WOULD WE HAVE THIS CRISIS UNDER THE GSD?

If in December 2011 Gibraltar had returned again a GSD government would we be going through the current crisis with Spain? The answer is of course we simply do not know but we can make some educated guesses.

The first observation to make is that the problems with Spain are not new. They have been going on for over three hundred years, for a period we saw the border closed and usually when the Partido Popular are in power there’s a more forceful chanting of the Gibraltar Español mantra. So the fact that we have endured a long hot summer is nothing unique.

What we can probably say with certainty is that if we now had a GSD government the accord with the local fishermen, which has seen them break Gibraltarian law with impunity. would not have been rescinded. It therefore follows that the reef would not have been placed in our territorial waters because Gibraltar would not have had a proactive environmental policy.

So if you believe the summer campaign by Spain was caused by the reef and generated by the scrapping of the illegal fishing accord shortly after the GSLP Liberals came in to government you might argue all would be peace and harmony.

However the fact is the fishing accord and reef were only the excuses that Madrid needed and not the root cause. The Partido Popular spent two terms in opposition plotting how to both dismantle PSOE’s international treaties with Gibraltar and also how to instil Gibraltar Español as a central plank of its “foreign” policy. On being elected around the same time as our own Government it made its intentions crystal clear so the crisis should be no surprise to anyone.

Having first defended the eight hour border queues as punishment for the reef laying Madrid quickly changed tack and declared it was to prevent smuggling. This pasodoble was because the Spanish Government realised it could not defend the abusive queues by pointing at a reef at the end of the runway buried metres under British Gibraltarian waters. So it became official: the border chaos has nothing to do with the fishing dispute or the reef - it’s all about tobacco.

One of the measures that Margallo has threatened Gibraltar with is the toll. This, of course, is nothing new for it first made its appearance when we had a GSD government. Indeed the then maverick PP mayor of La Línea, Alejandro Sánchez, who is now said to be guiding the Spanish Government’s “dirty tricks on Gibraltar department” in Madrid, went much further than mere suggestions. Indeed I suspect the concrete lane markings he laid out as you enter La Línea can still be seen to this day. Sánchez is foe to both GSD and GSLP chief ministers alike. ¡Gibraltar Español! is emblazoned on his t-shirt.

So what are the other issues that Rajoy and Margallo take with Gibraltar? Well chief amongst them is the Córdoba Accord which was the shining policy of the GSD. There’s tobacco, bunkering, all matters financial, phone lines, the sovereignty of our waters and air space, land reclamation, Uncle Tom Cobley and all. None of these are new and all existed under the GSD and would exist now. They are a target for Madrid whoever is in power here.

Even when the fishing accord was in place the Guardia Civil still made incursions in to our waters. Indeed during the GSD era they even landed, shopped in Main Street, bought monkey t-shirts for the kids, purchased cartons of cigarettes in black plastic bags and stashed a bottle of whisky not DYC down their trousers before heading home. OK I made the very last bit up but you get my gist.

The fact is the current crisis with Spain is nothing to do about fishing, nothing to do about the reef, little to do with Bárcenas or the PP’s other corruption scandals, little to do either with that country’s economic crisis but everything to do with Gibraltar Español. The crisis would have come whoever was in power only its timing may have been different.

There are several good things to come out of the summer heat. The vicious campaign, especially in the Spanish media, against our Chief Minister, Fabian Picardo, shows how little the Spaniards understand Gibraltarians or the British. The aim was to make us turn against our leader and for Westminster to disown him. The opposite has happened. Gibraltarians have rallied to his side and the British Government has never been a stronger ally. British Gibraltar rules ok!

The crisis also means that much of what we have suffered in silence over the years is now out in the open. Brussels is involved on a number of fronts as well too could be the international courts and even the UN before the year is out. The fascist Gibraltar Español policy of the PP will be shown up for what it is and if we play our cards right Gibraltar can emerge stronger not weaker.

One Gibraltar, one Rock, one people.

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES A DAY MAKE? NONE!

This time last week we were all studying the runes in the Spanish press to see what we could read in to the meeting in Madrid on the Monday between Spain’s Prime Minister, Mariano Rajoy, and his British counterpart, David Cameron.

The Foreign Office had made it clear that Gibraltar wasn’t on the agenda: the visit was part of Cameron’s campaign to persuade EU leaders that reform was necessary. However the FO did later concede that Rajoy had raised Gibraltar.

Cameron’s response was to recite his mantra on self-determination and only talks if we wish it and are there under our own flag. Rajoy outwardly expressed his wish to engage in talks but added little more. It is hard to see why he would move from his two flags position although would try to include Gibraltar as part of the British delegation because he had included the Campo de Gibraltar on theirs.

Well we know that is a non-starter but Rajoy and Cameron posed for a happy smiling, handshaking photo call to let us know these two right wing politicians are in accord on matters other than the Rock.

On Tuesday it was back to normal. The Guardia Civil patrol boat Río Pas entered once again our waters and according to quoted diplomatic sources at the Foreign Office the Royal Navy saw them off. The British Ambassador was ordered to stop roasting his crumpets in front of the fire and to scurry round to the Madrid ministry of foreign affairs with a note.

