But he stressed: “This depends on Britain providing the necessary new elements. Only then will we be able to make process towards normalisation. We will see if the British come up with some good ideas.”The Foreign Secretary, Malcolm Rifkind, will risk enraging Britain’s EU partners further by blocking a number of initiatives when foreign ministers meet in Luxembourg today. Mr Fischler said Britain had provided only “headline” proposals, with no detail.He insisted the ball was in Britain’s court but did not rule out achieving the framework before the Florence summit, which begins in two weeks. In particular, the Commission is insisting all elements of the slaughter policy are in place and fully monitored and that Britain’s animal identification system is working.r The Government must also provide a more precise definition of the different phases it proposes for lifting the ban Britain has opened negotiations suggested a 10-step process.

This proposal would then be voted on by qualified majority, in the EU’s standing veterinary committee. A further qualified majority vote would then be needed among EU agriculture ministers. It was this process which applied during the lifting of the ban on gelatine, tallow and semen, and which the Government had hoped it could bypass in future.r Before the framework can be signed, Britain must have implemented, to the satisfaction of the Commission, its full eradication programme. A proposal to ease a new part of the ban would first be made by the European Commission on the basis of scientific evidence. They don’t believe we are doing it because of the scientific evidence. This makes it harder to maintain consumer confidence and harder to ease the ban.”Mr Fischler’s comments are the latest sign that Britain’s tactics in Brussels are not helping win allies over the crisis.At the weekend, Jacques Santer, president of the European Commission, said member-states were reaching “the limit of our possible tolerance” and that Britain could face years of diplomatic isolation.Mr Fischler said Britain must meet three demands before any agreement can be signed:r The Government must accept stringent EU voting procedures each time another element of the ban is to be lifted. “Now, if we want to make a concession, people think we are doing it for political reasons because of pressure from Britain.

Franz Fischler, the European Agriculture Commissioner, has ruled out any chance that Britain might secure a timetable for the lifting of the beef ban, and has proposed tough new demands for a framework to ease the crisis. In an interview with the Independent he also made clear there can be no deal on how to lift the ban until Britain has halted its blocking tactics in Brussels. “Nobody in Europe can speak about a timetable at this stage … if the British present a framework as a kind of blank cheque, nobody will sign it.”
Britain’s blocking policy had made it much harder for the EU to make concessions on lifting the ban, he insisted. The prospect, two weeks into the beef war, is for a prolonged stand-off, or an escalation by the Government, with uncertain consequences for Britain’s future in Europe.. This would have been a classic EU exit from a political swamp of this kind.But the statements over the weekend suggest that the Commission, and other governments, have closed ranks and will try to force the Government to back down publicly This may be politically impossible for Mr Major.

In John Major’s case, he desperately needs either a real victory (which seems unlikely) or something which he can convince the Tory right-wing and the Euro-sceptic British press amounts to a victory.The clear message from the Commission over the weekend is that the rest of Europe is determined to deny Britain even the semblance of a victory.Both Mr Santer and Mr Fischler make it clear that no further progress can be made towards lifting the beef ban unless Britain abandons its blocking tactics. Mr Fischler also warns that there will be no easy agreement on step-by-step proposals for lifting the ban and certainly no specific timetable.Last week Malcolm Rifkind, the Foreign Secretary, claimed a first step towards victory when the Italian government – now holding the EU presidency – agreed to propose a framework for the gradual lifting of the beef ban. By the nature of any 15-nation institution, a compromise is something which all sides can take home and call a victory. The next 11 days up to the EU summit in Florence on 21-22 June are fraught with danger for the Prime Minister and for Britain’s place in the EU. The warnings given at the weekend by the European Commission President, Jacques Santer, and, by the European Agriculture Commissioner, Franz Fischler, in his interview with the Independent, represent a serious escalation of the crisis.
Why? For two reasons. Firstly, we have lost the sympathy and support of the European Commission, which has been playing on our side until now.Secondly, the comments made in Brussels suggest that there is a growing determination on the Continent to deny the Prime Minister any political benefit from the dispute.At this stage in any Euro- crisis, the EU is politically programmed to seek a compromise.