Skip to main content

Better off in!

I see that the more rabid conservative bloggers are advertising a meeting of the Bruges Group over the weekend that intends to discuss policies for "a post EU" Britain.

You might expect to see such immaturity on the amusing Guido Fawkes blog- but I was moderately surprised to see the same event given equal coverage on Iain Dale's blog.

Iain is the Queen Mother of political blogging, especially since he became a Tory "A" Lister- "They can't answer back you know". Although he was on a hiding to nothing trying to unseat Norman Lamb in North Norfolk, there are many people who would certainly like to see him inside the House of Commons. Personally, I enjoy many of his initiatives as a blogger.

Nevertheless the fact that the majority of British Conservatives can no longer have a sensible debate about the costs and benefits of membership of the European Union and have taken the maximalist position of complete withdrawal just reminds me why the party should not be let anywhere near the levers of power.

Either they are fools who do not understand the vast political and economic costs that withdrawal would inflict on the UK, or they are hypocrites who know those costs but like to fantasize about withdrawal in front of the electorate, while all the time knowing that they could not take the final step.

UPDATE: Iain writes- saying that it is MessageSpace that provided the advert on his blog and that he carries adverts from other organisations that he is not associated with. I have therefore modified my post to attack the Bruges Group itself and those in the Conservatives (though not, presumably Iain himself, since he disassociates himself from the Bruges Group) who advocate withdrawal from the EU.

Glad he did not object too much to being compared to the Queen Mum- I expect he will have revenge when I go on his 18 Doughty St show in a couple of weeks

Comments

Iain Dale said…
As you know this advert is hosted by MessageSpace. Just because I carry an advert for the Bruges Group does not imply support for it. I also carry adverts for Friends of the Earth and War on Want on the same basis.
Etzel Pangloss said…
We will not be withdrawing from the EU when the Tories win the next election. It's a no brainer and you know it.
Cicero said…
Dr. Pangloss- I agree. The Bruges Group does not- and neither do the many Conservatives who belong to the Bruges Group
Anonymous said…
You advocate a low regulatory burden (and I agree) but the EU produces red tape at an alarming rate. As long as this burden keeps increasing there will be a number of people who see the price as higher than the benefits, and with some justification. The EU abolitionists may be taking this logic too far but it’s a bit of a patronising position to just suggest stupidity and hypocrisy in your opponents, it’s also a position that will not convince many of them to join your cause. If you want to remove support for this position then you need to focus on why they consider the costs so high. A repeal act for Brussels like the one you advocated for Westminster would be a good place to start. Too often the LibDems look like enthusiastic supporters of Europe and the perception is you therefore approve of all the pages and pages of rules and regulations flowing from it.
Cicero said…
RK- while I agree that the system in the EU is flawed, the evidence is strong that British civil servants have tended to a) gold plate EU guidelines and b)to interpret the directives in the most restrictive way. A good example is the question of hygine at abbatoirs. In the UK, but nowhere else, the directive as intepreted has reduced the options of abbatoirs to a small number of very large facilities- which is no benefit to animal welfare.
Anonymous said…
It's not just civil servants. Our courts also seem to adopt much stricter interpretations of EU laws and regulations than the rest of Europe (eg HRA). You suggest we are over interpreting but I'm often left feeling that we’re the only ones playing by the rules.
Cicero said…
Sure, but if 24 countries don't do it that way and 1 does, then who is doing it right, and who wrong?
Etzel Pangloss said…
Dear Marcus,

I do hope you remind us (i'm sure Mr. Dale will) of this promising debate, nearer the time.

And as I recall, 24 wrongs does not necessarily make a right.
chris said…
It's certainly true that most EU regulations get lead plated when they pass through whitehall. But where we not in the EU there would not be this stream of regulation, that is outside democratic oversight, to be lead plated.

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...