They haven’t shown me the note but apparently it said London was fed up with the constant incursions by the Guardia Civil and Armada in to British Gibraltar territorial waters and it had to stop. If not William Hague is going to stop drinking Rioja. Trouble is many of the world’s wine producing nations are at odds with the UK over one thing or another so the Foreign Office carte du vin must be getting very short indeed.

What I find extraordinary is that one day Rajoy and Cameron are all lovey-dovey and the next Madrid sends a gun boat into Dave’s backyard. I know the Foreign Office has made being two faced into an art form but even the Mandarins would have waited to Wednesday.

As far as I am aware neither our Government nor the Convent has issued any statement on the Madrid talks or the Guardia Civil incident apart from the Foreign Office statement about Spain raising Gibraltar with Cameron. I know not the reason but it is one I approve of. Madrid knows that it can cause mischief by stirring up uncertainty when Spanish and UK government officials meet or watching us jump each time they poke us with a stick. There’s a time for protesting and a time for a sharp, knee in the diplomatic bags. On this occasion we were wiser to go for the later.

Now pass me my glass of Torres Viña Sol. Anything we can do to boost the Cataluña economy the better.

OPERATION MISCHIEF

By the time you read this Operation Mischief will have begun. Correction: it has already begun.

I am not sure how you first heard the news that the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, is due to meet his Spanish counterpart, Mariano Rajoy, in Madrid on Monday. In all likelihood is was from the Spanish media. As I write this no press release from No 6 has been issued on the matter.

On one hand why should there? After all it is a meeting between the UK’s and Spain’s head honchos, both conservatives. One presumes they will be discussing bilateral and EU matters. 

However it would be interesting to know was our government informed in advance of the meeting? Was the Convent? If the latter and not the former did the Convent tell out government? If not, why not etc etc.

I am sure there are more than enough topics to occupy Cameron’s and Rajoy’s time without touching on Gibraltar. Again as I write this there has been no formal statement from the UK that the meeting will take place. Perhaps they hoped we wouldn’t notice. Trouble is Gibraltarians read the Spanish press and have access to their radio and TV networks so the chance of such an encounter slipping us by is nonexistent.

Indeed the Spanish media and Partido Popular wouldn’t want it to either. The word in Spain’s press is that Gibraltar will be on the agenda. As the meeting is in Madrid Rajoy’s clerks probably wrote same agenda so that is no surprise.

So what is the scenario? Will Gibraltar and its sovereignty be on the agenda? Will Cameron refuse to discuss it without us being present and then state in no uncertain terms his mantra on our right to self determination adding in the Falklands for good measure. If that is the scenario then let’s hope so.

Yet is that good enough? Spain is challenging Britain’s sovereignty over our territorial waters. Spain is challenging our sovereignty over our airspace. Logically Gibraltar should be an issue and an urgent issue at that and so be on the agenda? At the top.

However if it is, if Cameron is going to Madrid for more than a photo opportunity and to down some Rioja and tapa, then we should be there too. If our territorial waters, our air space, our right to control our environment, which are all matters of sovereignty, are on the agenda then we should be there. Not our chief minister as a prime-ministerial bag carrier but under our own flag.

Of course if that happened then Rajoy would refuse to meet. Good. The sooner Spain understands that it cannot have it churros and eat it the better. The sooner it realises that it cannot challenge Britain’s and our sovereignty over Gibraltar, our Rock, the better. If that means that Rajoy loses an ally in Europe, so be it. So will Cameron play hard ball with Rajoy or show he has no balls at all: I suspect we know the answer to that one.

In the meantime time the Spanish media will cause mischief by churning out misinformation, sowing the seeds of doubt and creating the impression that two flag talks took place on a three flag issue. Of course all of this will fall on deaf ears here on the Rock. Ok on most of the Rock. There are still ‘palomos’ around who will feed eagerly off these crumbs and make a meal out of them. You have been warned.

ONE NATION POLITICS: THE GIBRALTARIAN WAY

If you had asked me before the end of last September about One Nation politics I would have pointed you in the direction of former British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli and the One Nation tradition in the old Conservative Party.

That was to last year’s Labour Party Conference in Manchester when party leader Ed Miliband captured the concept of One Nation for the socialists. He did it just a stone’s throw from where Benjamin Disraeli had first used the term in a speech at the Manchester Free Trade Hall some 140 years before on April 3 1872.

Now I presumed at the time this was the second coming of One Nation politics but I was wrong. It was the third. The second happened in the mid-1990’s when Tony Blair became leader of the Labour Party. It was part of his New Labour journey from One Nation politics to the Stakeholder Society to the Third Way.

So to Ed Miliband’s speech at the Fabian Society Conference in London on Saturday. Certainly the Fabians were anxious for flesh to be put on the One Nation bones. Did Ed achieve that? He certainly did for me but then I have long embraced the notion of One Nation politics. Some of those around me shared my satisfaction but others didn’t and I wonder if they are waiting for Ed’s One Nation to fit their agenda, which I am not sure it is ever going to do.

