Time to call a halt to dangerous rhetoric

Date: 27/06/1996

THE battle over beef is over - at least for the time being. In the end, UK Prime Minister John Major was given a face-saving formula which enabled him to drop his non-cooperation policy without having to admit defeat, and other EU leaders were able to reassure concerned consumers back home that the deal did not commit them to anything.

Just two days after the summit, Major told the British parliament that key elements of the EU's ban on beef exports could be lifted by November.

His decision to even talk about a possible timetable for getting the ban lifted was greeted with raised eyebrows in many EU capitals, where the lack of any firm dates in the framework agreement was precisely the reason why they were able to accept the formula devised by the Commission and Italian presidency to end the crisis.

Whether Major was wise to start talking about a timetable to appease the Eurosceptics on his backbenches who wanted more out of Florence remains to be seen. Only time will tell whether the UK can do all that is necessary to meet the conditions set out in each stage of the agreement.

But there are already signs that his decision to take on the rest of Europe in such an aggressive fashion could backfire both on the domestic front and at EU level.

As the summit drew to a close, Belgian Premier Jean-Luc Dehaene led the way in calling for sanctions to prevent the UK - or any other member state - from adopting such obstructionist tactics again. London's success in blocking over 100 items of Union business has also reinforced the argument for extending the range of decisions taken by qualified majority vote to ensure that the Union continues to operate efficiently and smoothly as its membership expands in the years ahead. When the UK first announced its decision to block all decisions requiring unanimity, officials in Brussels were quick to point out that very few proposals in this category were ripe for agreement and the tactic would therefore have only a limited effect. Few, it seems, appreciated the range of issues which would be caught in the net - and few are likely to be willing to maintain the status quo and risk such a crisis again.

Major may also find himself in trouble at home, with Eurosceptics fired up by his aggressive approach to the beef issue already calling for the same tactics to be applied if the UK does not get its way over reforms of the Union's Common Fisheries Policy and its calls for new limits on the powers of the European Court of Justice.

If the British prime minister were to heed those demands, the resulting crisis would would make the battle over beef seem like nothing more than a minor skirmish.

Few expect Major to go down that road - despite defending his right to resort to such tactics again, if necessary, at the end of the Florence summit - for he knows only too well how close his non-cooperation policy came to backfiring, even if he would never admit it publicly.

But the triumphalist tone adopted by the prime minister both after the summit and back in Westminster will only tempt the sceptics to incite further trouble over Europe. He would do well to temper his remarks, or he will surely have to face the consequences - both in Europe and at home.