The predictable reactions are coming in on Cameron’s climb-down on pulling the Tories out of the Christian Democratic EPP Group in the European Parliament. The Eurosceptic right are incensed, although a few of them are trying to put a brave face on it, hoping for something in 2009. The majority of Conservative MEPs are relieved to be staying in the EPP and are walking around Parliament with an “I told you so” grin on their faces. I just wonder what the mainstream EPP make of it: to paraphrase one of the Conservative MEPs, it’s a bit like saying you want a divorce, but, despite trying, you haven’t found a suitable new partner, so you’ve announced that you’ll stay at home for the next three years and then look again!

But how did Cameron get into such a “lose-lose” situation in the first place? I noticed that The Economist rightly drew attention to the role of Dan Hannan, an arch Eurosceptic who wants Britain to actually leave both the EU and NATO. The Bagehot column in the Economist (15 July) commented:

"The last thing that Mr Cameron wanted was to look like a Euro-obsessive: he knew the damage which that impression of his party had done in successive elections, and anyway it is just not his style. But the deal he was offered [by the Eurosceptic right] seemed harmless enough; the kind of thing that only the most dedicated political anoraks would give a hoot about.(…) Chief among the siren voices was Daniel Hannan, not only an MEP but also a Daily Telegraph leader-writer and an indefatigable critic of the European Union and all its works. Mr Hannan convinced Mr Cameron that in the new Europe of 25 member countries there were staunchly Atlanticist and free-market eastern Europeans queuing up to be part of a dynamic new anti-integrationist, centre-right group led by British Conservatives. With a knowledge of European politics that even his admirers admit is patchy, Mr Cameron decided to believe Mr Hannan. He also made the mistake of failing to discuss the matter with Mr Hannan's fellow Tories in the European Parliament. This was unwise since a large majority of Mr Hannan's colleagues disagree strongly with him about almost everything."

One can only add that if it was unwise to assume that Hannan spoke for the Tory MEPs, it was even more unwise to assume he spoke for the “staunchly Atlanticist and free market eastern Europeans”, most of whom are perfectly happy in the EPP (which includes both federalist and anti-federalist centre-right parties).

As to the small centre-right/right parties that are not in the EPP, this is usually for a reason: they are often homophobic (the Polish PiS), extreme right, or have some other feature that clashes with Cameron’s professed domestic agenda, such as not allowing women to stand for election (a Dutch Calvinist party). And quite what the traditional Tory supporter made of the suggestion that they should sit with Irish Republicans or the party that emerged from the Italian Fascists (which allegedly turned down the offer on the ground that the Tories are far too right wing for them!), heaven only knows.