One Nation politics is essentially a British, perhaps even English, dogma. It will be the socialist buzz words ahead of the next British General Election. Yet I can think of no better way to describe how politics in Gibraltar should be carried out and I would argue that in essence Fabian Picardo (not to be confused with the Fabian Society) is a One Nation politician.

In such a small community as ours the One Nation concept sits very easy indeed with Gibraltarians’ core beliefs. It wasn’t the philosophy of the GSD which set out to serve its own at the expense of the majority. However Fabian Picardo governs for all Gibraltar and not just those in the GSLP or Liberals. In his heart and soul he believes in fairness: a concept that is shared by those in government with him.

Blair’s 1997 view of One Nation politics was set out in the Labour Party’s manifesto. He stated “I want a Britain that is one nation, with shared values and purpose, where merit comes before privilege, run for the many not the few, strong and sure of itself at home and abroad.” Isn’t that 2013 Gibraltar?

Miliband in his 2012 conference speech hoped for Britain to be a land in which “patriotism, loyalty, dedication to the common cause courses through the veins of all, and nobody feels left out”. Isn’t that 2013 Gibraltar too?

If Gibraltar is to be successful this small nation has to be one nation. For well over a decade the GSLP – Liberals have demonstrated first how a coalition can work for a country in opposition and how that can be successfully carried through in to government. This is in stark contrast to the Conservative Lib Dem coalition in the UK which is self-serving and not there to serve the nation. Now as One Nation politics again takes centre stage in the UK we here can point to how it is a core Gibraltarian belief which defines our small nation as one nation.

DOES LONDON TALK TO MADRID BILATERALLY ABOUT GIBRALTAR? OF COURSE IT DOES!

Spain’s Foreign Secretary Margallo has been caught again telling porkie pies about having bilateral talks with the UK on environmental issues. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has been called upon to deny it and it duly has.

However if we believe that London does not talk bilaterally to Madrid about Gibraltar then we are being extremely naive. Of course it does.

When the Spanish Ambassador was called to hear the UK’s protest over its warships entering our waters that was a bilateral meeting simply because no person representing Gibraltar was there. I am sure on that occasion Madrid’s man received a stern ticking off, because now the defence of Gibraltar’s waters is very much in the UK’s self interest. Yet like it or not it was a bilateral encounter.

Spanish and British officials meet all the time be it in London or Madrid. It is what Foreign Office mandarins and diplomats do. I am sure that for now British officials and diplomats staunchly defend the stated position on our Sovereignty and the fact that jurisdiction on all matters except defence and foreign affairs is constitutionally with Her Majesty's Government of Gibraltar. Let be frank, it has not always be so.

None the less it beggars belief that over cups of tea and digestives in Whitehall, chocolate and churros in Madrid and on the cocktail circuit that diplomats and officials do not chat about Gibraltar. They chat about the border queues, the environmental issues and numerous other topics that relate to the Rock – and they do it bilaterally because our Man in London is not there and we do not have a Man or Woman in Madrid.

Of course Margallo and his sidekicks can make mischief out of this situation by saying they have had bilaterals with the UK – which of course they have. We then nag the sweet FCO to issue a denial which they do because in their terms they haven’t. Spaniards are cute enough to know this keeps our nerves jangling and sows the seeds of doubt.

I see no reason why in this day and age Gibraltar cannot have a desk at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office staffed by Gibraltarians. The same should apply to all British Overseas Territories. Gone are the days when Gibraltarians were treated like a class of schoolchildren – patted on the head when good or sent to stand in the corner when bad. When the issue of Gibraltar is raised we should have somebody on the spot to at least be a party to the discussions: then they would be trilateral.

It is not just in cases of conflict that a Gibraltarian should be on hand. The current crisis over the environmental supervision of our waters would never have happened if a Gibraltarian had been involved in the original process of establishing what were Spain’s and which were Britain’s. There are also numerous other issues affecting primarily the EU and how they impact on Gibraltar that needs to be properly represented in Whitehall. We should no longer tolerate the impact on the Rock being discovered or discussed as an afterthought.

We have a Governor and his staff in Gibraltar whose email addresses betray all too clearly that they work for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and not for us. They are the FC&O on the ground here. What Gibraltar needs, and needs now, is its own feet on the ground in Whitehall –and even Madrid.

CARUANA BACK ON THE JOINT SOVEREIGNTY HOOK

A week ago I reported in Panorama that the leading Labour politician, Jack Straw, had published his autobiography – Last Man Standing. I went on to say he had held two of the great departments of State, the Home and Foreign Office under Tony Blair. Yet for Gibraltarians his name will for ever be linked with the debacle over joint sovereignty with Spain in 2002.

The odd thing about his autobiography is there are just two references to Gibraltar. The first relates to discussions on a Freedom of Information Act and mentions briefly the shooting of the IRA suspects. The second is a subheading to the chapter on his becoming Foreign Secretary entitled “Life in the Air”. This is followed by the quotation: “Zimbabwe, and Gibraltar – My answer to a close friend who’d asked in July 2002 what were the biggest issues facing me as the new Foreign Secretary.”

The big international issues of the day such as Iraq and Pakistan feature but although Straw claims Gibraltar was one of “the biggest issues facing me” not another word.

