Article in the Daily Telegraph 17th November 2000.
Click on the blue text for amplification.
Robin Cook, Foreign Secretary, argues that the Government's proposals for Nice, including more majority voting, are in the national interest
Britain's approach to next month's Nice Summit will be confident, patriotic and pro-European. I see no contradiction in putting the words "patriotic" and "pro-European" alongside each other.
I understand that not everyone in Britain sees Europe in this way
There are few more reasoned and articulate exponents of the Euro-sceptic position that Charles Moore, the Editor of The Daily Telegraph, and I am grateful for this chance to put my side of the story to his readers today.
Many Telegraph readers share Mr Moore's view that the Euro-sceptic argument is based on the national interest. I respect that. And I would ask you to respect the fact that our pro-European argument is also based on the national interest. It is a pity that much Euro-sceptic commentary assumes that engagement in Europe is against the national interest, as if any negotiated agreement with our European partners must by definition be made at the expense of Britain.
I have set out this week to try to reclaim the patriotic ground from our Euro-sceptic critics. No one should think it strange to say that we are at the same time patriotic and pro-European.
Last night in Sheffield I set out three British principles on which we pursue our national interest within the EU:
After more than three years of working, week in, week out, with our European partners,
I am convinced that full engagement is a better way for Britain to look after its national interests than isolation.
Everyone is
familiar with the club bore who does nothing but complain, never making any constructive contribution. Nobody listens to the club bore. That is the isolated role that I believe would be bad for Britain in Europe.
Europe will
always be our biggest market.
Developments in the
EU affect our lives whether we are engaged or not. I would far rather be helping to set the rules and playing an
active role
Britain needs a strong Europe and Europe needs strong nations.
The
point of the Nice Summit is not to undermine British sovereignty
but to build a wider Europe in which Britain will be stronger and more prosperous.
We want to reunite the established democracies of western Europe with the re-emerging democracies in the east rebellion.
Nice is about
reforming Europe in readiness for this rebellion.
It is self-evident
that this is in Britain's interests. It should be equally self-evident that we must play a leading role in negotiating the treaty that makes it possible
We must dispel the myths.
The myth is that Nice is about taking power away from Britain.
The fact is that
it is about building a stronger Britain in a wider Europe. Europe makes us stronger because 15 or more nations together are better able to fight cross-border crime, drugs, pollution and unemployment.
The myth is
that European defence will cut across Nato's functions. The fact is that Nato is and will remain the sole basis of our territorial defence
The EU will act only in response to crises and where Nato as a whole is not engaged. European Security and Defence Policy enhances the armoury at our disposal and that is
why the US administration and military establishment have welcomed it.
The biggest myth
about Europe is the superstate. That is why the second of our British principles describes the EU as a union of democratic nations. The fact is that the national identities, cultures and traditions of the democratic nations of Europe are too strong to be subsumed.
The EU is unique in world history. No other nations have done so much to pool their strength in the common interest while
retaining the sovereignty and identity
that make them distinct and diverse. As my French counterpart, Hubert Vedrine, expresses it, Britain and France will never agree to the status of a Massachusetts or a Virginia.
Tony Blair and I aren't going to Nice to negotiate a superstate. It is not on the agenda. We are going there to work for more votes for Britain in the European Council.
To argue for majority voting where this can promote the national interest and to maintain the veto where it protects the national interest.
Many myths surround majority voting. To read some commentators, you would think that it had just been invented. In fact, 80 per cent of decisions are already taken by majority voting. And Britain is usually on the winning side. Of 85 votes in the past two calendar years, Britain was in the majority 80 times.
That means there were 80 decisions in Britain's interest, which others could have blocked if the decision had been subject to veto. France and Germany were out-voted more often that Britain.
"Britain isolated" is an outdated caricature. At Nice, we will insist that majority voting is not extended into areas where we need the veto to protect the national interest, including tax and social security. We have made clear that, in these and other areas, we have red lines. Others will go to Nice with red lines of their own. All 15 countries will be negotiating in their national interest.
This is not a case of Britain isolated, but of Britain standing up for our interests, as all our partners do.
But where, case by case, we believe we can promote the national interest by majority voting, we will agree to it. We have achieved much over the years for Britain through majority voting. Directives on banking and insurance that helped the City were opposed by other countries, which would have blocked them if they had had a veto.
Overall this article gets a bilge rating of 9 out of 10.
If Mr Cook really wants to promote the cause of the EU he must surely produce some cogent arguments supported by facts. If his article is a fair example of his debating and negotiating skills I fear that he will return from Nice with a mess of potage.