Thus his speech outlined his views on European integration. It was given to a packed dining room, at St. Ermin's Hilton Hotel in London, of distinguished guests. The meeting and speech was made more poignant by the presence of the ambassadors to Britain of Romania, Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Poland and the Slovak Republic. Each of whom would like to join the European Union, when it expands towards Eastern Europe. Lord Owen supports E.U expansion. Even so, he said that he remains dismayed by the European Union's attitude towards enlargement.

Lord Owen also emphasised that any new E.U members could not "be immediately accepted into the Eurozone." Lord Owen cited the conditions of the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM), as outlined by the Treaty on European Union, which was signed at Maastricht in 1992. Britain itself would have to rejoin ERM, for a period of two years if it decided to join the single currency. Talking about a British referendum on the euro, he added: "It would be extremely foolish to hold a referendum until after the next Inter-Government Conference in 2004."

This IGC would outline and define a 'European Constitution.' As with the Human Rights' Act incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and the proposed European Charter on Fundamental Rights, Lord Owen believes that the European Union would need time to absorb this new constitution. Lord Owen opposes Tony Blair's actions that made ECHR a formidable part of the Human Rights' Act. Yet he supported in 1997 some other Government initiatives, and still backs them. These included the fulfilment of New Labour's pledge to make the Bank of England independent, along the lines of the Bundesbank model.

Wishing the euro well, he argued that Economic and Monetary Union faced a great upheaval. He gave two examples: the single markets of the United States and the United Kingdom, which rely heavily on fiscal transfers for their own regional economic policies. In order to provide stability in a "one fits all interest rate" Eurozone, Lord Owen said that it is essential for the EU to reform its tax and social policies. He also forecast that the Government's troubles on the single currency are far from over. Hoping for a stronger euro, and with reference to the Danish referendum, he said that Tony Blair faced his greatest euro challenge from 18-25 year olds. A recent poll has suggested that about 80% of this age group are against EMU.

Although Lord Owen dismissed European federalism, he professed to being: "a long-standing supporter of the Common Market, the European Community and the European Union." The main question he posed was that of 'destiny,' considering the EU's ambitions for "ever closer union" since its founding as the EEC in 1957. He declared: "However, it is a perfectly honest aspiration to form a European Superstate." Nevertheless, Lord Owen emphasised that there are "genuine differences about this destination."

In 1975, during the referendum campaign on EEC membership, Lord Owen was a keen supporter of the Common Market principle. He fought on the pro-EEC side of the campaign. In Wednesday's speech he revealed that the electorate had been assured that "the dangers of Economic and Monetary Union were over." This he declared was despite the fact that the Werner Plan on EMU had been produced between 1970-1972. Britain acceded to the European Economic Community in 1972. Lord Owen added that "time moves on," and referred to John Major's negotiations at Maastricht during 1991-1992. He suggested that it was "correct of John Major to veto Economic and Monetary Union, and a common foreign and defence policy."

Lord Owen believes that post-Maastricht, Britain and some other Member States began to realise that "there would be a varying pace" in the European Union. He feels that a 'two-speed Europe' is possible to live with. He said that Britain should support the ambitions of the other Member States, if they so desire to integrate further. Lord Owen's position on the single European currency, the euro, he said is to: "never say never to it!" At the same time he reiterated the question about defining the limits of European union. So what is his position on extended Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) on defence (the so-called 'Euro Army'), and foreign policy?

"I am never prepared to go to Qualified Majority Voting on defence and foreign policy - it is 'never' in this case," he declared. However, Lord Owen stressed that he supports the application of QMV in areas such as the environment. He described himself as being "extremely green in environmental attitudes." Nevertheless, Lord Owen rejected E.U plans for a common legal system. Returning to the issue of a European defence force, he emphasised that there is no support for such an initiative in the UK. Alike Lady Thatcher, Lord Owen believes that without the leadership of the United States within NATO, a European army could "threaten peace in Europe," and Britain's special relationship with the United States.

Contrary to reports in the media, Lord Owen argued that "there is a very big fight going on in the military." The French seek more of a liaison role, but he fears that the French proposal lacks accountability. Responsibility, he argued, should also not be left with Chris Patten, the EU's External Affairs Commissioner. He illustrated that on a number of defence and foreign policy issues, it is impossible for each state to agree.

These included NATO's actions in Serbia, in the Gulf War, in Bosnia, and Britain's response during the Falklands Conflict in 1982. Lord Owen gave this as a core reason of the importance for Member States to maintain their individual rights to control defence and foreign policy. Yet he believes that it is "a congressional matter" for the United States to decide whether to keep its ground troops stationed in Europe.

Even so Lord Owen said that Europe cannot operate militarily as well without the United States. His reasoning looked at the economic and technologically power of the US compared to that of the European Union. In order for the EU to act as effectively either in war or peacekeeping situations, each Member State would have to significantly increase their defence budgets. This would, he argued necessitate higher taxes that, economically, the EU cannot afford.

Former MEP, Peter Price countered Lord Owen's comments on the Common Foreign Security Policy (CFSP). He argued that the rapid reaction force is essential for "taking action where the US is not prepared to intervene." Mr. Price believes that " a proper accommodation is needed between the European Union and NATO." He underlined that CFSP should be the responsibility of the Council of Ministers, and argued that the "EU is not a real threat." Mr. Price also feels that "the economic power of the EU needs to be brought together."

Lord Owen, nevertheless, forecasts "real tension between Germany and France over the Treaty of Nice." Any prospective shift in decision-making from NATO to the European Union 'haunts' him. He insisted that the UK can survive outside the Eurozone, as the world's fourth largest economy. The European Charter on Fundamental Rights, he argued emphatically, should not become part of British law. Finally, he concluded: "I am an enthusiast of the European Union, but not a supporter of a European Superstate."

Lord Owen: Defining The Limits (Top).

About The Event .

About Lord Owen.

About The European Atlantic Group (Bottom).

Lord Owen: Defining The Limits (Top).

About The Event .

About Lord Owen.

About The European Atlantic Group (Bottom).

Lord Owen: Defining The Limits (Top).

About The Event .

About Lord Owen.

About The European Atlantic Group (Bottom).

Copyright © 2000 [European Atlantic Group]. All rights reserved.

The Europhiles: The Full Response

[About EuroPolls]  [Index] [Participants] [EMU Forum] 
[EMU Vote] [Letters] [Legal Disclaimer]