I am at the Labour Party Conference this week and of course Jack Straw is in attendance. I asked his office could we meet? “Oh no” they said, “he’s far too busy promoting his book”.

So I contacted his publishers who said there was a book signing - meet Jack Straw event on Tuesday night but other than that, nothing. So he wasn’t far too busy promoting his book.

Nor was Mr Straw keeping a low profile although his labelling of the former almost sainted leader of the Labour Party, John Smith, as an alcoholic who was not fit to be prime minister probably didn’t endear him to many party activists from that era.

So I took the opportunity to introduce myself to Mr Straw, who seemed to recognise my name, and was only too happy to talk. I asked him about the “Zimbabwe –Gibraltar” quote and if that was true why hadn’t he mentioned Gibraltar in the chapter.

His answer was he had written a chapter on Gibraltar but it wasn’t the Foreign Office who asked him to take it out but the publisher. He said the book was overlong so something had to go and it was the Rock.

Fair enough if true! However a chapter on Gibraltar would certainly have boosted the sales and to be honest the book is not exactly lengthy. The other oddity is that the heading to his Foreign Secretary chapter is the one that belongs to the Gibraltar chapter. So maybe Pan Macmillan, his publishers, not only has a paper shortage but also are lacking in competent editors.

So why isn’t Caruana not off the hook yet on the joint sovereignty issue? Well it seems Jack Straw is now keen to tell the tale of what happened over the joint sovereignty debacle in 2002 and is considering not just a chapter but a book exclusively on that subject.

The Hain book in January of this year, which was also being heavily promoted at the conference, revealed enough to suggest Caruana had intended to back the joint sovereignty deal and had misled the Europe Minister. However the fact is Hain is not a popular figure in the Labour Party let alone outside of it. Jack Straw on the other hand is a big beast of British politics and if he points the finger at Caruana then the accusations will stick. Of course the former chief minister might challenge Mr Straw in court. The only problem is that like Caruana Jack Straw is a lawyer too. Not only that he was Lord Chancellor. “Game on” is I think the modern phrase.

SPAIN FALLS OUT OF LOVE WITH EUROPE

 

Britain has always had a large number of citizens who would describe themselves as euro sceptics. However in contrast Spain has gained so much from its entry to the EC that the people have been firmly behind the European project. However with the economic crisis all that has changed dramatically.

In a survey carried out by the Pew Research Centre 30 per cent of Britons are satisfied with the direction their country is taking but 65 per cent are dissatisfied. In Spain the satisfieds make up only 10 per cent of the population and a far higher percentage, 88, are not happy at all.

In Britain in 2007 52 per cent of people viewed Europe favourably compared with a massive 80 per cent in Spain. This year the UK rating is down seven percent at 45 but the support in Spain has collapsed by 20 per cent to 60.

In the corruption stakes Britons believe Italy is the most corrupt country (38 per cent) followed by Greece on 30 but only 13 per cent believe Spain is corrupt, one per cent more than think their own country is. Gibraltarians will cast a wry smile over that assessment and agree more with Spaniards themselves who view things very differently. They give their own country and Italy a 63 per cent corruption rating with Greece just on 24.

In 2007 30 per cent of Britons were satisfied with their country, the same figure as this year. Fifty-one percent of Spaniards were satisfied in 2007 but that has tumbled by minus 41 per cent to just ten per cent.

The contentment with the economic situation in both countries follows a similar dip. In 2007 69 per cent of Britons were satisfied, now just 15 per cent are, a drop of 54 per cent. In Spain the 2007 figure was 65 per cent and is now six, a drop of 59 per cent.

However the attitude of Spaniards to the EC and indeed the euro has many implications for Gibraltar. In recent months concern has been raised here over the UK holding a referendum to leave the EC (which hopefully Gibraltarians would have a vote in) and how would the Rock fair outside of the union should the vote be for withdrawal.

We also need to watch trends across the border. Willie Walsh the supremo of the united British Airways – Iberia conglomerate revealed they are holding senior meetings on a weekly basis to plan for Spain’s withdrawal from the euro. Everybody knew Spain was in a financial mess but leaving the euro has never been previously discussed.

What if that did happen and in turn Spain decided it would quit the EC? The implications for Gibraltar could be massive. We may not have been particularly well served by Brussels on matters relating to Spain but if our neighbours become a rogue state without any checks or balances then we could be in very dangerous waters indeed.

WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO SAY ON GIBRALTAR?

August is fast approaching and I have my summer reading ready. When I was in London I bought a copy of Alastair Campbell’s latest diaries on Blair and the Iraq War (The Burden of Power: the countdown to Iraq). By chance I flicked though it last night to see what references there were on Gibraltar: three to be exact and very brief: my first reaction was they were of little interest.

However having slept on it I awoke this morning to realise Blair’s first reference to Gibraltar was in fact dynamite. I then read our Government’s statement on the Guardia Civil incursion on Friday and I believe in a very roundabout way there is a link.

Back to Blair who in Campbell’s book is preparing for a press conference with the Spanish premier José María Aznar. Blair asks Aznar: “What do you want me to say on Gibraltar?” Before Aznar can reply Campbell jumps in as shouts “Don’t answer that!”

