Cook puts case against EU `super-state'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Firm limits to Labour's enthusiasm for further powers moving to Europe were fixed yesterday by Robin Cook, the party's foreign affairs spokesman, who said there was no case for the Commission acquiring new powers over foreign and security policy. On a day when Lord Howe, the former Conservative Foreign Secretary, said Labour had "a balanced case for Britain's place in Europe", Mr Cook said his party wanted "a community of free member states" not a "European super-state".
The union "must be based on a sharing of national interests and not on the surrender of national identity," he told a European Policy Institute conference in London. Politicians had to respect the people's wish "to retain control over the public policy of their nation".
In a speech which defined some common ground with the Government as well as underlining differences, such as Labour's determination to sign up for the Social Chapter, Mr Cook said: "Labour sees no case for merging the common foreign and security policy into the bureaucratic machinery of Brussels, or establishing a European army." Foreign and security policy was "a defining expression of national identity" and decisions should be made between governments rather than by the Commission.
Mr Cook's presentation was aimed at warding off charges that Labour would agree to anything Europe proposes. He said the veto over matters of vital national interest, including the budget and treaty revisions, would be retained. He also underlined his reservations about a single currency by emphasising the extent to which "real world" conditions would need to be met beyond the financial targets set in the Maastricht treaty before Britain joined.
Labour would need to be convinced that industry could survive and prosper before "abandoning for all time the lever of devaluation", he said. While he could see the practical attractions, a single currency "is not going to happen this year; I would be very surprised if it happens in 1997 in any part of the Continent". It would be "wonderful if we could do it by the end of the century".
Accusing the Tories of having "not a single positive proposal" for Europe and declaring they would veto all changes before they even knew what they were, Mr Cook said the European Parliament should have a wider scrutiny of the Commission, but national parliaments should have increased influence over the Council of Ministers.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments