 "Concern for business leaders as Cameron's win edges Britain closer to EU exit")
David Cameron's re-election as Britain's prime minister increases the risk that the country will quit the European Union in the next few years. Although this is still not a probability, the possibility will concern business, as an exit would degrade Britain's access to by far its largest market.
Cameron has promised to renegotiate Britain's relationship with the European Union and then hold a referendum on its membership by the end of 2017. The prime minister has done well enough not to need to renew his coalition with the pro-European Liberal Democrats, who have been crushed.
On the other hand, Cameron may not have done well enough to ignore Euroskeptics in his own party. They will try to push him to make impossible demands in the planned negotiation with the European Union knowing that, if he fails to get what he asks for, it will be harder to argue that Britain should stay in the bloc.
One early skirmish will be over what question the British people are asked in the planned referendum. Euroskeptics may press for something like, "Do you want to leave the European Union?" with the result that "yes" meant "out". Being the "yes" campaign could give the Euroskeptics an edge in the coming battle.
Another early skirmish will be over the aspects of Britain's relationship with the European Union that Cameron will seek to renegotiate. So far, he has been fairly vague.
The Conservative manifesto makes four pledges: to control migration from the European Union by overhauling welfare benefits; to reclaim unspecified powers from Brussels; to change the system so national parliaments can work together to block European Union legislation; and to end Britain's commitment to "ever closer union" in Europe.
Whether these are feasible objectives will depend on the detail of what Cameron demands. One problem is that there will probably not be a change in the European Union treaties before the referendum - unless, perhaps, Greece quits the eurozone, and that move prompts an emergency repair job to the bloc's economic arrangements.
But if there is no new treaty, Cameron will only be able to get diluted versions of what he has promised. Maybe he can get a commitment from other European Union leaders to alter the phrase on "ever closer union" when and if there is a treaty change. Perhaps he can persuade the European Commission to abandon any legislation that half of the national parliaments propose.
The knottiest issue may be overhauling social benefits, because immigration is a hot topic with the electorate. Among other things, Cameron wants to stop European Union migrants gaining access to so-called in-work benefits - money those in low-paid jobs get to replenish their earnings - until they have lived in the country for four years. While many other leaders are sympathetic, that particular plan may fall foul of treaty commitments not to discriminate against European Union citizens from other countries.
The Euroskeptics in Cameron's party will presumably try to box him in on all these issues. It will be important that he maintains wiggle room. A further question will concern when the referendum occurs. Cameron has promised that it will be by the end of 2017 but said he would like it to be earlier if possible.
If there was a prospect of a new treaty, there would be a good reason for waiting until 2017. But, in the absence of that, Cameron should go for an earlier vote.
This is partly because of the European Union economic cycle. The eurozone will grow this year as a result of the European Central Bank's huge new money printing operation. But the effects of this will wear off and, with oil prices rising again, there's no certainty that the eurozone will perform well from mid-2016 onward. Cameron will find it harder to persuade the British people to stay in the European Union if it looks like Britain is shackled to a corpse.
The European Union political cycle is another reason to prefer an earlier referendum. In 2017, there is a general election in Germany and a presidential election in France.
Neither country will find it easy to agree to concessions to Britain very close to its own elections. What's more, Angela Merkel may not run again as Germany's chancellor. If she goes early, that could further complicate Cameron's plans for renegotiating Britain's relationship with the European Union, as Merkel has been his most important ally.
It is not guaranteed that Cameron will be pulled hither and thither by the Euroskeptic wing. After all, he will feel pumped up by an election victory, which is, in many ways, a vindication of his leadership. The prime minister may, therefore, have the courage to face down any rebels in his party.
In this regard, the fact that Cameron has promised not to run for a third term as prime minister in 2020 could strengthen his hand. Although he will still need to hang on in power until then, he will presumably now focus on his long-term legacy - and he almost certainly does not want to go down in history as the man who took Britain out of the European Union.
