Cameron's EU veto rattles UK coalition

Writing on theParliament.com website, Former Conservative MEP McMillan-Scott, who since March 2010 sits with the liberal ALDE group, wrote that Cameron had been shown up as "a spiv" and only used the veto to defend "jobs for the boys" and his "rich friends". He circulated the remarks by e-mail to all 754 MEPs and their staff.

The leader of Britain's Conservative MEPs Martin Callanan accused McMillan-Scott of resorting to low insults. He said: "Edward devoted a very long article today to a rather haughty hatchet job on his former leader – just because he had stuck up for Britain's freedom and prosperity."

"He should remember that the prime minister's brave and principled decision to wield the veto was made, we are told, entirely in agreement with his coalition partner – Edward's latest boss Nick Clegg.

"He would presumably prefer a Blair or Brown who would agree to anything the rest of the EU asks. But we now have a prime minister who will fight for Britain and refuse to be pushed around by Germany and France," Callanan said.

Sir Graham Watson, leader of ELDR, the European liberal political family, blasted Cameron in a written statement.

"David Cameron played his cards badly. He could have achieved the safeguards he sought  and preserved the UK's influence in Europe by ensuring reform within the EU treaty framework. Instead he upset his counterparts by holding out against bank regulation, sidelined the European Commission and Parliament and left Britain in the EU but with much less sway over its decisions. Much work must now be done to stop a slide to an intergovernmental hegemony dominated by Germany and France.

"Intergovernmental leadership is not what Europe needs. Super-qualified majority voting allows France or Germany to break the rules but not the smaller countries. Without the Commission and Parliament there is nobody to mediate Merk-kozy. But Europe needs closer economic union to accompany its monetary union so we must now ensure that the EU institutions and the Community method are part and parcel of the arrangements for the 26," Watson concluded.

In a written statement UKIP MEP and former EU Chief Accountant Marta Andreasen called for Britain leaving the EU: 

"Surrendering fiscal policy to the EU and in particular Herman Van Rompuy, Barroso, France and Germany is a recipe for disaster and the effective castration of member states power.

"Prime Minister Cameron will seek to wriggle out of giving the British people a say on whether this is the type of Europe it chooses to stay in and do business with, albeit in the second division. Now is the time to re-assess our position as part of the EU and withdraw. Our role is fast becoming a charade."

Charles Grant, Director of the Center for European Reform was also critical regarding Cameron's position:

"The outcome of the Brussels summit on December 8th and 9th is a disaster for the UK and also threatens the integrity of the single market. For more than 50 years, a fundamental principle of Britain's foreign policy has been to be present when EU bodies take decisions, so that it can influence the outcome. David Cameron, the prime minister, has abandoned that policy. Britain will not take part in a new fiscal compact that most other EU countries will join"

Simon Tilford, chief economist at the Center for European Reform questioned whether UK's decision could have an impact on the core of this crisis:

"The UK's decision to marginalise itself by vetoing a new EU-27 treaty has dominated the post-summit media coverage. And for good reason – it could prove a big step towards UK withdrawal from the EU. However, the bigger question is whether the agreement reached at the summit will do anything to address the fundamentals of the euro crisis"