Since Tony Blair nominated Peter Mandelson in July as Britain’s next European commissioner, the eurosceptic elemnets in some parts of the British print media have once again demonstrated an insatiable appetite for any Brussels gravy train story going. After June’s European parliamentary elections, you would have thought that the stream of familiar and formulaic eurosceptic yarns would have dried up. But no, any whiff of perceived euro-scandal and objective news reporting appears to fly out of the window (Oliver Burkeman’s article in the Guardian ‘What has the European parliament ever done for us?’ is a noteworthy exception). The UK subsequently secured the trade portfolio, the most powerful of European commission briefs, but this didn’t stop some of the British media from dredging up the so-called dirt regarding salaries and the perceived salubrious lifestyles of eurocrats. Not only does this smack of a shameless copy-paste effort from EU stories past, but it feeds a stalwart anti-EU sentiment that exists in Britain. It is off the back of such reporting that parties such as the UK Independence party fare very well.
So Mandelson will continue to face a hostile press (and a staunchly eurosceptic press to boot), though that is nothing new and will probably prove to be the least of his worries. When he, as the sole British commissioner assumes one of the hardest policy briefs, he will have his work cut out negotiating on behalf of the EU with the USA, Japan, China and the WTO. Challenges on the home front are no less significant. He will be expected to play a significant role in a successful British presidency of the EU in the second half of 2005 and, as if this isn’t enough, the year after that, he shares the responsibility of ‘selling’ Europe and the European constitution to a hostile British public, where polls put public opinion against the constitution at two to one.
There is no need to despair, though. Whatever the British media and political class have to say, no one has ever seriously suggested that Mandelson is not up to the job. In fact, a yes vote in the referendum is certainly conceivable under his guidance, especially given that he has auspicious timing on his side. The referendum on the EU constitution will follow hot on the heels of the UK presidency of the EU which starts in July 2005, and a successful stint at the EU’s helm could set a precedent for a successful referendum campaign. To capitalise on any pro-EU sentiment generated by the UK presidency, the pro-European political class and media must let no time slip between the end of the UK presidency and the referendum.
Another string to Mandelson’s bow lies in the government’s decision announced at Labour’s National Policy Forum in July to break the deadlock on the proposed EU directive on temporary agency workers. Thanks to that, the trade unions are less hostile to voting yes to the EU constitution and, with them on board, a significant part of the battle is already won.
The UK presidency is just one part of a strategy for winning the referendum. A lot will obviously depend on how well Mandelson actually performs in his new job and on whether he delivers on his commitment to make the EU more relevant in people’s minds. Given that EU social and employment policies frequently top the Eurobarometer public opinion polls as citizens’ favourite aspect of the EU, it would make sense for Mandelson to develop these policies and make them integral to any policy initiative. This is especially crucial at a time when all three of the EU’s legislative institutions have a centre-right majority and an overly laissez-faire services directive is in the pipeline, which has the potential to unravel European and national social standards.
Peter Mandelson has also committed himself to another goal: to realise the Prime Minister’s vision of a more flexible, less regulated Europe, with further liberalisation. Both commitments are not necessarily mutually exclusive and a more competitive European economy need not compromise progress on EU social and employment policy. For a start, if the government comes good on its pledge to end its opposition to the temporary agency workers’ directive, workers will be afforded greater social protection, making temporary work more attractive to them. The economy will enjoy greater flexibility as a result, giving employers more choice. This might also persuade the 3.1 percent of the UK workforce working as temps to vote for the EU constitution. Another referendum-winner would be to revise the working time directive and end the British opt-out from the 48-hour working week. Not only could this also persuade the 55 percent of the British electorate (according to a Guardian/ICM opinion poll in August) in favour of ending the opt-out to vote yes to the constitution, but it would also garner further support from the unions.
So, Mandelson has a tricky juggling act ahead of him, but there are clear ways and means of winning the referendum, of carrying forward a balanced and progressive EU policy agenda and of finally putting Britain at the heart of the EU.