Earlier this evening, Tom Nuttall, who writes the Charlemagne column for the Economist, moderated a round table debate in Oslo's Litteraturhuset (Literature House).
The panel, made up of four liberal politicians from Austria, Estonia, the Netherlands and Norway, were asked to respond to the reference in Nick Clegg's resignation speech, in which he noted that European liberalism is under threat.
Trine Skei Grande MP, Leader of Venstre, our hosts, spoke about the importance of being relevant in national politics. We need to renew our policies in the light of technology and its potential impact on our civil liberties. She was (politely) critical of the Liberal Democrats, noting that we appeared to have forgotten the things that had made us successful in the first place. Trine believes that you should go into government with a clear set of goals and promises and stick to them (she apologised to Lib Dems for having to say that). She was very critical of Nick Clegg, saying that you can't tell the people that they are wrong, that we must go back to our strengths - representing people, 'pavement politics', connecting with people one at a time.
Urmas Paet, former Foreign Minister of Estonia, and now a member of the European Parliament, talked of three risks that liberalism faces - the economy and household income, impacted by free movement of goods and services, the digital economy and trade agreements, security - where fears over migration from outside the EU may challenge the future of the Schengen zone and bring about a further increase in support for populist, nationalist parties, and privacy - how can we balance personal freedoms with the need for security.
Han ten Broeke, VVD's Foreign Affairs spokesman, felt very sorry for Nick Clegg, suggesting that it was very brave to go into government. He had hoped that the coalition would continue, ensuring that the United Kingdom does not turn its back on Europe. He was of the view that we must decide whether we want to be entirely true to our principles or whether we are willing to exercise real power.
For example, if voters believe that freedoms is under threat, so how do we address the concept that freedom is security?
Angelika Mlinar MEP, NEOS (Austria) espoused a view that the voters are always right - I fundamentally disagree with that - and we have to address their concerns, regardless of whether or not we agree with them.
Han ten Broeke also noted that, for the first time, foreign affairs has become a major issue in Dutch politics as voters begin to fear the outside world. Liberals are uncomfortable talking about security.
Urmas Paet disagreed with Angelika, as he felt that, actually, some people ARE wrong. Estonians are not shocked by events in the Ukraine, for example, given their history and geography. Europe is very diverse and has a lot of variety in its views.
Ever willing to seek wisdom - that rather seems to be the point of coming to these events, I suggest - I asked the panel what our priorities should be, and their unanimous answer was that we need to rebuild from the floor up.
So, there you go, Team Cockroach, there are some marching orders...
No comments:
Post a Comment