David Cameron yesterday embarked on the most significant negotiation of his political career. European council president Donald Tusk reported to waiting journalists that there had been ‘some progress’ on the first day of the Brussels summit, but ‘a lot still remains to be done’.

No 10 sources say Cameron and Tusk left talks at 5.30am local time (4.30am GMT) and were due to return at 9am.

And the German chancellor Angela Merkel reportedly said it had become ‘clear that agreement will not be easy for many, but that the will is there’. Meanwhile, Tusk said yesterday this is a ‘make or break summit’.

I am not sure this is an entirely accurate observation. Tusk will know, as do most other European politicians, that negotiations take considerable effort before a solution is reached.

Cameron has already indicated that he is prepared to wait and continue for as long as it takes to get the deal he so badly needs. Failing to reach a solution will mean that the heads of the other 27 member states reconvene. The negotiations will continue because all those involved in these crunch talks know it is in everyone’s interests to ensure the union stays together.

Having not yet announced the much anticipated date for the referendum, Cameron is under no obligation to set it for 23 June – the date pundits most likely think it will be. Of course, if he does not get the desired outcome in the next few hours, or as German politicians suggest by Saturday, then it is increasingly likely that the referendum will not take place until the autumn. And of course this gives Cameron further time to continue attempting to get the desired settlement he is seeking.

Those supporting the ‘In’ campaign must not undermine what Cameron is seeking to achieve in Europe. Undermining the negotiations at this stage simply weakens the argument back in the United Kingdom for staying in the European Union.

The proposals set out by Cameron, familiar to most by now, include protection of the single market (for Britain and other non-euro countries), as well as boosting competitiveness by setting a target for the reduction of the ‘burden’ of red tape and exempting Britain from something that dominated some of Cameron’s initial rhetoric an ‘ever-closer union’, which Cameron wants to legally opt out of. He is also seeking to be able to align with other EU countries to block certain undesirable legislation.

The area causing the most concern, though, and a real sticking point for Cameron, is the plan to restrict EU migrants’ access to in-work benefits such as tax credits. In this scenario families would still be entitled to send benefits back home to their children though these would drop so that they are in line with the cost of living in their home country.

If Cameron is able to secure this final proposal then it would signal a major breakthrough. It is not popular with everyone, and understandably British trade unions are concerned. In addition, at least four eastern European countries have signalled that they are extremely reluctant to have any kind of limit on benefits.

Overall the signs are promising. The president of the European parliament, Martin Schulz, said yesterday he is confident leaders will find a way for a decent compromise. The critical word here is ‘compromise’, an essential and obvious ingredient in almost all negotiations. While Cameron vociferously states his demands he may well have to concede that the best outcome will mean some sort of compromise is, perhaps, inevitable.

Although Schulz is positive of the end goal he gave a rather qualified response earlier this week to a question regarding how the European parliament would vote. He said, ‘To be quite clear: no government can go to a parliament and say, “This is our proposal, can you give a guarantee about the result?” This is, in democracy, not possible. Therefore my answer is the European parliament will do the utmost to support compromise and a fair deal, but I can’t pre-empt the result in the European parliament.’

While strictly this is true, the European parliament can adopt or reject any draft legislation put before it, in reality it is not conceivable this will happen. Let’s consider for a moment the reforms are approved by all 28 member states, then the mainstream political parties within the European Parliament are unlikely to vote against their own national governments.

The two biggest groups (the Socialists and the Christian Democrats) both wish to keep the union together and have indicated they will vote in favour. The Conservatives, the third largest group, are also hardly likely to oppose Camron’s proposals following such mammoth negotiations!

Of course, it is important to remember that ultimately the principle of remaining ‘in’ Europe is in the national interest. Most of us agree that the EU needs some reform, but having a seat at the table means we have a voice and the ability to shape the future direction of the union.

Leaving could have dire consequences. Only this week HSBC warned that a consequence of a Brexit, would mean the bank may be forced to move at least 20 per cent of its banking headquarters to Paris, if not more. We must all work together to make sure that the campaign to stay in Europe is overwhelmingly successful when the referendum is finally upon us.

———————————

Mary Honeyball is member of the European parliament for London and Labour’s spokesperson in Europe for gender and equality. She tweets @MaryHoneyball

———————————

Photo: Open Democracy