Last night I took another sip of my gin and tonic and moved on. This morning I found the reference again whilst drinking my green tea and needed nothing stronger. Here is the British Prime Minister of the day asking the Spanish Prime Minister what Madrid wants him to say about Gibraltar. My God, thank goodness Campbell was there to stop the answer although we know from the joint sovereignty debacle that followed just what it was!

Now a lot of water has flowed under Westminster Bridge since then but in some ways relations between Gibraltar, the UK and Spain have not changed one jot. Spain, especially PP governed Spain, is still the bully and it knows that every time it give Gibraltar a Chinese burn No.6 has to run to Whitehall for help.

The problem is Westminster and Whitehall are none too keen to get involved. Anglo - Spanish relations always come before Anglo – Gibraltar relations simply because Spain is more important to the UK as a trading and political partner than Gibraltar is. I suspect as I write a Mandarin in the Foreign Office is dusting down a formal protest to Madrid on Friday’s incident: it will be presented and accepted with all due ceremony then put in the cardboard box with all the others and promptly forgotten about.

Let me give you two scenarios: on Friday night a French Gendarmerie patrol boat boarded a UK vessel in British waters off Dover and under darkness took the boat to Calais where the innocent crew where held for two hours and then released. Result: all hell would have broken loose, the TV news channels would be giving blanket coverage, politically and diplomatically Britain would be breathing fire!

OK, on Friday night an Argentinean naval patrol boarded a Falkland’s vessel in the island’s waters and took it under darkness to Buenos Aires where the British crew were held and questioned before being released. Result: Britain would be jumping up and down at the UN and Royal Navy patrols would be beefed up.

So too last Friday: a Guardia Civil armed patrol boat boards a British vessel in Gibraltar’s water and takes it in darkness to Algeciras where after two hours questioning the crew and boat are finally released.

Is Britain breathing fire? No!

Is it receiving 24 hours UK news coverage? No!

Has Britain increased its Royal Navy presence? No!

Is Britain’s ambassador to the UN lodging an urgent protest? No!

The key difference between the first and second scenarios and Gibraltar is they took place in British home waters and the oil rich waters of the Falklands. Gibraltar is adrift, alone, in the waters of the bay – albeit it British Territorial ones, which some Whitehall Mandarin thought were off Algeria, so left to Spain under the EU’s environmental plans.

And so we return to the ghost of a British Prime Minister asking his Spanish counterpart – “What do you want me to say on Gibraltar?”

The fact is the waters, airspace and borders of Gibraltar will only be fully secure when Gibraltar and not Britain defends them. Gibraltar has to stand up alone to the Spanish bully and until it does the pinching and punching will go on and on and on. The ultimate challenge is will Gibraltar take on this nasty bully because London won’t.

IS THERE LIFE FOR OUR FINANCIAL CENTRE AFTER EU WITHDRAWAL?

Leaving the issues of the Treaty of Utrecht and sovereignty aside the most important decision that may have to be faced by Gibraltar in the coming years is will it remain a member of the EU?

Ironically Gibraltar is a member of the EU solely by virtue of the UK’s membership. Gibraltar will cease to be part of the EU if the British Government withdraws. Gibraltarians should have a vote in any UK referendum on the issue but its 20,000 votes are unlikely to swing the decision one way or the other. What is more if Gibraltar votes to stay in and the UK votes for pulling out: the Rock is out.

Britain’s continuing membership is vital for our Financial Centre and the Financial Centre is vital for the future financial stability and independence of Gibraltar. In the Budget debate, Gilbert Licudi, the Financial Services Minister spoke of exploring new emerging markets like Brazil, Russia, India, and China, the so called BRIC countries, which are enjoying massive economic growth. This he pointed out was particularly relevant as Gibraltar can offer them an alternative entry point into the European single market. Or it can if the UK remains in the EU.

So what if Britain withdrew? One of the first persons I asked was Marc X Ellul in his role as chairman of the Association of Trust and Company Managers. His response was short but sweet: “I consider it to be something which will not ever happen.” I mention what he said because in part I agree with his view: however the job of government is about planning not only for what will happen but also for what might not happen.

My personal view is also that withdrawal is unlikely. All recent UK Governments have been pro-Europe even the Conservative euro sceptic ones. Tories might moan about Brussels but when it comes down to it bitching and pulling out are two different things. Britain’s Foreign Secretary William Hague was interviewed by Andrew Marr on the BBC recently just after his boss David Cameron had made his widely reported time for a referendum comments. It was clear Hague believes Britain’s place is firmly within the EU.

The scenario for Britain’s withdrawal comes at the next election. The Conservatives now cut adrift from the Liberals against Labour know that the British public favour a referendum on withdrawal. Hence it makes sense to a euro sceptic party to include in its manifesto a commitment to hold an ‘in or out’ referendum. Cameron will be desperate to carry the euro sceptics with him for they have nowhere else to go except to UKIP which could steal enough votes or seats to usher in a Labour or Labour – Lib Dem coalition. I believe any future Tory - Lib Dem deal is dead in the water.

