Letter: Voting compromise for Brussels
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.Sir: I disagree with the thrust both of your leading article ('Tory obstinacy over Europe, 22 March) and Andrew Marr's analysis (23 March) of the European Union's voting-rights crisis. I do not think Britain's stance is chiefly about internal Tory politics, or playing the nationalist card in the coming European elections.
I believe that ministers do have some ideological convictions, and are genuine in their opposition to reducing Britain's blocking potential because they realise the policy consequences of being out-voted. All other EU governments, of the centre-right as much as the centre-left, agree that market capitalism must be tempered with extensive state intervention. Hence the Maastricht treaty, which, apart from the Social Chapter, enhanced the Union's capacity to act - by qualified majority vote - in areas such as the environment, transport and social cohesion. If Britain's experiences with the Single European Act's health and safety provisions are any guide, policy decisions in these fields will inevitably conflict with (even post-Thatcherite) British Conservatism.
The Government may have also belatedly realised that the accession of the Efta applicants, all with strong social democratic traditions, will reinforce the Union's interventionist character. Even Sweden's conservative Prime Minister, Carl Bildt, is much closer philosophically to Chancellor Kohl than John Major, never mind Mrs Thatcher.
Of course, in hitherto failing to discern the political nature of the Union, or how this would be amplified by both Maastricht and enlargement, the Government has shown remarkable short-sightedness. In that, at least, I agree with the tone of your leading article.
Yours faithfully
NICHOLAS AYLOTT
Holbeck, Leeds
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments