Until recently the Tories said Jose Manuel Barroso’s views were ‘definitive’

When the European Commission president agrees with David Cameron his views are 'definitive'.

When the European Commission president agrees with David Cameron his views are ‘definitive’

The Tories have been quick to dismiss comments made by the outgoing European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso that the UK would have ‘zero’ influence if it decided to quit the EU.

According to the BBC, a No 10 source said Mr Barroso ‘should be under no illusion that the status quo is not acceptable to the UK’.

Barroso also said that without agreement from all EU countries on changes to EU migration rules, the prime minister’s plans to curb EU migration could be illegal.

Again this has been dismissed by Downing Street, which said Mr Cameron would listen to Mr Barroso’s argument but that Britain needed to negotiate a better deal.

Which is all quite amusing really, considering that until very recently the government treated Mr Barroso’s word as gospel; or to be more precise, as ‘definitive’.

You may recall that, during the Scottish referendum debate, Mr Barroso intervened to say that an independent Scotland would have to re-apply for EU membership.

David Cameron responded to this intervention approvingly, describing it as ‘very telling’:

“What I say to Alex Salmond is he in a way wants to have his cake and eat it. He wants to say ‘I want to separate from the UK, I want this new future for Scotland’, but on the other hand, he doesn’t want the consequences that flow from that.”

Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson also called it a “definitive intervention from the President of the European Commission, which Alex Salmond simply cannot ignore”.

In other words, when Mr Barosso agreed with David Cameron, as during his intervention in the Scottish independence debate, his views were ‘definitive’ and ‘very telling’. Now that he is talking about the European Union and the possible illegality of the PM’s migration proposals, his arguments are of practically no significance.

Perhaps Barosso’s views on the Scottish independence referendum were not so ‘definitive’ after all, then. Or maybe they were, and are just as ‘definitive’ on the question of reform of the European Union.

Follow James Bloodworth on Twitter

Like this article? Left Foot Forward relies on support from readers to sustain our progressive journalism. Can you become a supporter for £5 a month?

11 Responses to “Until recently the Tories said Jose Manuel Barroso’s views were ‘definitive’”

  1. NorthBrit

    The EU could have chosen to be neutral on the Scottish indyref by stating that it would make no difference to either Scotland’s or England’s EU membership.

    Instead Barroso chose to intervene to help the most anti-EU government in Europe to frighten Scots into voting “No” to independence.

    The French senate commented that his arguments were “not credible” and Sir David Edward, Yves Gounin and Graham Avery made similar comments.

    Barroso was not credible then and he is not credible now.

    But British exit from the EU would be a just reward for the EU’s anti-democratic interference in the Scottish referendum.

  2. The_Average_Joe_UK

    The EU experiment is being laid bare. Barroso’s comments just prove they’ll say anything to keep the gravy train going. If you’re in the system you’re paid alot with cast iron benefits and pensions. No wonder they try to grow it.

    The real truth is that it hasn’t delivered economically, it costs us a fortune and we’re better off out. Labours position of command and control, unnecessary bureaucracy etc. is a perfect fit, hence the ludicrous position of denying democracy. But you can understand Labours position for their economic illiteracy is the reason they don’t understand the lack of benefit.

    Cant wait for 2015, Hodges reckons 29% isn’t the floor, how low can these losers go?

  3. Guest

    No surprise you’re whining about democracy, as usual.

  4. Guest

    Keep saying that trade does not deliver economically, that the benefits to us are magically a cost and that it’s not nearly enough command and control, that it’s not nearly enough red tape, and that it’s far far FAR too democratic to you, as you say Labour are not for wages enough.

    How low will you go? I’d say you’d start at voter intimidation and vote rigging, myself.

  5. Leon Wolfeson

    Does show how silly anti-trade positions are, yes.

  6. NorthBrit

    Labour supporting unionist accuses others of voter intimidation and vote rigging.

    Calls unelected officials threatening people “democracy”.

    Even allowing for the low standards of the Labour party this is demented stuff.

  7. The_Average_Joe_UK

    Sorry fool, I trade with the EU and China. I think I know what I’m talking about.

    You socialists are all talk you dont actually have the experience to make the claims you do.

    Back to your rock, troll.

  8. Guest

    You’re now claiming ti be a Labour supporting Unionist?!

    That’s just sad. And you think you’re demented…oh my.

  9. Guest

    So you oppose your own trade, hence know what you’re talking about, as you lash out against magical socialists and trolls.

  10. The_Average_Joe_UK

    No fool, not taking your pathetic spin, this is BS “So you oppose your own trade,” The point is simple I can trade globally, I dont need the EU and its left wing bureacracy.

    I’m not lashing out against socialists. I am making a serious point, wherever there are socialists, there is usually negative growth and more poverty for all.

    So prove me wrong, stop the lies and the spin. Answer these questions in plain English. How does a Socialist drive growth? How do socialists create jobs and show me an example of where this is a roaring success.

    A stupid answer will lead me to conclude that you know in your heart of hearts that socialists have never, and cant deliver.

  11. Guest

    You can trade globally, since you’re not in the UK, I see.

    You don’t need magically left wing “bureacracy”, or the EU, since you’re where, in Brazil? You’re witch hunting invisible socialists, as you say that Germany and the Nordics, where they really *are* socialists, are…wait, they’re doing well.

    I am not in a position to stop you lying, as you constantly seek the invisible socialists. I am not a socialist, never have been, and am not interested in socialism – I want broad left-wing politics.

    Of course you will declare VICTOR TREE and run around making funny signs with your hands now, with the flame-thrower strapped to your on your back spewing fire and flame.

Leave a Reply