So Britain could have a Conservative Government (or even a Tory – UKIP coalition) where an “in out” referendum is granted to the clamouring masses. Given that the Murdoch press and other media such as the Express and Mail will campaign for pulling out that is indeed the way things may go.

Britain and Gibraltar pull out: what then for our Financial Centre? My first port of call was the Financial Centre itself who sent me to Stuart Green for comment. He told me: “The finance centre has been built on the basis of access to the EU internal market. The implications of the UK departing from the EU would depend on the arrangements that would then be put in place between the UK and the EU upon the UK’s exit.” Basically Stuart’s comments leave us none the wiser but hint at pending doom if the arrangements are not in our favour.

Next stop was Emma Perez who apart from being CEO of SG Hambros is president of the Gibraltar Banker’s Association. I caught her on the hop but she told me: “The first things that spring to mind however would be the loss of passporting capabilities for Gibraltar Banks into EU and also the implications which could arise vis a vis EU directives which would therefore not be applicable.” This ability to passport into the EU of course is what Minister Licudi is basing his entire BRICS strategy on.

Finally I spoke to James Lasry who is Chairman of Gibraltar Funds and Investments Association. He stated: “Gibraltar is firmly within the EU and its legislative framework and it has positioned itself over the last decades to maximise its position within this context. It would be difficult to conceive of Gibraltar not being within the Union. The funds and investment industries take full advantage of the passporting rights afforded to EU members.”

Yes James, but is there life for the Finance Centre after EU death by withdrawal? His answer is positive. He continued: “Having said this, if Gibraltar were to cease to belong to the Union, its infrastructure and experience could be reapplied to use in non-European contexts such as in the cases of the Channel Islands."

Marc X Ellul believes the UK’s withdrawal from the EU is unlikely, and I agree, but at least we have the reassurance of James Lasry who believes our Financial Centre still has a strong future based on the Channel Islands model. The success of Gibraltar’s financial sector and our very economy will depend our ability to adapt to a sound “in or out” strategy.

DIVIDE AND RULE

Divide and Rule has been a strategy used by governments and their ambassadors since Roman times when it was known as ‘divide et impera’: divide and conquer is another variation.

The statement by the Spanish Ambassador to the Court of St James, Federico Trillo, is another typical example of this ancient ploy. The centre right Partido Popular government, stung by its Conservative led coalition counterpart in London refusal to enter in to bilateral talks on Gibraltar, is bent on causing mischief.

This year David Cameron has made the strongest statements ever by a British Prime Minister on the right of Gibraltar to self determine its own future whilst also insisting no talks would be held with Spain without Gibraltar’s agreement.

He is not alone. Cameron’s words have been echoed by both the Foreign Secretary, William Hague, and his Minister for Europe, David Lidington. So either these members of the British Government are involved in the biggest deception towards Gibraltar ever or Federico Trillo is being mischievous (but may be not totally lying).

I do not believe the British Government is deceiving Gibraltar for one very simple reason that has nothing to do with the Rock: the Falklands. London sees direct linkage between Argentina’s claim to the Malvinas and Spain’s insistence on the Gibraltar Español dogma. Hence when London proclaims “no surrender” it means it because the Falklands is sitting on liquid gold and is a handy staging post to extract valuable mineral deposits in the South Pole region. Give way on Gibraltar and you loosen your hold on the Falklands. You didn’t believe it was about democracy did you?

I did however say that Trillo might not be totally wrong. Trillo is an ambassador and not a politician. Hence it is quite possible that he is involved with bilateral shenanigans with his opposite number in Madrid or indeed Mandarins at the Foreign Office. In the world of diplomacy anything could be going on and I doubt whether even Cameron or Hague are aware of it. Yes Minister still rules ok?

There is a valid view that says that the Gibraltar Government should demand Trillo withdraws his statements but I am not sure if that is productive or not. It might just give the wily ambassador more scope for mischief. He may be testing the water, Spanish waters of course, to see what disquiet he can cause. Also should we throw a rock at him every time he pops his head over the wall and shouts Gibraltar Español or simply ignore him?

At the end of the day it is for London to deny there are any bilateral talks going on and to restate its position on Gibraltar. Also if Cameron and Rajoy or Hague and Margallo meet and the Spanish side raises Gibraltar that is bilateral – even if Britain restates its stout defence of the Rock’s interests and right to self determination.

There has to be trust between No 10 and No 6 and I believe that exists. I do not believe that Cameron or Hague are out to stab Picardo or Gibraltar in the back. I know they are politicians but I do believe the British Government’s staunch defence of Gibraltar’s right to self determination for the reasons I have already stated.

So Trillo will try and destabilise that trust: and is he talking bilaterally over fino and chorizo to Whitehall Mandarins in a Knightsbridge tapas bar? Probably.

HOW SHOULD WE FUND OUR POLITICAL PARTIES?

The “cash for access” row in the UK has raised the issue again of how political parties are funded. Should the cash come from party members, donors or the State?

