The Independent, 20 June 2007
Letter to the Editor: Europe needs a deal to make it work effectively; nothing is to be gained by calling for a referendum or ruling one out in advance
Tony Blair will arrive in Brussels on Thursday evening with a sense of relief at his last European Council. This will be mixed with some nostalgia along with a cocktail of apprehension and determination as he faces 48 hours of tough negotiation on the EU's institutions. Gordon Brown, who will inherit the legacy of the negotiations, may be more apprehensive still.
For this is not one of those meetings sewn up by officials in advance. Much will indeed have been done: prime ministerial meetings and phone calls; foreign ministers meeting this week; senior officials exploring deals. But the final deals will be done by the heads of government themselves, late in the night. All will fight for the best deal they can get, for they all - or in Britain's case Gordon Brown - have to defend it at home.
Some things are clear. We are not going to be landed with another draft constitution. Those member states that have ratified the old one will continue to hanker after it. But not everyone liked it all, even then, and the French and the Dutch, having rejected it in referendums in 2005, will need to show that the outcome this time is demonstrably different. Britain, in its pragmatic way, will argue for those changes that are necessary for an EU of 27 or more members to work effectively.
Many of the changes likely to emerge are indeed that. An EU presidency changing every six months, and coming round every 13 years, is nonsense: better a long-term President of the European Council. Anyone in business will say that a rotating presidency makes as little sense as chopping and changing a CEO every six months. Nor does it help the EU play an effective role in the Middle East and Africa - needed more than ever today - if two top EU officials turn up for every meeting. A more effective European foreign policy need not be at the expense of national foreign policies. Neither the British nor the French would accept that.
With 27 member states, most of them small or middling, a voting system that better recognises the weight of the larger states, including Britain, makes sense: under existing proposals Britain's voting weight in the European Council is set to increase by 45 per cent. A greater role in decision making for national parliaments makes sense too.
These reforms are simply common sense. But there will, of course, be trickier issues too. Others will argue for more majority voting - the end of the veto. This isn't necessarily bad: it means ending other members' right to veto things we want, as well as the reverse. The single market, which benefits British business and workers, would never have progressed as it has if Lady Thatcher had not accepted more majority voting 20 years ago. But there will have to be give and take here.
And the Charter of Fundamental Rights is potentially damaging. The business community see it as a threat to our flexible labour markets. Some way must be found to ensure it doesn't trump our employment and social laws.
Notwithstanding such concerns, these negotiations come at a time when Europe has been moving in the right direction. The upsurge in the French and German economies last year resulted in the fastest growth rate in Europe for six years.
Some economists predict that if present trends continue Europe could achieve the rare feat in 2007 of outstripping American growth.
In addition to renewed economic dynamism, the elections of Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy, along with the impending arrival of Gordon Brown, gives Europe a new cadre of reform-minded leaders. Their energies complement the approach of Jose Manuel Barroso and the European Commission.
Let us too remember the background to this summit. An EU of 27 independent member states, committed to democracy and liberal market economies. A single market of some 500 million people increasing the EU's prosperity and competitiveness with the emerging economies of India and China. And remember too that these achievements owe much to British advocacy over the years, under both Conservative and Labour governments. History suggests that we should have confidence in our ability to negotiate a good deal for Britain and for the EU.
Will that deal require a referendum? We won't know until the weekend. If there are substantial transfers of power to the EU, yes. If not, no. We can't make that judgement now. So there is nothing to be gained by demanding one or ruling one out in advance. Let's see what Blair brings back from his last and perhaps most important European Council.
Michael Jay (Vice-Chair, Business for New Europe)