Today's now delayed much trailed and pre-critiqued (pre-whinged in the case of Ed Miliband) speech by David Cameron of his thoughts on Britain's future within or without the EU and whether or not a referendum on the subject will eventually be held should be a simple task. Unfortunately the Conservative Party's form is to present sensible policies and projects disastrously thereby snatching a PR disasters from what should be easy winners.
The big speech is already being slated by opponents of all sorts as being about Britain alone slagging off the concept of the EU in the face of a united front of all the other members. Cameron should not have allowed himself and Britain to be positioned in this way. It's not what the question is all about and he should say so very clearly.
The fact is that there have always been two separate visions of what the EU is and should be all about. It's become a very old elephant in the room and needs bringing into the open. Unfortunately Europe is not full of leading politicians prepared to surface it although a number clearly do behind closed doors.
Firstly the original concept of the Common Market was a free trade area amongst European nations. This is what British citizens voted for in the orginal referendum and that is the only democratic public mandate any government has ever had. No more no less.
Secondly there is the much more extensive sub plot always espoused by France and Germany, partly as a defensive measure to stop them ever again trying to knock six bells out of each other on the one hand and to jointly dominate wider European politics and economics on the other by the creation of a single European superstate. This was never agreed by the United Kingdom's electors and is unlikely to be. It would probably get the thumbs down from most of the EU's other voters too if they were ever asked. Most of their governments however have no intentionto do that.
For at least the past two decades politicians and Eurocrats have tried to ignore the fact that one day the question of who wanted which ,or neither, of the options would have to be faced.
Cameron should now be saying, not that he is at war with anyone, but the time has come when all European nations must face the the choices and declare what it is that they really truthfully ( a difficut word for politicians and officials alike) want.
The reality is that there are two groupings, possibly with 26 in one and 1 in the other. How many are in which doesn't really matter. Nor does talk of a two tier or two speed EU. There is no reason that the Superstate group should not do their thing and the Common Market people theirs with a bridge of a free trade area linking the two. There is also no reason why either group should out of political pique put up trade and taffiff barriers against the other. Restricting trade does nobody's economy any good .Free trade areas are growing between countries of vastly different political and social character without talk of political alliances so why should a diference within Europe be a problem?
By giving four years notice of a referendum, Cameron is in reality opening a debate in which all EU members should take part about whether from here on they want to go for option 1 or option 2, or again neither. It should not be positioned or positionable as a hostile move of UK v the rest. It should be labelled as a "Let's each take stock and then decide individually which option we want to take" moment with an end date of 2018.
All we need now is for Cameron to seize the initiative by talking in these terms rather than place himself and the UK on the defensive by presenting the debate as a great confrontation. Will he? Past experience is not encouraging. Those of a nervous disposition may have to watch his speech from behind the sofa.