The British experience is small beer compared with the obscenity of US political campaigning. In a nation with high unemployment countless millions of dollars are being spent in the primary process just to select the Republican nominee to challenge Obama. Then more countless millions will be spent as they battle it out to be president. Needless to say the majority of the cash comes from business and pressure group donors and rather than promoting policies it is all about character assassination. The US would have us believe it is the political system at its finest: sorry it is sewer politics and it stinks.

The main need for funding comes at election time but just to run a political office even with volunteers costs money. The Gibraltar parties are largely on a par with constituency parties in the UK. The Conservatives and Labour used to have a profession party agent running the local office perhaps with a paid secretary. For many constituencies that scenario is ancient history and now it is down to the activists. Yet rent, heating, lighting, office facilities and telephone – internet still add up to several hundred pounds a month minimum.

Ideally a political party should be funded by the many rather than the few. However a grass roots party may pay in to keep the operation going but if their leader is either in government or on the road to power then all sorts of major donors can suddenly surface hoping a large cash sum can buy them influence. In that scenario the activists are pushed aside with a people’s party bowing instead to the people with big pockets.

The positive point about Gibraltar political parties of all persuasions is that the politicians whether in or out of government have their professions outside of Parliament and their feet firmly on Main Street. This is in contrast to the UK where Cameron, Osborne, Miliband and Balls to name just four are professional politicians who have never had to earn an honest crust in the real world.

Gibraltar’s politicians get their ears bent by supporters and opponents alike as they shop, go to church, fill up the car with petrol, eat in a restaurant or stop for a coffee. There is no hiding place and it makes for healthy politics.

However leading British politicians live in a bubble completely separated from the people they represent: they are far more open to listening to somebody passing them a fat cheque with one view rather than a queue of activists clutching a fiver each with numerous opinions.

In some ways State funding does not help solve the problem. Certainly it should remove the millionaire donors but if the State is funding the party the professional politician has even less need for supporters and certainly no need to listen to their views.

I am also unclear how this State funding would work. Would it apply to all parties or elected parties? If I set up as a political party tomorrow would I suddenly be eligible for some dosh? Presumably not but would it be fair for the GSLP, Liberals and GSD to be funded and not the PDP because it has no MPs? Would the Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dems, Greens and various nationalist parties in the British Parliament receive State funding but not the Monster Raving Looney Party and far from funny BNP?

Running a political party costs money and hence democracy costs money. Yet one party having more money than another and therefore better able to run a campaign is not democratic either. A party backed by a thousand activists each paying in a pound is easily out gunned by another party with a single donor handing over a million. It is a problem that needs to be solved but are politicians the people to do it?

NOW AMBASSADOR CRUSHES SPAIN’S HOPES

Working on the theory if you say something often enough it will eventually sink in it was the British Ambassador to Spain’s turn to reiterate his government’s position on Gibraltar. Giles Paxman (brother of TV hard man interviewer Jeremy) used a breakfast meeting in Madrid on Tuesday to deliver his message. He was addressing the Executive Fórum España and told the assembled company that Gibraltar would not come under Spanish sovereignty without a referendum being held on the Rock at which Gibraltarians would have the right to determine their own future.

The ambassador’s words were straight enough: “We won’t allow the inhabitants of Gibraltar to pass under the sovereignty of another country against their democratically expressed wishes.... It is a very strong principal for us.”

Paxman said he understood that the right of self determination was not something that was recognised under the Spanish Constitution but none the less the people of Gibraltar had the right to determine their own future. He went on to stress that the UK would not forget its promise to Gibraltar despite the insistence of the government of Mariano Rajoy that there should be a return to the negotiations on the sovereignty of the Rock that were interrupted in 2002.

In his address to Congress on January 22 the Spanish foreign minister, José Manuel García-Margallo had called on London to re-establish this dialogue “soon”. However the Ambassador rejected the offer of García-Margallo and made it clear there would be no negotiations unless the Gibraltarians wanted it. He stressed: “The British position is well known and hasn`t changed. On Constitutional themes account has to be taken of the opinion of the people.”

Under the 1984 Thatcher – Howe brokered Brussels Process between Spain and the UK it was stipulated that dialogue on sovereignty should be bilateral and that any eventual accord could not be vetoed by the population of Gibraltar. It is this two flags process that the Partido Popular wants to return too with the two flags being the UK and Spain but Gibraltar and the Campo de Gibraltar sitting in as part of their delegations. The Ambassador avoided any reference to this part of the García-Margallo big idea.

Whilst delivering a “no surrender” message to Madrid in Madrid Paxman also stressed the British Government wished to see collaboration between the authorities of Gibraltar and the neighbouring Campo de Gibraltar “for mutual benefit.” This mirrors the Gibraltar Government’s own desire to see cross border accords and co-operation on matters of shared interest.

WRONG QUESTION, WRONG TIME

On Tuesday the new Spanish Prime Minister, Mariano Rajoy, met his British Conservative counterpart, David Cameron, holding the briefest of meetings at Downing Street. Apart from the security helicopters hovering overhead and the police outriders the tourists gathered in Whitehall had no idea anybody important was coming or going.

The meeting was important for both men because it was about the economy and not Gibraltar. Spain and Britain along with 10 other EU nations have sent a joint letter to Brussels calling for urgent measures to be adopted to stimulate economic growth.

