British Premier, Cameron, Defends Veto on Europe Treaty

As members of the Labour opposition shouted “Where’s Clegg?” — a reference to Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, a Liberal Democrat, who, angry about the veto, was conspicuously absent from Parliament — Mr. Cameron, a Conservative, seemed at pains to offer soothing words to those afraid that he had so alienated his European allies that Britain was bound to leave the European Union altogether.

“Britain remains a full member of the E.U., and the events of the last week do nothing to change that,” Mr. Cameron said. “Our membership of the E.U. is vital to our national interest. We are a trading nation, and we need the single market for trade, investment and jobs.”

After vitriol poured out at Mr. Cameron over the weekend — from the Labour Party, from prominent Liberal Democrats in the coalition government, from European diplomats — Monday’s session was oddly anticlimactic. Buoyed by the compliments of anti-European backbenchers in the Conservative Party, who said they would have vetoed the treaty themselves if Mr. Cameron had signed it, the prime minister appeared relaxed and self-assured, exuding the easy confidence that is one of his strongest political assets.

He told Parliament, as he has said all along, that he exercised Britain’s veto because the proposed treaty changes, meant to avert future European economic disaster by strengthening fiscal discipline, gave no assurances to safeguard the future of London’s financial services industry, a critical part of the British economy.

“The choice was a treaty with the proper safeguards or no treaty,” he said. “The result was no treaty.”

Mr. Cameron’s veto left Britain standing alone in Europe. All the other 26 European Union countries either agreed to the proposals, which will be negotiated according to intergovernmental agreements, or said they would seek the approval of their parliaments back home.

Ed Miliband, leader of the Labour opposition, said Mr. Cameron had isolated Britain, a dangerous move at a time when European cooperation was essential. He also questioned Mr. Cameron’s purpose, given that the treaty changes seemed likely to go ahead anyway.

“It’s not a veto when the thing you wanted to stop goes ahead without you,” Mr. Miliband said, to shouts of approval from his fellow party members. “That’s called losing. That’s called being defeated. That’s called letting Britain down.”

Olli Rehn, the European commissioner for economic and monetary affairs, said Britain could hardly wall off its financial industry, the bustling City of London. “I regret very much that the United Kingdom was not willing to join the new fiscal compact, as much for the sake of Europe and its crisis response as for the sake of British citizens and their perspectives,” Mr. Rehn said. “We want a strong and constructive Britain in Europe, and we want Britain to be at the center of Europe, and not on the sidelines. If this move was intended to prevent bankers and financial corporations in the City from being regulated, that is not going to happen.”

Mr. Rehn also offered a reminder that Britain had approved “the six-pack of new rules tightening fiscal and economic surveillance” that goes into force on Tuesday. “The U.K.’s excessive deficit and debt will be the subject of surveillance like other member states,” he said, “even if the enforcement mechanism mostly applies to the euro area member states.”

There had been some worry that Mr. Cameron would face trouble from his own anti-European Union party members, including many who called over the weekend for the government to seize the opportunity to claw back powers from Brussels. But all was conviviality on Monday, with even the most hard-line Conservatives praising the prime minister. Although Mr. Cameron faced a few gentle questions about whether to hold a national referendum on Britain’s membership in the European Union, something the anti-Europe faction dearly wants, he batted them briskly away.

And the Liberal Democrats — at least those other than the missing Mr. Clegg — pulled back from their tough language over the weekend, mildly attacking Mr. Cameron while giving assurances that the important thing was to ensure a good relationship with Europe and to keep the coalition government together.

Reporting was contributed by Alan Cowell from London, Rick Gladstone from New York, Steven Erlanger from Paris, Nicholas Kulish from Berlin, and Stephen Castle from Brussels.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=d74557484a0e40cdd6ef3c19951c4fc3