Europe Rising.

Standing in the Commons on Monday, Prime Minster David Cameron was heckled and faced his largest opposition to date: however, these criticisms came largely not from the opposite bench, but from those sat behind him.

Debates regarding the British membership in the EU remain fierce and frantic. Online polls from various websites largely concur that the British public feel it necessary to call a referendum on the issue of European Union membership and there is evidence that large swaths of the voting public are interested in a renegotiation of the terms of membership at the very least.

The backbench motion was defeated by 483 votes to 111.

Cameron and the vast majority of Parliament officials voted against the reformation, after all Tory, Lib Dem and Labour MPs had been instructed to oppose it.

However, that is far from helping define the gravity of the issue.

Proposed by a Conservative MP, David Nutall, the motion was brought forward under the insistence that the vast majority of those eligible to vote had not had their say on the EU. And he said the UK Parliament was becoming "ever more impotent" as the "tentacles" of the European Union "intruded into more and more areas of national life".

Of course, no government can ever assume to be possessed of the right of power over an issue to the end of time. In an almost repetitious manner, the government here are setting up a power by assumption; they appear to cling to laws that are inherited as definitive of the current time.

As the circumstances of the world are constantly changing and we live through a rather volatile and unstable set of political movements, an act of non-repeal is taken for consent on certain issues, presumably to ensure some social stability. Voicing the need for change is the first step.

Yet in the face of this adversity, the Conservative party imposed a three-line whip on backbench motion on their representatives. In short, any that voted in favour of the bill and against the Tory grain were to be forced to leave their posts.

Such almost childish quibbles should not be the resort of a government not only criticised as fragile, but who are managing a country through one of the most difficult financial negotiations of human history. In fact, it ensures Mr Cameron and co have more a look of a totalitarian state: ignoring public feel and punishing those MPs, whose job it is to serve their community – ergo, punishing public opinion.

Whilst I do not consider an exit from Europe a viable move for the UK considering the globalisation of markets and trade, the methods executed to prevent such an event are hindering progression in the main.

Asked whether he regretted the order, Mr Cameron argued, "No I don't: in politics you have to try to confront the big issues, rather than try to sweep them under the carpet and that's what we did yesterday.”

All the same, this appears a rather dubious comment. Considering that his party has a history of infamous relationships and opinions on Europe (looking back to the Thatcher era), this defence could be seen as unique. It is arguable that Cameron is sweeping an issue under the rug in his hard line of action. Instead of allowing an open debate on the issue and gaining an accurate image of the concerns, there has been elected to power a leader whose prerogative on this issue seems against free speech.

Although the current timing may not suit, the motion would certainly give an idea of policies that should be considered for future governments.

Eurosceptics and members of the Conservative party alike remain somewhat bemused by the events of the past week however. Cameron’s public stance since coming to power has been one of a firm hand with Europe: proclaiming efforts to take back powers from Brussels, this was not the dedication many had hoped for last May.

Perhaps these restrictions are more indicative of a wartime government, for we should be under no illusions that the current stand point is that we are in a war on debt. On a global scale.

“Every step closer to the exit sign shakes confidence in the British economy and can hit British jobs.” argued Nick Clegg after the votes had been announced and there is no doubt a truth in his proclamation. With downgrading already occurring and forecasts being realigned, not even the onset of the 2012 Olympic games seems to be aiding a boost to our economy.

Reforms that are still primary concerns are said to be on the agenda still, but approached in much more a softly, softly manner, as Clegg added that “You reform Europe by leading it.”

Nonetheless, with a plethora of problems melting in the mixing point, the next decade will be one that continues to produce turbulence across Europe. Angela Merkel, the Chancellor of Germany, earlier this week predicted the threatening results of a collapse of the Euro: “let us be under no illusion, another decade of peace in Europe cannot be an absolute certainty.” she proclaimed to large scoffs.

Extreme or rational? The idea plays on a great many fundamental truths; if European nations do not pull together over the current climate of Euro debt, then markets and trade suffer, amidst increasing demands for consumer items and supplies in an ever growing world. Add to this countries pulling every which way to suit their own political aim and not that of the majority, then there quickly establishes a tentative web of allegiances and political oppositions that mirrors the outbreak of World War One just a century later. 

Merkel’s comments certainly make for interesting outlooks and should not be skated around.

Cameron need reacquaint himself with public interest: his rash action is certainly done in the best interest to economic growth, but forcing a wedge between parliament and the public is one certain way to have an overspill of riots: and considering continued activism at St Pauls, planned strikes at the end of November and continued student demos from the end of last year, the Conservative party is not one with many activist friends. Now, it alienates its own members in the largest uprising in modern Tory history.