BRITAIN: Mr Tony Blair completed the most spectacular U-turn of his premiership yesterday when he conceded that the British people should have the final say on the proposed European constitution.
At the same time Mr Blair declined to set a date for a British referendum, saying only that it would be "when all our questions have been answered, when all the details are known, when the legislation has been finally tempered and scrutinised in (the Commons) and when Parliament has debated and decided".
Given the widespread belief that failure to win a Yes vote could trigger the end of his leadership, this was widely taken to mean the referendum will not take place before the general election expected next year.
However, it was a defiant and seemingly confident prime minister who reached for the high moral ground yesterday at the start of what promises to be a long struggle against what he termed "the myths" peddled about the proposed constitution by people he knew to be "hostile not just to this treaty but to the whole notion of Britain playing a central role in Europe".
He vowed to confront "head on" what he described as "an unrelenting" and "partially, at least, successful campaign to persuade Britain that Europe is a conspiracy aimed at us, rather than a partnership to pursue our national interest properly in a modern, interdependent world".
"Let the issue be put. Let the battle be joined," declared Mr Blair in a rallying cry to pro-European MPs on all sides of the House of Commons: "The question will be on the treaty. But the implications go far wider. It is time to resolve once and for all whether this country, Britain, wants to be at the centre and heart of European decision-making or not; time to decide whether our destiny lies as a leading partner and ally of Europe or on its margins."
And he warned that Britain would be reduced to some form of "associate membership" of the EU, should the Conservatives be elected and make good their promise to renegotiate the constitution Mr Blair now says he hopes to see agreed at the conclusion of the Irish presidency.
But the prime minister was mocked by the Conservative leader, Mr Michael Howard, for the "lip-quivering intensity" with which he had told last year's Labour Party conference he had no reverse gear, whereas yesterday "we could hear the gears grinding as he came before us again, lips quivering". Gleefully returning the prime minister's familiar charge against him, Mr Howard wondered if the referendum decision was "a product of principle or based purely on opportunism". And he accused Mr Blair of "misrepresentation" about the possible consequences of a No vote.
Observing that Ireland, Denmark and a host of other European countries were to have referendums, Mr Howard insisted "if Britain votes No we will remain in the EU".
However, Downing Street last night stood by Mr Blair's assertion that a No vote would lead to a fundamental change in the terms of British membership, insisting this would be a direct consequence of Conservative opposition even to the principle of a European constitution.
Asked what would happen if Ireland or any number of European countries similarly rejected the constitution, a spokesman conceded "who knows what situation you would be in". But he added: "Nobody should underestimate the difficulty in persuading the other 24 to make the changes you want."
In the Commons Mr Blair again declared he would retain his national veto in key areas of taxation, foreign and defence policy, social security, common law, and the working of the criminal justice system. "We will insist on the necessary amendments to the present draft treaty to ensure beyond doubt that they do," he told MPs, adding: "On this basis the treaty does not and will not alter the fundamental nature of the relationship between member-states and the EU."
The president of the European Parliament, Mr Pat Cox, said Mr Blair's decision triggered a crucial debate for Britain and the EU. While stressing the decision was for the British people to make, Mr Cox said: "People will be obliged to reflect on realities and not just on myths, they will be obliged to look at interests and not just emotional populist argument. If tabloid logic is confronted with real substance, I refuse to be pessimistic about the outcome."