POLITICS
A Right Honourable gentleman who is certainly honourable, but not right
SIMON HEFFER
Oliver Cromwell, who was no consen- sus politician, remarked that 'in the govern- ment of nations, that which is to be looked after is the affections of the people'. Mr Major would agree with that, though to his critics it seems the people whose affections he wants to look after are his fellow Euro- pean heads of government, and most par- ticularly Chancellor Kohl. Four weeks after Denmark rejected Maastricht, the Prime Minister is having no truck with the widespread view in his party that the rejec- tion should be an end of the matter. Despite predictions that the numbers opposed to the Prime Minister would decrease once he exerted authority over his party, one or two more Tory MPs each week continue to sign the 'rebel' Early Day Motion on a 'fresh start' on Maastricht.
Lady Thatcher's resurfacing has further unsettled him; though some of the anti- Maastricht group are as worried by her as he is. One minister told me that the fear was not of Lady Thatcher recruiting against Mr Major in Parliament, but against him in the country, where her word still counts for much among Conservative supporters. Since his return from the Earth Summit, so his friends say, Mr Major has not been the easy-going chap of old. His bitter reaction to Lady Thatcher's predictable comments that she would not vote for the Maastricht Bill if it ever got to the House of Lords confirmed that he is on the defensive.
'And another thing that worries them,' the minister added, 'is that she or some- body else will remind the people that the ERM has compounded this recession, and that it is all part of the overall policy that includes Maastricht. They may not give a sod about Maastricht now, but they soon would if they thought it would keep their mortgages up and put them out of a job.'
But what bemuses the Tory party most is that Mr Major, a considerable politician, has not closed the gap between himself and his party. Hearing his rhetoric about the importance of ratifying the treaty, one feels he risks prompting a descent into faction. His priority must be to lead his party to a point where it can unite on Europe; or, if that is impossible (and it probably is), to the point where he can carry most of the party with him. He was correct to assume that the deal he won at Maastricht would unite his party not just before an election but (as the second reading vote showed) afterwards too — in the circumstances of apparently certain ratification that per- tained. Those circumstances are history now, but his line has barely changed.
In his statement to the Commons last Monday about the Lisbon summit, Mr Major indicated that, if the Danes say they cannot ratify Maastricht, then he really will regard it as dead. However, a month of reflection has hardened his party against Maastricht. Even if the Danes changed their minds (and there are, so far, no signs of that) Mr Major might find it hard to con- vince his party and his country that Britain should press on. Because of the Danish events, Britons now know far more about the perceived failings of the Treaty than before.
Mr Major's psychology (as gauged from his public utterences and behaviour) is per- plexing. His public schoolboy ethic of hon- our in wanting to ratify is admirable, but pointless in this context. No one's honour is at stake; the Danes had the right to reject, and they did so. Even if it were a matter of honour, Mr Major should not confuse his personal integrity with that of his country. As it is, he has needlessly made it a point of personal honour, and looks increasingly like he is trying to save his own face. The Maastricht deal may be regarded as unim- pressive by many in the country, but it is still, as he sees it, his greatest achievement.
Some close to him hint he might resign if the Commons fail to ratify. The very threat suggests he feels insecure; if one is confi- dent of one's position one does not talk about resigning, one does it (as Mr Hesel- tine will tell him). So perhaps we should conclude that Mr Major is not really as confident about his judgment as he might like us to think. His continuing addiction to reading the newspapers (and his vulnerabil- ity to what he reads in them) is another sign of this. For example, his circle has suddenly become hostile to the Daily Telegraph because of the belated attack it made last week on the economic policy. He shows signs, in his petulant dismissal of his oppo- nents as 'naive', of failing to understand the breadth of the unhappiness on his back- benches. The discontented are not just the usual suspects from the Thatcherite wing. Whether or not the Conservative Party falls apart over Europe will depend on Mr Major, not on the likes of Lady Thatcher.
As the Prime Minister found out when a junior whip at her dinner-table, his prede- cessor liked a good argument, and respect- ed those who stood up to her. He benefited from that, and should himself hear other views. As he also found out, she could change her mind, however reluctantly. Deciding to enter the ERM was a case in point, as were the subtle changes of eco- nomic policy in the 1980s that led to the abandonment of strict monetarism. She changed whenever she realised she was not going to take her party with her. One issue on which she failed to change — the poll tax — destabilised her before the European question killed her off. She only had a bare majority on Europe, and that may be the best Mr Major can hope for as he seeks to find a balance of power. It was not enough for her survival, and it may not be enough for his. He claims he will have no trouble when he brings the Bill back. If he was real- ly that confident he would bring it back now, but he and his Chief Whip, Mr Ryder, know that the Bill would not get a majority in the prevailing climate.
Lady Thatcher's latest change of mind is on referenda. It is instructive that Mr Major finds this a matter for ridicule. He should instead regard it as a powerful demonstration of how to pursue a political aim by any means. Instead, he protests that the people voted for Maastricht at the elec- tion (which is news to most of them), and uses that and the parliamentary support of it before the Danish vote as proof he is right to press on. It is a sign of leadership to fight on when all about you say you are wrong. It does help, though, actually to be right. The 94 Tory MPs who have signed the Early Day motion, and two or three dozen more who (because they are ministers or parliamen- tary private secretaries) cannot sign, feel Mr Major is not right. Another dozen or so backbenchers feel precluded by loyalty or position from signing, but harbour grave doubts nonetheless. They despair at his stubbornness in not grasping this point, and in continuing to use language that further maroons him from the tidal movement of his party. He may not realise it, but his opponents have not begun to fight. They will wait until he tries to bring the Bill back. Before that stage, he might like to ponder some more words of Cromwell's, to the General Assembly of Scotland: 'I beseech you, think it possible you may be mistaken.'
Previous page
