A slurp of Cullen Skink
Can a slurp of Cullen Skink (a type of haddock soup, now you ask) and a glass of Sharpham Beenleigh (a fine Devon red, I'm told) lubricate the wheels of EU diplomacy?
That's what's on the menu of the European Council tonight in Brussels courtesy of Tony Blair who's sitting in the EU's big chair for a few more weeks. It's unlikely to prove enough to sate the appetite of the EU's leaders. They are likely to dine instead on Britain's reputation and her rebate.
Standby for reports of harsh words exchanged. So Europe heading for budget breakdown then? Well maybe but maybe not. Beneath the gloomy rhetoric on all sides I smell the possibility of a deal. Britain and France can, I believe, agree on a review of the EU budget. It will allow Britain to say that the there MAY be changes to the Common Agricultural Policy from 2008 (if you're an EU trainspotter that's before the end of the current EU budget deal in 2013) and France to say it MAY NOT.
Britain would have to agree to permanent cuts in the British rebate - something the Eurosceptic papers assume they have already offered but has not infact been tabled. The Central and East Europeans will need to be offered a little extra cash not in the form of a bigger budget but a bung here and a bit of what the Americans call pork there so that they can tell their electorates there has been no cut in the money they were offered when the last budget collapsed.
The only real obstacle is just how much more of the British rebate has to be given up. We say we're giving up 8 billion Euros. The French say we should give up 14 billion. I use the word "say" deliberately as how much we actually give up depends on how you measure what we spend on the EU. Believe it or not, Britain and France measure in different ways.
There's is also a difference between what you commit to spend and what you actually spend. Never mind the detail it just means that a Britain and France can't even agree on what they say we'll spend. Diplomats are not just haggling over cash but over the words that allow Blair and Chirac to sell back home what they agree to in Brussels.
Even if he can get agreement on all of this there is, of course, one problem. He will be negotaiting not just in Brussels and not just with EU leaders. Agreement will be needed from a crucial player who's in the United States.
His name? Gordon Brown.
I'm 
Comments
If the European Parliament moves to Budapest the UK ought to agree to give the same amount of taxpayers money per capita to the EU as France currently contributes. If France does not agree, we ought to pull out of the EU and give the money directly to countries such as Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia to help them develop their infrastructure - with the expecation that we will receive a card from them every Christmas saying thanks for the dosh!
When the auditors won't sign off the EU accounts, for the umpteenth year running, what do you expect?
The thing that I don't understand is why the rebate can't be got rid of in exchange for reforming CAP. The CAP is an embarrasment to the EU on the world stage, and gives the lie to any rhetoric about fair trade. The rebate is also something that we, the British, should find our conscionses troubled about.
Well, I say "I don't understand", but in fact I think I do: politics must be allowed to come before good sense once again, and the EU is reduced from being something that might be good for Europe and good for the World to just a bunch of tired horse-traders.
And what about the agreement of the British people? Or does Blair think he doesn't need that now to secure his place in history...
I'm actually (whisper it) a europhile and would love to see this country join the Euro and have greater integration with Europe. I'd actually even like to see this United States of Europe that everyone seems to hate so much. And I believe that in my lifetime we may achieve this. And it's currently why I have problems with the Tory Party (I wanted Ken Clarke to win the leadership, of course).
I'm don't normally have much praise for the Labour Party, but I have to say that I'm glad Tony Blair managed to stand his ground on this one. As Chirac pointed out, the decision to surrender away any of the UK rebate was not going to sit well politically in this country, but nothing else would have done for the rest of Europe. And presumably Blair shares at least part of my vision on Europe. But, France and the CAP aside, I don't think the UK's rebate is particularly fair anyway and I think it should be abolished entirely. It's the classic situation where we know it's not right, but that, because we've got it, we don't want to get rid of it.
I'm currently in a bit of a muddle over where to vote next time. It's time for a change, but with Cameron (and Hague) looking to go down the route of alienating the rest of Europe, and Charlie Kennedy having to defend his own back more than anything else, what choice will there be? And what will Gordon Brown's position on this be?
What a fantastic blog. Doesn't Blair look really tired explaining things to the press? Cameron is looking twenty/thirty years younger.
That'll matter more to lots of people than the detail of any rebate etc etc