EU deal is not ‘legally binding’ in any way
It was understandable that David Cameron should wish to put as brave a face as possible on that sad little “deal” he got from Donald Tusk, the President of the European Council, by telling the Commons: “When I said I wanted change that is legally binding and irreversible, that is what I’ve got.”
But when we look at each of the points of their agreement, they dribble away even faster than has generally been recognised.
On Mr Cameron’s wish to see Britain’s treaty commitment to “ever closer union” struck out, all he got was a vague “recognition” that this country “is not committed to further political union”. The socalled “red card”, giving a majority of national parliaments the right to block those bits of EU legislation that supposedly conflict with “subsidiarity”, in fact adds little to the empty form of words already in the Lisbon Treaty. And the so-called “emergency brake”, which would supposedly allow the UK to impose a modest restriction on the right of EU migrants to receive benefits, has been covered by articles 112 and 113 of the agreement on the European Economic Area ever since 1994.
But when it comes to Mr Cameron’s claim that he has won “changes that are legally binding”, even he had to admit that they would require not only the agreement of all the other 27 member states (which already seems highly unlikely) but also “treaty change”. And the procedures for any further treaty changes, as also laid down in Lisbon, must now include a fully fledged “Convention”, an intergovernmental conference and ratification by the member states, all of which could not be achieved in less than four or five years.
It is true that such a treaty has been discussed, although talk of it is now on the backburner while the EU flounders through its migration crisis. But when it finally re-emerges to centre-stage, the preoccupation of our EU colleagues will be with all that further integration of the eurozone countries needed to deal with the ongoing difficulties of their single currency. By comparison, Mr Cameron’s futile ragbag of “demands” will be seen for what they always have been – no more than an irritatingly trivial little sideshow.
The ‘red card’ to let parliaments block EU rules adds little to the Lisbon Treaty