London Briefing: The battle-lines for the next phase of the great European debate have been drawn.

In the past, trying to pin down what divided the British pro and anti-European camps was never easy. It was a bit like asking Londoners why they supported Chelsea rather than Arsenal: it usually amounts to something that just is, rather than something that can be explained.

Where people get their beliefs from is often a task best avoided if sanity is to be maintained; trying to figure out just why someone is for or against the European ideal can be damaging to your mental health.

Ask a pro-European what he stands for and you will rarely get a straight answer, rather just an incredulous look that reveals contempt for the question. Something as obviously as good as Europe needs no explanation or rationalisation.

Anybody who feels the need to ask is clearly a doubter - or even an unbeliever - and is consigned forever to stand outside the tribal tent. Rarely do we observe hard discourse or debate. Dialogues of the deaf are the order of the day.

Occasionally, we do observe the tribal elders making the only serious point that they can. During the French referendum campaign one or two Brussels types drew attention to the 60th anniversary of the discovery of the Nazi concentration camps.

Quite rightly, the europhiles stated that modern Europe was invented to prevent such things from happening again.

The problem is that this goal, outside of the Balkans at least, has been achieved.

What else is Europe for?

Well, not much, by all accounts. And electorates are, in differing ways, beginning to take notice.

Most of the time the economy takes centre stage and this is where the edges of the British debate have suddenly become a lot firmer.

Whereas we could never really figure out what the French wanted from Europe, other than it to be run by Frenchmen, we can now discern some hard objectives with which we can utterly disagree.

France, it seems, wishes to meet the competitive threats and opportunities posed by globalisation by pretending they aren't there. The economic tsunami that is globalisation is to be met with the building of a picket fence.

Anglo Saxons, to use the term of abuse so beloved of President Chirac, stand for a competitive response: hard work and flexible economies that move away from manufacturing and climb higher up the value chain.

Old Europe stands for shorter working weeks, more holidays and fancy apartments paid for by the state.

This is not as crude a generalisation as it sounds. Europhiles have a self-image that has "civilisation" as a core value, along with other fine-sounding but utterly vague aspirations.

The economic manifestation of civilisation is absolutely clear: it involves working less, something that has universal appeal.

Most of us would admit to be willing to retire tomorrow if somebody else was willing to provide the necessary finance. Anglo Saxons, unlike President Chirac, are pragmatists: we know that if we respond to globalisation by working less we will end up with an economic disaster. It won't happen overnight but it will happen.

Europe's much vaunted social model has resulted in double-digit French unemployment for much of the last 15 years. One in four people under the age of 25 in France is unemployed.

John Major once said that Europe could have its Social Chapter and we will have the jobs. Quite.

Europe's left-wing elites now blame all this on globalisation. The simple truth is that more socially inclusive policies will lead to the ultimate exclusion: no job.

The conceit of the left is to believe that globalisation is bad and can be stopped.

Just ask the hundreds of millions of Chinese and Indians who have been released from poverty what they think of globalisation.

Of course, they will quietly go back to penury at Europe's request.

Things change. Europe and its social model had a good run for a while. Rigidity in the face of strong winds usually invites breakage.

The tenor of the UK debate over the past few days has been remarkable: Europe is broken, shows no sign of knowing how to fix itself and will only exhibit remorseless economic - and therefore social - decline. The one or two other successful European economies should take note.

Chris Johns is an investment strategist with Collins Stewart. All opinions are personal.