This EU poll will show whether Cameron is servant or master
Our place in Europe is almost an issue of conscience for the Tories but the PM will remain staunchly pragmatic
CHEER UP, Labour: the Tories are mired in a leadership contest, too, and one that will last much longer than the battle to succeed Ed Miliband. The forthcoming referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union is a test of many things, ranging from the self-perception of the British — their sense of Britain’s place in the world — to David Cameron’s authority and the respective merits of those who would take his place.
Five weeks ago the Prime Minister triumphed in a general election he was not expected to win. For more than a month, he has been breathing the pure oxygen of victory and flexing the muscles of the politically unchallenged. Yet, having pre-announced his departure before the next election, he has also fired the starting pistol for the first Tory leadership race since 2005.
The referendum that must be held before the end of 2017 will be the first and the defining crucible of this battle. It will reveal where the ideological centre of gravity is to be found in the modern Conservative Party. It will test the familiar contenders — George Osborne, Boris Johnson, Theresa May — and unmask new ones. Above all, it will establish once and for all whether Cameron is master or servant of his fractious tribe.
Europe’s divisive power in our politics has long been formidable. In the 1975 referendum, Harold Wilson was obliged to give his senior colleagues the freedom to campaign on opposing sides. In March, the Cabinet divided 16-7 in favour of staying in the European Economic Community; 145 Labour MPs voted against the Labour government’s proposals. Wilson — only tepidly in favour of continued membership himself — had little option but to let Roy Jenkins, Denis Healey and Shirley Williams (pro-EEC) fight publicly with their notional comrades, Tony Benn, Barbara Castle and Michael Foot. As Dominic Sandbrook writes in his marvellous account of Britain in the late Seventies, Seasons in the Sun, the whole circus was an embarrassing “sideshow”.
If you doubt that collective responsibility remains a live issue 40 years on, consider the fiasco over weekend. At the G7 summit in Bavaria on Sunday, the PM was asked whether he had “absolutely closed [his] mind to allowing ministers a free vote” in the referendum. Cameron replied: “I’ve been very clear, which is I’ve said that if you want to be part of the Government, you have to take the view that we are engaged in an exercise of renegotiation to have a referendum, and that will lead to a successful outcome”.
What did this mean? Back in London, a senior source had already told me on Saturday that this particular question was far from resolved. There was concern, for instance, that Iain Duncan Smith would not be able to support the renegotiated terms of EU membership. Did Cameron really want to force a former Tory leader from his Cabinet?
Yet the PM’s remarks at the G7 gathering were interpreted by the media as an unambiguous warning that ministers who wished to campaign against the Government position would have to resign. In truth, this overstated the firmness of his present position. On Monday, the PM issued a “clarification” that — inevitably — looked like a screeching U-turn. According to his official spokeswoman, his insistence the day before upon collective responsibility applied only to the period of renegotiation rather than to the referendum campaign itself.
As if to demonstrate why this particular issue is so neuralgic for Cameron’s handlers, Boris Johnson declared this week that “it would probably be safer and more harmonious” to release ministers from collective responsibilit y during the referendum campaign. How innocent this observation sounds. But the Mayor and new MP for Uxbridge and South Ruislip is not only a leadership contender. He is also one of the few politicians — were he so minded — who could make the campaign to leave the EU look dynamic, self-confident and exciting.
“On something like this, do you really need to bind everyone in?” Boris asked. To which the principled answer ought to be: yes, absolutely. Political parties are not debating societies or handy vehicles for personal ambition, but organisations for the collective acquisition and retention of power. Discipline is, or ought to be, the essence of the enterprise.
You might think that a party leader who had just delivered a sensational victory — sensational because so unexpected — would be entitled to six months of internal party unity. But not a bit of it. Already, a phalanx of Tories has formed Conservatives for Britain, a proto-caucus of about 50 profoundly Eurosceptic MPs, gathered to remind Cameron that his majority is small and that he is therefore vulnerable to Commons rebellion on this or any other matter.
But Europe, of course, is not like any other matter — and not for the Conservative Party, especially. For Tories of all characters, Britain’s place in the EU is much more than a narrowly economic, cultural or institutional question. It is almost an issue of conscience, a prime example of George F Will’s contention that statecraft is soulcraft.
The Tory Party is no longer divided between Eurosceptics and Europhiles, but between Eurosceptics of different stripes: between those who want to leave the EU and those who want to stay. By rights, those who disagree with Cameron’s proposals — when they are unveiled — and decide to campaign for withdrawal, should have the courage of their convictions and step down. Yet, as in 1975, practicality will probably trump principle.
The PM values his authority but he also understands the aesthetics of politics. Few things would look worse in the final act of his long leadership than a flurry of prominent resignations. This referendum is a process governed by high principle and historic precedent. The rhetoric will soar. But Cameron’s feet will remains squarely planted on the ground. Never forget that, above all else, this Prime Minister is a pragmatist.
You might think that a leader who had just delivered a sensational victory would be entitled to six months of unity. But not a bit of it