Suggested

Interventions
Headline: Does the Prime Minister still believe that a change to the EU Treaties, with some safeguards on the single market, is still the best outcome for the UK? And if so, what plans does he have to pursue this and reverse the isolation that the UK now finds itself in? Would the Prime Minister be prepared to return to the negotiating table over securing an EU treaty change, which he himself has said is his preferred outcome, so long as some safeguards can be secured on the single market? Given the single market and competiveness safeguards that are provided through the EU treaties for the use of EU institutions, does the Prime Minister believe that allowing the institutions to link with the new intergovernmental agreement between 26 of the 27 member states is in the national interest or not? The reports I hear from Brussels are that Nicholas Sarkozy was deeply opposed to the linking of the intergovernmental Treaty to the EU institutions. Does the Prime Minister not agree that allowing for this link is vital means to ensure that the 26 member states do not make decisions amongst themselves that affect UK national interests and that will help to safeguard the rights of the UK as a full EU member state? There is a lot of confusion and myths floating about over what happened at the weekend. For the avoidance of doubt, can the Prime Minister confirm that at no point in the Summit was the UK being asked to transfer any powers of competences? That the UK was simply being asked to allow Eurozone countries to amend the Treaties to allow them to improve the fiscal coordination? And that there was nothing in the deal that would have obliged the UK to agree to an EU financial transaction tax? Does the Prime Minister believe that the fallout from the summit, is that the UK has so badly damaged relations with our core European partners that we will find it more difficult now than ever to build the alliances we need to secure British national interests? Can the Prime Minister name another time in time in history where the UK has found itself isolated in Europe by a factor of 26 to 1? What implications does the Prime Minister think this will have for how the UK is viewed in Washington who have always looked to the UK as a key partner, precisely because of our influence on the continent? While Thatcher was not exactly a fan of the EU, she never left Britains chair empty as she knew that British interests could only be pursued by having a strong British voice at the table. How does the Prime Minister plan to ensure that the UK continues to have a strong British voice at the European table in future? What does the Prime Minister say in response to a poll in the Times today that shows that shows that 56% of the public believe that the UK will be less influential in the EU as a result of 26 other member states manoeuvring around the UK? Rather than protect British interests, does the Prime Minister not think that he has effectively gone to Brussels, snubbed and angered 26 of our closest allies, brought back no safeguards whatsoever and left the UK a diminished force in the EU?

Eurozone: While I am concerned about the longer term impact of the decision to veto a Treaty deal, the number one immediate concern threat to the British economy remains the possibility of a Eurozone collapse? Does the Prime Minister believe that the deal agreed at the Summit is enough? And what action is he considering for the UK to do to help a collapse of the single currency, and the appalling economic consequences that would have for the British economy? The Prime Minister and I agree that the Eurozone crisis remains the most serious threat to the UK economy at present. But by not allowing the Eurozone to use the EU Treaties and EU institutions, does he believe he helped or hindered the resolution to the Eurozone crisis? City of London Safer? Rather than protecting the City of London, does the Prime Minister not believe that he has made significantly more vulnerable? We have no extra safeguards, our allies our furious with us and we now have no seat at the table where many of the decisions that will affect the City can be made? How does he propose to get the UK, and the City of London, out of the ditch he has dug for us? Can the Prime Minister name a single EU financial services regulation or directive that the UK has voted against? I think there will be very few, if any. In which case, what was the huge threat that the Prime Minister to the City that he was so concerned about? And does he not think that he has made the likelihood of us being outvoted in the future more not less likely? Does the Prime Minister believe that the prospects for safeguarding the interests of the financial services industry in the UK are now stronger or weaker, and can he explain why? What threats to the City of London does the Prime Minister believe that he has now protected the City of London from as a result of refusing to allow a change to the EU Treaties and forcing them to pursue a separate Treaty among 26 other member states? Does the Prime Minister think that the City of London is really safer as a result of removing the UK from the negotiating table and giving the green light to Sarkozy to push the 25 others others towards an intergovernmental setup without us? Does the Prime Minister agree with Tom Brown, from the Norddeutsche Landesbank, one of the many large European banks with a very sizeable presence in the City of London, that the City would be finished if it were not in the Single Market? What message does he have for those many banks and financial institutions in the City that are nervous about the implications of his decision to block EU treaty change for them? The Prime Minister should be aware that as a result of the outcome of the Summit, Sharon Bowles MEP, Chair of the Economic & Monetary Affairs Committee and of the most influential British voices on EU financial services legislation may lose her Chairmanship of that Committee? Is this not another example of, rather than protecting the City of London, the Prime Minister has left it exposed? Broader Single Market: As a result of his decision on Friday, there is a significant risk that the 26 other member states of the EU will be meeting on a regular basis to discuss economic and business matters, many of which will affect the single market. How then, does he plan to ensure that Britains voice is heard in those

discussions and that we can continue to retain our full influence and ability to pursue the British national interest, as one of the biggest member states in the Union? The UK, under Margaret Thatcher, was at the forefront of driving forward the single market programme, in particular by introducing qualified majority voting, which has led to the dramatic removal of barriers to free trade within the EU and delivered an extra 3,000 in income per British household per year. How does the Prime Minister plan to pursue further jobs and growth in the UK through deepening and expanding the single market if the UK is not at the table for many of the key discussions? Does the Prime Minister not think that, with the EU-26 now meeting regularly to discuss economic and business matters, the ability to pursue the UKs interests, particularly on the single market, are now severely reduced? How does he consider this to be in the UKs national interest? How can the Prime Minister reassure those businesses around the UK, many of whom are concerned that his decision on Friday to remove the UK from the table and encourage 26 others to go on around us will, over time, damage the ability of the British Government to pursue the national interests in the future? The UK is a globally attractive destination for foreign direct investment for many reasons. But chief among them is the fact that we are part of and highly influential over the worlds largest single market. If our influence over the single market is put in doubt as a result of being increasingly isolated in Europe and absent from the key discussions, what impact does he think that will have on the UKs ability to attract global investment in the future? International Standing: The UK has long stood tall in Washington because of our influence on the continent. What impact does he think that being isolated by 26 to 1 will have on the special relationship with the US? How important does the Prime Minister believe our relations in the continent are for pursuing British foreign policy interests, and what impact does he believe a permanent divide, should it emerge, between the UK and the other EU 26 member states would be for our ability to pursue our foreign policy interests in the future? Contrasting Diplomatic Styles: When the Prime Minister compares the constructive and positive diplomatic leadership shown by the Energy & Climate Change Department, working with EU partners to secure a superb deal at the UNFCCC Meeting in Durban over the weekend, with his own performance at EU summits of late, what conclusions does he draw about the best way to pursue the British national interest in the future? When the Prime Minister compares the constructive and positive diplomacy of Business Department which has led to the new commitment by the Commission to exclude all micro-businesses from all new EU regulations, the EU patent, a uniquely ambitious free trade deal with South Korea and substantial progress on digital and services sector liberalisation, with his own performance on the European stage of late, what conclusions does he draw about the best way to pursue the British national interest in the future? What effect does the Prime Minister believe the very serious spat we saw on Thursday and Friday with President Sarkozy has for the bilateral defence cooperation, which he has said is important for British defence and security interests?