Cameron has promised to renegotiate Britain's relationship with the European Union and then hold a referendum on its membership by the end of 2017. The prime minister has done well enough not to need to renew his coalition with the pro-European Liberal Democrats, who have been crushed.
On the other hand, Cameron may not have done well enough to ignore Euroskeptics in his own party. They will try to push him to make impossible demands in the planned negotiation with the European Union knowing that, if he fails to get what he asks for, it will be harder to argue that Britain should stay in the bloc.
More From This Section
What's more, the UK Independence Party, which wants to take Britain out of the 28-nation European Union, secured roughly one-eighth of the popular vote - although they will have only one lawmaker because of the way the "first past the post" electoral system works.
One early skirmish will be over what question the British people are asked in the planned referendum. Euroskeptics may press for something like, "Do you want to leave the European Union?" with the result that "yes" meant "out". Being the "yes" campaign could give the Euroskeptics an edge in the coming battle.
Another early skirmish will be over the aspects of Britain's relationship with the European Union that Cameron will seek to renegotiate. So far, he has been fairly vague.
The Conservative manifesto makes four pledges: to control migration from the European Union by overhauling welfare benefits; to reclaim unspecified powers from Brussels; to change the system so national parliaments can work together to block European Union legislation; and to end Britain's commitment to "ever closer union" in Europe.
Whether these are feasible objectives will depend on the detail of what Cameron demands. One problem is that there will probably not be a change in the European Union treaties before the referendum - unless, perhaps, Greece quits the eurozone, and that move prompts an emergency repair job to the bloc's economic arrangements.
But if there is no new treaty, Cameron will only be able to get diluted versions of what he has promised. Maybe he can get a commitment from other European Union leaders to alter the phrase on "ever closer union" when and if there is a treaty change. Perhaps he can persuade the European Commission to abandon any legislation that half of the national parliaments propose.
The knottiest issue may be overhauling social benefits, because immigration is a hot topic with the electorate. Among other things, Cameron wants to stop European Union migrants gaining access to so-called in-work benefits - money those in low-paid jobs get to replenish their earnings - until they have lived in the country for four years. While many other leaders are sympathetic, that particular plan may fall foul of treaty commitments not to discriminate against European Union citizens from other countries.
The Euroskeptics in Cameron's party will presumably try to box him in on all these issues. It will be important that he maintains wiggle room. A further question will concern when the referendum occurs. Cameron has promised that it will be by the end of 2017 but said he would like it to be earlier if possible.
If there was a prospect of a new treaty, there would be a good reason for waiting until 2017. But, in the absence of that, Cameron should go for an earlier vote.
This is partly because of the European Union economic cycle. The eurozone will grow this year as a result of the European Central Bank's huge new money printing operation. But the effects of this will wear off and, with oil prices rising again, there's no certainty that the eurozone will perform well from mid-2016 onward. Cameron will find it harder to persuade the British people to stay in the European Union if it looks like Britain is shackled to a corpse.
The European Union political cycle is another reason to prefer an earlier referendum. In 2017, there is a general election in Germany and a presidential election in France.
Neither country will find it easy to agree to concessions to Britain very close to its own elections. What's more, Angela Merkel may not run again as Germany's chancellor. If she goes early, that could further complicate Cameron's plans for renegotiating Britain's relationship with the European Union, as Merkel has been his most important ally.
It is not guaranteed that Cameron will be pulled hither and thither by the Euroskeptic wing. After all, he will feel pumped up by an election victory, which is, in many ways, a vindication of his leadership. The prime minister may, therefore, have the courage to face down any rebels in his party.
In this regard, the fact that Cameron has promised not to run for a third term as prime minister in 2020 could strengthen his hand. Although he will still need to hang on in power until then, he will presumably now focus on his long-term legacy - and he almost certainly does not want to go down in history as the man who took Britain out of the European Union.