We deserve better than this farce of a contest

It’s been a funny old week at West Minster. It began with David Cameron apparently issuing a clear warning to his ministers: back me on the EU, or face the sack. 

What he actually said was that this was a government programme they’d all signed up to, which journalists interpreted as a rebuke to any minister thinking of opposing continued membership of the European Union.

The next day, he was falling over himself to clarify the situation, feebly complaining that journalists had misinterpreted him: his comments only related to the period of negotiation.

I suggest, however, that David Cameron only has himself to blame for any misunderstanding. Indeed, he should take Harriet Harman’s advice and stop gloating, because this week has been a case in point of indecisive, half-hearted leadership.

The truth is, there was no misinterpretation, because Mr Cameron has not actually said anything noteworthy for us to debate. Can you blame journalists for trying to read something in to the few crumbs he has flung in to this vacuum of his own making?

He continues to fudge the issue and dodge the question: it’s simple really, will the doctrine of collective responsibility force ministers to resign if they wish to oppose the government line, or will they be free to campaign as they wish?

Let’s be clear, the Tory party is unlikely to enter a bloody civil war if he does insist on backing from his cabinet; even that ultra-Eurosceptic champion Daniel Hannon has pointed out that the PM has never professed to be neutral.

Other euro sceptics have said that, of course, ministers who don’t support the government line have to resign to be free to speak as they wish.

On the other hand, accusations of rule changes in the name of swinging the outcome towards a yes vote are now widespread; Cameron’s complaints about the Purdah before the Scottish referendum, and statements about the need to speak about EU matters so desperately in the mere 4 weeks for which Purdah would have lasted, were unconvincing as justifications for rule-rigging which has alarmed the electoral commission.

Giving his ministers freedom on this issue would go a long way to assuage fears of a stitch-up, forcing the euro sceptics to find a decent leader and make a decent argument, rather than try and whip up public anger by arguing that, so poor are the pro-EU arguments, that the government’s having to cheat to win.

Mr Cameron’s non-committal, dithering attitude to this question is unsustainable. He does, however, have no convincing reason not to let his ministers speak freely: most will come out in support of the EU anyway.

It would make the referendum fairer, and a richer debate. It’s the right thing to do. True, he’s going anyway, but he can either boldly take a great stride forward in keeping his party together over Europe, or turn the issue in to an even more toxic, running sore in the Conservative party.

Then we had the debate on the bill itself in West Minster: predictably enough, it went through.

Predictably, Labour tried to play up Tory divisions on the subject, like they’re something everyone’s only just discovered or owned up to.

The BBC’s reporting of the debate was pathetic: it was projected as a battle of the veteran relics: a show-down in the Commons between John Redwood and Ken Clarke. To say this depiction of irrelevant dinosaurs slugging it out on old divisions cheapened the coverage is an absolute understatement.

Ken Clarke, in particular, is far from a relic of the past: a thoughtful, reflective man who has been able to reconcile deeply-held support for the EU, with a convincing explanation for its current failings.

Then again, the BBC didn’t have much to work with, for the thunder was stolen by the SNP, who I find to be more repulsive by the day.

What did they do? Wasted everybody’s time with a ridiculous amendment allowing voters aged 16 and 17 the opportunity to vote.

I have absolutely no enthusiasm for probing deeply the arguments for that as an idea, because everyone else is doing that. It has become a complete distraction, focussing arguments away from both the merits of remaining in, and exiting the European Union.

This week, I took the unusual step of declining to watch Question Time for reading a book. I watched about 15 minutes and I’d seen and heard enough. This week has been a very depressing one politically.

The real losers are us. If this farce of a week sets the tone for the intellectual rigour and political integrity of events to come, this referendum, whatever its outcome, will be an opportunity wasted.