The gambler

DAVID CAMERON’S vision for Europe is compelling. The prime minister wants a European Union dedicated to free trade and competitiveness, which helps business rather than tying it in red tape. It should be a “leaner, less bureaucratic union”, he says. There should be intense co-operation on things like tackling terrorism, but, as far as possible, decisions affecting the people of a country should be made by the government of that country. The club must include Britain. All this he laid out in a long-delayed and epochal speech in London on January 23rd.

But Mr Cameron’s plan to realise his vision is risky. He intends to renegotiate Britain’s relationship with the EU and then to hold a referendum on whether Britain should stay or leave. The vote will be held in the first half of the next parliament—by the end of 2017, in other words.

Mr Cameron’s move is, ultimately, driven by the euro zone’s troubles. Eurosceptics in the Conservative Party have long been nipping at the ankles of party leaders, but the level of harassment has risen as Europe’s fortunes have declined. If the euro zone is to stay together, it seems likely that the union will have to be a tighter one. Eurosceptics see this period of flux as an opportunity for Britain to loosen its ties with the EU. By conceding a referendum, Mr Cameron hopes to undermine sceptics both inside his party and in the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), a small but determined outfit that could deprive the Tories of a majority in the next election.

But even if Mr Cameron’s primary purpose in calling a referendum is to save his political skin, there are other, better, arguments for having one. Referendums are a good way of settling important constitutional questions which, because they split political parties as well as the electorate, cannot be decided through a general election. This newspaper believes that a referendum is needed at some point to settle the difficult matter of Britain’s relationship with Europe.

The big question, then, is when that referendum should be held. Mr Cameron correctly says that now is not the right time, because the future of the EU is too hazy. He wants to hold it in the first half of the next parliament. By then, things should be clearer. This delay will also allow him time to renegotiate his country’s relationship with the EU. He has already said that Britain will opt out from many pan-European judicial and police agreements, as it is entitled to do, and although he is vague about what other concessions he intends to demand, he promises Britons fundamental change.

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21570691-promising-referendum-europe-prime-minister-taking-punt-gambler?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/pe/thegambler