THE summit-within-a-summit by centre-right leaders of the European People’s Party (EPP) at Bouchout castle, in Belgium’s national botanical gardens outside Brussels, had two notable absences. One was the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, detained in Berlin by parliamentary business. Her spirit nevertheless dominated proceedings. The other was David Cameron, the British prime minister, whose Conservative party left the EPP in 2009 to form an anti-federalist European faction.
So while Nicolas Sarkozy of France hobnobbed with the likes of Luxembourg’s Jean-Claude Juncker, Poland’s Donald Tusk, Sweden’s Fredrik Reinfeldt and Belgium’s Yves Laterme, who did Mr Cameron schmooze with? Nobody, really. He worked the phone on the Eurostar train from London, and briefly met Mrs Merkel and Mr Sarkozy before walking into the summit.
Splendid isolation from Europe’s mainstream centre-right family, and from the burning debate over whether to change the treaties to strengthen fiscal disciplione in the euro zone, has worked well so far for the British prime minister. He has avoided a bust-up over European policy – with European leaders, with his Liberal-Democrat coalition partners and with the Eurosceptic wing of his party.
But even if Mr Cameron is not interested in Europe, Europe may be interested in him. To begin with, Eurosceptics are interested in the idea that re-opening the treaty gives Mr Cameron an opportunity to repatriate powers from Brussels to Westminster. And EU institutions are interested in more of Britain’s (and everybody else’s) scarce money. The European Parliament has supported the European Commission’s proposal for a 5.9% budget increase for EU bodies next year. Member-states had voted in July for a 2.9% rise, after Britain and several allies lost a vote for a cash freeze. A “trilogue” between the commission, parliament and council of ministers has started to find an agreement.
Enter Mr Cameron, fresh from announcing the most severe budget cuts in Britain since the end of the second world war. The EU budget was not on the summit’s agenda. Earlier in the week, though, Mr Cameron had rashly pledged to fight once again for a freeze or a budget cut. The British press expected another one of those handbag-swinging summits that Margaret Thatcher had been famous for. As Mr Cameron arrived in Brussels, though, a partial retreat was in the offing: the target of his attack shifted from demanding a freeze to denouncing parliament’s support for the 6% rise.
His impassioned criticism of the EU’s spendthrift ways at a time of austerity won support from several fellow leaders in the meeting room. As told by British officials, Jerzy Buzek, president of the parliament, argued that rejecting the 6% rise would make Mr Cameron “anti-European”. To which the prime minister replied: “I have had to cut the police force; that does not mean I am anti-police.” And Mrs Merkel chipped in: “I’m cutting the German budget. I’m not anti-German.”
Such words will have heartened Mr Cameron. By evening, British officials were circulating a letter signed by several countries declaring that they “cannot accept any more” than a 2.9% increase. Mr Cameron’s officials touted it as an important British success. In reality, though, the budget battle was a sideshow. Mr Cameron’s letter was signed by just 11 out of 27 members (including, it must be said, France and Germany), who agreed to what they had already agreed three months ago. If only Mr Cameron had been at Bouchout castle.
