Sceptical: yes. Unaffected: no. Surprising EU politics enter the UK debate
| Friday, 30. October 2009 |
![]() Toby Archer
Researcher In most European countries the politics
within the European Parliament (EP) come very low on the news agenda. European
citizens tend to vote for MEPs on the basis of national political debate –
often using it as an opportunity to a ‘give a kicking’ to the party or parties
in power in national parliaments. This often means protests votes, or votes for
less mainstream parties who might not receive so much support in a national
election. In the June 2009 European elections, the success of the Swedish
Pirate Party was indicative of this sort of trend. In the UK, like in other
more Eurosceptic countries, there is even less interest in the EP itself, beyond the
obligatory news stories of sleaze and huge expenses claims made by some MEPs.
It is safe to say that very few Brits know about the transnational party
groupings within the EP and even fewer care much about them. Hence David Cameron, leader of the British
Conservative Party, probably had felt reasonably safe during his
campaign to win that leadership in offering a deal to the Eurosceptic-wing of his party over which
transnational party group the Conservative MEPs would sit with in the EP.
Traditionally this has been the European People’s Party (EPP), the biggest grouping of mainstream centre-right and conservative European parties. But the EPP
was seen as too federalist for the Tory Eurosceptics, so in an effort to gain
support in the leadership race, Cameron promised that the Tory MEPs would
leave the EPP. Cameron won the leadership and, after the Conservative’s success
in the 2009 European elections, they left the EPP as promised. After much
negotiation and debate, a new group was set up in the EP called the European
Conservatives and Reformists (ECR). Whilst dominated by British
Conservatives, the group also has a strong Polish contingent, a smaller
Czech group along with single MEPs from Holland, Lithuania, Hungary, Belgium
and Latvia. As well as raising much resistance within
the EP itself, the group has caused little but trouble for Cameron back in the
UK. In Brussels the EPP, feeling betrayed by the Tories, has cooperated with the
leftwing grouping in the parliament to thwart attempts by the ECR to gain
positions of responsibility in the EP. But that is of minor importance for the
Conservative Party in the UK, which is getting into full campaign mode before the
general elections that will come next spring. In Britain it is the Tories’
allies in the ECR that have caused all the problems. The accusations centre on
the Polish MEP Michal
Kaminski, who is the chair of the ECR group in the European Parliament, and
the Latvian MEP Roberts
Zile, another ECR member. Kaminski, from the Polish rightwing Law and
Justice Party, has a controversial history of making statements that many see
as anti-Semitic and homophobic. Kaminski has made an
attempt at explaining his past and apologizing for what he now says he sees
as mistakes, but few British commentators, including from the Jewish community,
have been convinced. Zile, a former Latvian minister of finance, is from the
For Fatherland and Freedom party that is accused by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre
of having an “obsession” with paying “public
homage to the Latvian-SS Legion”. The British Conservatives have also had to contest
this interpretation. The sudden British interest in the history
of various small Eastern European political parties is of course really about domestic UK politics. The story has buzzed through the British political
blogosphere this summer, with some coverage in the wider press. Kaminski’s
visit to the Conservative Party conference in October became a focus, but it
was the British Foreign Minister David Miliband who used the ECR links as a
stick to beat the Conservatives with most prominently. Miliband’s speech
to the Labour Party conference internationalised the issue, and when
Conservative shadow-foreign minister, William Hague, visited Washington last week
for a meeting with Hilary Clinton amongst others, the issue came up. American
Jewish groups have expressed
their concern over the Conservatives' new European allies and Hague is
reported to have had to defend
the alliance when meeting with Secretary of State Clinton. Even if the Conservative party’s allies from Eastern Europe were anti-Semitic or far-right, something that considering the domestic contexts of the countries concerned is not quite as black and white as British critics of the Tories make out, they clearly do not reflect the Conservatives' own policies or attitudes. But it does make an important point about the Tory view of the EU. Here it demonstrate that firstly there remains a strong Eurosceptic faction of the party that can makes the leadership jump through these hoops over EU issues. Secondly it shows an indifference, or lack of understanding, from the party leadership over EU matters; thinking they could throw some red meat to the sceptics, without thinking about the implications of such a move. As stated at the beginning, European Parliament politics normally engenders little but apathy amongst the British political class. The fact that it could become an issue of concern with the Secretary of State of the United States of America must have come as a complete shock to the Conservative high command. The Tories still look to have a good lead going into next year’s general election campaign, but they will certainly not want their EU policy becoming a surprise area of debate. Rather, they appear now to be on the offensive warning other EU member states that they would see Tony Blair getting the job of President of the European Council as an act of hostility towards an incoming Conservative government. Texts reflect the opinions of the individual authors |
Discuss the topic |

