Asserting a European Identity (Andrew Duff MEP)

Asserting a European Identity

August 17, 1999 12:00 AM
By Andrew Duff MEP in The Reformer

Paddy Ashdown bequeaths to Charles Kennedy Britain's party of Europe. The ancien regime culminated in the election of ten Liberal Democrat Members of the European Parliament in June 1999. This is called making the difference. So it was in 1992, when the votes of the Lib Dem MPs secured the passage of the Maastricht Treaty on European Union in the teeth of Labour opposition. (It is highly probable that if Maastricht had fallen in the House of Commons it would have fallen everywhere.) And now, faced with a Tory party gone nationalist and a Labour government whose European policy seems to chug over in neutral, it is the Lib Dems alone who argue the case for sterling's early membership of the euro, for a European Union constitution and for the rapid development of a common foreign and security policy.

How should Mr Kennedy use this legacy? First, by addressing the crisis of legitimacy that has struck the EU institutions. A Parliament whose popular mandate is weaker than ever, a Commission which has one last chance to prove itself a clean, strong and efficient executive, and a Council of government ministers arrogating power to itself in a way that threatens to replace the prized Community method with old-fashioned, secretive and ponderous diplomacy. Frankly, the European Union is in no fit state to face the challenges of enlargement to the East and South, of assuming a security role, and of making freedom of movement of its peoples a reality. If the EU were to fail it would not only be replicating but also compounding the failure of its own member states to deal effectively with the transnational dimension of contemporary Europe. If the nation state is outmoded and federal union falters, how should democratic government deliver peace and prosperity? Better to make a success of the European Union right now.

National political parties have taken to blaming "Brussels" and of failing to tell the whole truth about the scale and scope of European integration. The British public, rightly, feel themselves to be deceived, and should be ready to respond to a party that provides fresh thinking and energy to the making of European policy. The onset of Proportional Representation for the European elections should have encouraged the Liberal Democrats not so much to defend their core votes in key areas but to appeal to the much wider pro-European constituency which knows perfectly well that a modern Britain must be a more overtly European one, that standards of living and of the environment in Britain are not as good as in many mainland countries, and that the UK economy will do better in the long term when more integrated within the single market of its major trading partners.

Mr Ashdown earned a strong reputation for his work in the Balkans. Mr Kennedy would be wise to find his European niche too, most probably as a political reformer. As a Scot he should have no difficulty in campaigning for federal union. Within the confines of the dialogue with Mr Blair and his colleagues, he will find ample scope for radical initiatives - not least during the imminent negotiations about treaty amendment. As a Lib Dem leader he should focus on improving the party's integrated approach to campaigning, deploying all the party's parliamentarians from Edinburgh, Westminster and Brussels to greater effect. This means, among other things, using his position as a European Liberal Democrat leader to be properly briefed and well-connected in EU circles. It means preparing the party for the deepening European dimension of British politics. And it means playing a decisive role in the two national referenda that are to come: first, on monetary union to help the British economy and to affirm Britain's European identity - and, second, on electoral reform to consolidate and exploit the full potential of such historic change.

Andrew Duff MEP