you sick though.