Cameron’s EU wheeze: capitulation, or blessing?
Conservative HQ is expected to publish its referendum bill around lunchtime today. They are describing this as “creative” thinking on their part and saying that when the Commons votes on it it will be a “blessing.” That, they say, is because it will put Lib Dems and Labour on the spot, show they’re opposed to the Tory in/out referendum policy, and boost the Tories’ support.
This, it could be argued, overlooks the fact that David Cameron announced the referendum idea in a much-trailed, massively reported speech in January and it helped his ratings very little. What helped his ratings was the Tory party’s harsh tone on welfare and sections of the press turning their fire on Ed Miliband. Both those activities have been suspended while the Tories get their teeth stuck into Europe again and the prime minister struggles to looks like he’s in command of the situation. 
Tory high command is saying the “let’s publish our own bill” initiative (I hear the PM has flown back one of this press aides from the US trip to help with this) makes tomorrow’s vote on an amendment to the Queen’s Speech a “sideshow.” It does take some of the sting or punch out of that occasion but does nothing to make it any less baffling. The prime minister is giving backbenchers and aides licence to abstain, support or oppose (ministers to oppose or abstain on) an amendment which criticises the coalition’s legislative programme for not containing a bill the prime minister never publicly called for before. That bill would require the next government after 2015 to hold a referendum in 2017 after a renegotiation of membership terms with EU partners. This bill, the supporters say, will encourage voters to trust David Cameron’s pledge but, as they well know, the bill can’t bind a future administration.
Earlier, I was at the Royal Academy by St James’ Park where the Nottingham University Politics team were presenting their latest survey of parliamentary rebellions. They mentioned that there appears to be no precedent they have found for a government allowing a free or partially free vote on its legislative agenda. The levels of rebellion have already been phenomenal in this session – particularly for new intake 2010 Tory MPs. This latest initiative moves things into dangerously uncharted territory in terms of party discipline in parliament. Philip Cowley called the Cameron “initiative” a “capitulation” which would only leave his backbenchers demanding more.
As for the broader picture on parliamentary rebellions, Philip Cowley and Mark Stuart say that the nature and size of cross-coalition rebellion or conflict would easily have brought down a continental coalition by now. Mark Stuart said the coalition had already effectively reduced to “confidence and supply” status because of the inability of the leaderships to deliver support for common measures beyond those that are already common ground between the two parties or are smaller house-keeping measures.
The two coalition leaderships might argue that’s exaggerating their discipline issues and might comfort themselves that they’ve already voted through their big measures and set them sailing. In both Nick Clegg’s office and David Cameron’s team you hear of how they see the next two years as the leaders getting out there selling stuff while the ministries (they hope) get on with delivery. The last 48 hours suggest David Cameron could be spending a decent portion of that time trying to manage his party on Europe.
Follow @GaryGibbonBlog on Twitter.