David Cameron is expected to announce his list of proposed EU reforms today in a letter to EU council president Donald Tusk. Catherine Bearder, Jim Wallace and Tom Brake have written an alternative letter advocating British leadership in Europe on refugees, tax evasion, climate change and organised crime. Text follows.
Dear President Tusk,
Our Prime Minister, David Cameron, will today be putting forward a list of demands which he believes are necessary to win over those in his own party and amongst the British public who are sceptical about the EU ahead of the forthcoming referendum on the UK’s EU membership.
We wish him all the best in his negotiations with our EU partners, and particularly welcome his efforts to expand the single market into the digital economy, improve competitiveness and put in place safeguards for non-eurozone members. But the sooner this renegotiation package is agreed, the sooner we can start talking about the broader reasons why it’s crucial for the UK to remain in the EU.
Liberal Democrats believe that being in the EU is vital in enabling us to respond effectively to the shared challenges we face. Our country and Europe are more prosperous and successful when Britain stands tall in the world and puts itself at the heart of our continent’s future. So we would like to put forward a number of areas in which we believe the UK should show leadership in Europe. By shaping a common response to these problems, we can demonstrate the added value of being in the EU and secure a fairer, more liberal Britain in Europe.
- Refugee crisis: Europe is facing the biggest refugee crisis since the Second World War. The UK should step up its efforts to respond to the crisis by opting into the EU’s resettlement scheme and lead joint EU efforts to address the causes of the crisis at source in countries such as Syria and Eritrea. Britain has a proud history of helping refugees and playing an active role on the world stage. We should build on this legacy not diminish it.
- Tax evasion: Billions of pounds worth of tax revenue is lost in Europe each year due to tax evasion. The UK should take action to tackle tax avoidance and evasion in overseas territories and support EU-wide reforms to improve tax transparency in order to ensure multinational companies operating in Europe pay their fair share.
- Climate change: We are on the cusp of a historic global deal to tackle climate change at December’s UN summit in Paris. The EU has the combined clout to push for an ambitious deal to avoid catastrophic climate change. The UK should play a leading role in these negotiations and set an example for the world by increasing support for our booming renewable energy industry instead of slashing green subsidies.
- Organised crime: Criminal gangs, drug smugglers and human traffickers operate across borders so law enforcement must have the tools to cross borders too. The UK must step up police cooperation with other EU countries and play a full role in the fight against human trafficking, wildlife crime and money-laundering.
Yours sincerely,
Catherine Bearder MEP, Chair of the Liberal Democrat EU Referendum Campaign
Jim Wallace, Liberal Democrat Leader in the House of Lords
Tom Brake, Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs Spokesperson
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Elvis Costello and The Attractions: Watch Your Step
West End ward surgeries today #dundeewestend
Speculation over Labour's benefit cuts
Being a good conference guest
Simon R
Robin Bennett
Mike Peters
Tessa Skoczylas
18 Comments
Do you guys live in a little cave? Start mixing with the real people and figure out that there are no opportunities for young British people at all. That is why some of us have left, some turn to crime, sucicide, drink and drugs. So wake up
In what sense is this an ask? Ask implies the other party doing something. All these suggestions are how the UK can play more of a role in the EU. I mean, that’s a fine thing to suggest. But it’s not going to win us votes to simply say “you know that thing you’re sceptical about? I think we should sacrifice more as a nation in order to help it out.”
We need to talk about what we expect to gain *as the UK* from this. Because whilst many in our party might feel “solidarity” with people on the continent, basically none of our constituents do.
I think we, the UK, stand to gain from tackling tax evasion and climate change, and completing the single market.
For goodness sake, you three, stop trying to muddy the waters. Whether we like it or not, the Tories do LEAD here, having ‘won’ the General Election. Whatever you think of their mandate, they do at least have one, unlike the Lib Dems.
Adam Casey is right. John Marriott, read his post again, it is in line with your comment and does not “muddy” any waters.
Cameron has promised to ask for change. We should debate what asks to make. We might say that the asks should be reforms that the whole of Europe need and which are not only what the UK wants. We might say that the UK can give something in return for being given things. But we should then make, or advise Cameron to make, some asks.
@John Marriot – the way you write anyone would think that the Tories had won a majority of the votes cast. They didn’t. The fact that they have a majority in the commons is down to a defective and outdated voting system.
@Gaz – it’s precisely because I want to see a better future for young British people that I am in favour of our continued membership of the EU, and higher taxes to pay for improvements to education.
