Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Defence

It says everything about the modern Conservative party that its members could see the appointment of a British person to the No. 2 job in the European Commission—the vice-president of the European Commission and the High Representative—as somehow a defeat or a concession. It is absolutely absurd to believe that the vice-presidency of the European Commission, the High Representative post—one of only two posts to be agreed last week—should be a defeat or a concession for the Government, the Prime Minister or anybody else. The Lisbon treaty will facilitate the sort of foreign policy I have described, but the Lisbon treaty also heralds the end of European institutional reform. As the European Council unanimously concluded in December 2007:""The Lisbon Treaty provides the Union with a stable and lasting institutional framework. We expect no change in the foreseeable future, so that the Union will be able to fully concentrate on addressing the concrete challenges ahead."" Split infinitive apart, that is an excellent sentence. The Conservative proposals seek to torpedo that consensus. Their five-year plan, which the right hon. Member for Richmond, Yorks has made it clear he would pursue throughout the next Parliament—if he were in government—to renegotiate Britain's relationship with Europe on major issues of social policy and criminal justice will isolate Britain and weaken our bargaining position. The isolation is domestic and international. The director general of the CBI has said that opting out of the social chapter""would be slow and painful, damaging the UK's relationship with the EU and causing yet more upheaval for employers."" The director general of the British Chambers of Commerce says:""Britain wants a pragmatic approach to the EU—not an ideological one. We do not believe that the Conservatives' new policy to opt out of European social and employment legislation is realistic, as it would require substantial UK concessions in return."" The Conservative party needs all 26 other European countries to agree treaty changes, or protocols to treaties. The Conservatives need 14 countries to summon the requisite intergovernmental conference. I ask the right hon. Gentleman in his speech to name any countries that will support an IGC. The reason he cannot is that the truth is clear: not one of them supports a new IGC. The Spanish Europe Minister says:""I do not know of a single country in Europe that now thinks we should be spending any time to change the Treaty we have just spent eight years negotiating. It is really, really impossible."" The Dutch Europe Minister says:""There is more chance of a snowball surviving in hell than the EU restarting debates on Treaty change."" The Polish Europe Minister says:""Nobody wants to negotiate a new Treaty."" The Irish Europe Minister says there is "complete aversion" across Europe to more treaty change. The consequence of British isolation is British weakness. Bleating on about treaty change, we will be ignored when it comes to the serious business. No wonder that in 1999 Sir John Major said:""We are in the European Union, we are going to stay in it and the belief that you can renegotiate is absurd, mad."" I could not have put it better myself—absurd and mad, from the last Conservative Prime Minister. Any hard-headed assessment of the UK's interests leads only to one conclusion: the UK's interests are best served if we are at the heart of the EU, shaping its policies and deciding its direction, not on the fringes, consigned to irrelevance. As we enter the last Session of this Parliament, Britain is stronger in Europe and stronger in the wider world. Our ideas lead debate, our troops and diplomats are on the front line and our development strategies are world leaders. It is a record to be proud of and one we are determined to build on.