John Vincent

Global reserve currency key to City's prosperity - Duff

On 29 April, UK expats living in Brussels and other interested parties were able to engage with MEPs from the UK's three main political parties, including our own Andrew Duff. Richard Corbett represented the Labour Party (PES), with Timothy Kirkhope for the Conservatives (formerly EPP-ED, future uncertain - see below). The event was kindly sponsored and hosted by White & Case LLP and moderated by White and Case's Thomas Tindemans.

Ian Forrester from White and Case gave a brief introduction to the proceedings, during which he deplored the rule that disenfranchises British citizens once they have lived abroad for 15 years - an issue on which BELD has been actively campaigning for some time.

Thomas Tindemans then kicked off the main part of the evening by asking what each other panellists thought had been the greatest achievement of the outgoing European Parliament, and what would be the biggest issue for the new one.

Richard Corbett felt that both the achievement and the challenge lay in regulating, but not over-regulating, markets. Unfettered markets, he said, were neither fair nor effective. He insisted that action on consumer protection, employment, trade and the environment were key to making the EU work. He criticised the centre right for wanting to leave everything to the market - or (in a clear attack on the Conservatives) just leave. He stressed that the UK needed to engage with the EU.

Andrew Duff said that the European Parliament had been proactive in the drafting of the Lisbon Treaty. He accepted that this had not yet been ratified, but stated that if and when it was, it would close a long drawn out chapter and make the EU more efficient, more effective and more democratic. For the next parliament, he wanted to focus on how the improved EU would strengthen the quality of public policy flowing from Brussels and Strasbourg. The European Parliament would, he said, be judged on its contribution to the EU's economic recovery. He also hoped to contribute to the EU's first coherent budgetary policy.

Timothy Kirkhope felt that the Parliament's greatest achievements were the successful integration of members from 10 [sic] new countries; resisting protectionism; not impeding the Commission's drive for less and better regulation. He also mentioned the climate change package. For the next Parliamentary term, he felt that the crucial issue was deciding the future of the EU in terms of its membership.

Thomas Tindemans prefaced his next question by reflecting on the EU's past achievements: peace among its members, open markets and borders, the single currency. What, he asked, would be the grand mobilising question of the next few years?

Andrew Duff replied that it would be the EU's response to globalisation, especially with regard to climate change and energy. He added that the common foreign, security and defence policy would also be a major issue in the future. However, there would be no progress on this until the outcome of the Irish referendum was known.

Timothy Kirkhope said that, with regard to issues such as the recession, the EU needed to demonstrate that it was part of the solution and not part of the problem. He also called for better regulation. On climate change, he stressed the importance of public support - "taking people with us", as he put it.

Richard Corbett felt that the two big issues were the recession and climate change. Any action taken by the UK alone would be a drop in the ocean. The EU, the world's largest market, could achieve much more, not least by using its leverage over the rest of the world. He pointed out that some Conservatives had opposed legislation on climate change.

Thomas Tindemans' third question was whether the panellists felt that the European Parliament was in need of reform and, if so, what form that should take.

Timothy Kirkhope said that the Parliament should not always be seeking more powers. There was a good argument for doing so, however, if those powers were transferred from undemocratic institutions. The Strasbourg seat should be scrapped. MEPs' expenses should be made more transparent, and there should be better links with national parliaments. A common sense approach to legislation was needed.

Richard Corbett thought that EU legislation should not be adopted by the Council alone, and pointed out that the Lisbon Treaty would give the Parliament a say in all legislation. He added that the Parliament dealt with policy choices rather than national self-interest. He pointed out that John Major, a Conservative Prime Minister, had signed up to the Maastricht treaty, which had made the Strasbourg parliament an article of faith.

Andrew Duff deplored the state of the UK debate on such matters as expenses. He stressed that probity in public life was important, but so were other things.

He reflected that there was no pan-European political party as yet. There was a need to connect the authority of the European Parliament to the public through federal European political parties. This would make a much-needed distinction between the European Parliamentary elections and national politics.

The floor was then opened for questions. The first questioner asked what was the most fun aspect of being an MEP.

Richard Corbett replied that this was dealing with 27 different nationalities with their different habits. He cited the Finns and their custom of doing business in the sauna as an example.

Andrew Duff mused that there was plenty of scope in the European Parliament for gossip columnists and sketch writers of the kind seen in Westminster, and regretted the absence of such characters from Brussels and Strasbourg. Answering the question directly, he said that the most fun he had had was at the Intergovernmental Conference, where Prime Ministers had crouched at his side to ask advice.

Timothy Kirkhope remarked that he had not had as much fun as he was having now since he had been a whip at Westminster during the debate on the Maastricht Treaty. He added that it was very important to enjoy doing the job.

The second questioner asked each of the panellists who their allies would be in the new Parliament. Timothy Kirkhope replied that there were a large number of individuals and groupings who could be potential allies, but that he intended to work with others on the centre-right.

Andrew Duff said that he would be staying within the enlarged Liberal group, which now included Fianna Fáil. He suggested that Guy Verhofstadt would probably be the new President of the Liberal group after the election. He regretted the Conservatives' shift to the nationalist right and felt that it was not in the UK's interests to be outside the mainstream.

Richard Corbett added that the UK used to have a strong presence in the three largest groups in the Parliament, but that the Tories had torn that up. He said he was proud to be working together with Socialists and Social Democrats.

A questioner pressed Timothy Kirkhope to state who exactly his allies would be after the next election, but he refused to give a clear answer.

The next questioner wondered whether we needed 27 commissioners. Andrew Duff replied that he had always been in favour of a Commission of 13, but added that the concession to the Irish on the Lisbon Treaty would delay the achievement of this. Timothy Kirkhope felt that the number of commissioners was less important than whether they were doing useful jobs.

Another member of the audience wondered what were the benefits to the UK of EU membership. Richard Corbett replied that there were idealistic, pragmatic and selfish reasons for belonging, and went on to give some examples. Timothy Kirkhope said that he believed that continued EU membership was in Britain's strategic national interest. Andrew Duff said that Britain was a European place. He was a federalist, he said, because he believed that British opinions, clout and people could contribute to a peaceful, stable, prosperous and just union of nations. He favoured an international approach.

He went on to say that the City of London could not prosper outside a global reserve currency, that the UK military was too stretched, and that the replacement of Trident was too expensive to contemplate.

The hustings was followed by a drinks reception, at which Mr Duff and Mr Corbett stayed to continue the discussion with the public.