A great part of the reason why (according to Cameron) he is “responding to the wishes of the British people” on this is because of the extremely distorted way the British press and the establishment have presented this, over many years. Do we not think it is time, as leading proponents of the EU, and a close relationship, that we do try to tell people some of the broader reasons (as Bearder et al put it) why we need the EU? The British establishment has been addicted, since the 1950s to a purely economic picture of the advantages, allowing UKIP and phobes to inaccurately describe the In campaign in the 1970s as recommending just a trading / economic union. If people are not given more than minimal access to a description of the political advantages, for all Europeans, doesn’t that make it more likely that people may vote no?
Can I add employment law to the advantages? One of the problems I have with Cameron’s “renegotiation”, even if it changes nothing, is that it allows a belief to continue to grow that there is something fundamentally wrong in the EU (more, for instance, that there is about the way the British Government operates. I do see a problem where we have exercised an opt out on the Euro and there is not yet a regulatory regime in place to treat Eurozone and non-Euro members, so can see the point of that “ask”. I think it is bonkers, however, to just accept at face value “a problem” with immigration, when we are not even a Schengen participant, mainly because the likes of the Sun, the Mail the Express etc have stirred it up. But then I think we should be in the Euro, and of course in Schengen. So perhaps I am bonkers!
@juf – “the way you write anyone would think that the Tories had won a majority of the votes cast. They didn’t. The fact that they have a majority in the commons is down to a defective and outdated voting system.”
i’d argue they won the only majority that matters given the result of the previous referendum result. wouldn’t you agree, as a good democrat?
@Gaz – here’s your problem (it *isn’t* the EU):
lack_of_aspiration + lack_of_achievement = lack_of_opportunity
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/white-british-pupils-the-least-likely-uk-ethnic-group-to-go-to-university-new-research-reveals-a6729361.html
Whether we stay in the EU or leave the EU, you can’t get a good job without qualifications. A BSc / BA is becoming the de – facto minimum.
@Jedi – yes, the Tories have a majority in the commons. Yes, the result of the AV referendum was to retain FPTP 🙁
That doesn’t mean I can’t point out that the majority of the people who voted at the last election voted something other than Tory, and therefore (by definition) the Tories represent a minority. It doesn’t mean I have to like it either.
Dear JUF,
You may have noticed that I placed the verb ‘won’ in inverted commas. You obviously missed that point I was trying to make, namely that, by the rules of FPTP, they did win in that they gained an overall majority on around 36% of the votes cast. I’m afraid that’s unfortunately the only majority that counts in that cockeyed system.
@John Marriot – ah OK, in that case I was violently agreeing with you.
Oh, dear, is this the best we can do? Four very practical policy suggestions but not even a hint of what even we think is wrong with the EU at the moment and no hint of any vision as to what the EU could become. It’s all starting to sound like our awful European Election campaign last time.
Surely as Liberal Democrats, the one party committed to EU membership, can provide both critique and vision to oppose the no campaigners and their 1950s Little England that never was.
Or, are we just plain afraid of being accused of being, like me, European Federalists?
Rather than make even more demands or threats, the useful thing that this letter does – and presumably is intended to do – is reassure our European partners that there are good reasons for them to help Cameron to keep the UK in the EU and that there are many British people willing and able to take a constructive role in Europe if and when the referendum can be won.
We who are keen Europeans may well think that Cameron has unnecessarily endangered our place in the EU by making the referendum pledge in the first place but he has a general election mandate to do so and the clear evidence is that if he is able to claim a victory of some sort in securing reforms and leads the “remain” campaign he will succeed. However there is a real danger that other European leaders will question whether it makes any sense to accommodate him with reforms and then find that the UK leaves anyway or at best is a negative force within the EU.. This is why pro-europeans must make it clear that there are enough of us around to ensure the UK plays a constructive and energetic part in the progress of our continent post-referendum.
You obviously missed that point I was trying to make, namely that, by the rules of FPTP, they did win in that they gained an overall majority on around 36% of the votes cast. I’m afraid that’s unfortunately the only majority that counts in that cockeyed system.
Well, yes; but then, what other system would have delivered us a functional government (whether you agree with it or not), rather than a continental-style endless coalition?
The Conservatives got more votes than any other party. Either that makes them the legitimate government, or you give up on the idea of ever having a proper legitimate government again and become like Belgium or something.
This is why pro-europeans must make it clear that there are enough of us around to ensure the UK plays a constructive and energetic part in the progress of our continent post-referendum.
What, both of you are going to do that?
Bim,
Coalitions often do deliver functional governments. Germany has had coalitions , except from 1956 to 1959, since the original West Germany was formed in 1949. Germany is hardly a basket case! Despite the mistakes it undoubtedly made, our own 2010 to 2015 coalition did a lot of necessary and worthwhile things. Countries like Belgium or the Fourth Republic of France, or even post war Italy can always be rolled out as bad examples; but there are plenty of countries in Europe where coalitions do work.