Spain is in the euro zone, Britain is out. Yet both economies are embattled and whilst both Rajoy’s and Cameron’s administrations have grasped the public austerity nettle they want to see flexibility and liberalisation in the markets to help them in the quest for the all important goal of economic growth.

Rajoy had another message too: and no it wasn’t Gibraltar. His government has introduced a labour reform package which on Sunday led to widespread street protests in Spain. The Partido Popular leader had to make it clear to his own country, London and the wider world that he wasn’t for turning and sorting out the economy is his primary goal.

It is ironic that Gibraltar’s chief minister Fabian Picardo should have jetted in to London later on the same day because he has also stressed this simple fact. There is only one item on Spain’s political agenda and that is the economic crisis that is both engulfing the euro nations but also his country. Spaniards couldn’t give a hoot about Gibraltar: they want jobs, they want to be paid, they don’t want to be evicted from their homes and still owe a fortune to the banks, they want to be able to feed their families – they want to live in dignity.

So was Gibraltar on the agenda at Downing Street? Of course it was. It was for the very simple reason that no Spanish prime minister or his foreign minister can meet his British counterpart without Gibraltar being discussed. They know it’s the wrong issue on the wrong day but are equally aware that if it is not raised they will get it in the neck politically and from the media when they get home. The Spanish public couldn’t care a toss about Gibraltar right now but that is neither here nor there.

It was the wrong issue on the wrong day in Downing Street because David Cameron was as clear as he could possibly be in re-stating Britain’s support for Gibraltar and the right of Gibraltarians to self-determine their own future. When he made that statement he also included the Falklands and I have pointed out in print here before that it was Buenos Aires that was the prime recipient of that message. Britain cannot give an inch on Gibraltar without giving Argentina hope of a deal on the Malvinas. As long as Argentina sabre-rattles on this issue Gibraltar is safe.

Which brings us nicely to Spain’s new big idea on Gibraltar. It wants meaningful and constructive talks with Britain over the future of Gibraltar. It wants the Campo de Gibraltar to be included in those talks. It wants Gibraltar to sit alongside the UK delegation as the Campo representatives will sit alongside its own: so it will be two flags with two supporting delegations. William Hague quickly but politely kicked that in to touch which means both London and Madrid can now get back to concentrating on the economy as Fabian Picardo said they would and should.

WHERE DOES GIBRALTAR GO FROM HERE?

The recent revelations in the Hain book coupled with the Brussels Process and rumours of other Conservative Government plotting with Spain tells us one simple fact: given the opportunity London would clinch a deal with Madrid over Gibraltar. That applies to whoever is in power and Cameron would snatch a deal as readily as Blair or Thatcher.

Let us take a look at this from London. There are at least one million Britons living in Spain or with second homes there. They pay taxes in Spain, many work for Spanish registered companies, others run businesses. Around the same number of Britons holiday in Spain each year; in many regions they top the tourist charts. Spain is Britain’s eighth largest trading partner and in 2011 exports were nearly eight billion pounds.

This means that when Whitehall looks at its interests with democratic Spain it is these statistics that loom large and not Gibraltar. In addition to that both are partners within the EU, both currently have centre right governments and both are members of NATO.

The days of Gibraltar’s strategic importance have largely gone and the Rock is no longer the bastion of democracy on the face of Franco’s Spain. Relations between London and Madrid are good but would be better if the Gibraltar issue could be solved.

I have no doubt that Britain will honour the pre-amble to the Constitution. In addition the ties that bind the UK and Gibraltar are very strong indeed. There is over 300 years of mutual history and institutional bonds including a shared monarch. However we are faced with two differing priorities: London would like a settlement with Spain (joint sovereignty would suit it fine) and Gibraltar has no intention of diluting its sovereignty: “no surrender!”

Every indication is that Gibraltarians wish to self govern their Rock whilst maintaining the link with Britain. What needs to be done now is for that policy to be agreed not by politicians but by the people and enshrined in a binding document. It should be a document that sets out the future for Gibraltar and how it intends to relate to Britain, the EU and the UN. It will be the will of the people endorsed by the people at a referendum.

Whether the Hain revelations are true or not the fact is that Caruana has constantly sent out messages to Spain that he is willing to discuss an Andorra style solution regardless of the fact the majority of Gibraltarians are not. He comes from the Palomo tradition and talks the Palomo talk. He has been happy for sovereignty to be on the table. As a democrat I believe he has every right personally, and I stress the personally, to do so. However when he did so as chief minister he should have realised that he gave hope to those in Madrid and London who desire a joint sovereignty accord for differing reasons. Furthermore he should have made it plain he spoke for himself and the two per cent who perhaps back such a solution but not the vast majority who would reject it out of hand: including most GSD supporters. In such delicate matters as sovereignty you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

That is why I say I believe there should be a debate amongst all Gibraltarians to define the future Gibraltar they want; how it will relate to Britain, Spain and its European neighbours. In essence it will be a political debate but it shouldn’t be clouded by party politics. It should be the will of the people and once set down represent the status quo that London and Madrid have to deal with.