Is Tony Blair having a rethink about the European Constitution? His actions earlier this week would indicate so. Blair was furious at the European Union's proposal to prevent employees from working more than 48 hours per week.

Europe's socialist heartbeat still generates a strong pulse and the British Prime Minister moved to detach himself from the EU's plans by using Britain's "opt-out" won by former Prime Minister John Major in 1993 to protect the rights of those who choose to work longer hours. The British work the longest hours in all of Europe.

"[W]e've got to have a fundamental debate in Europe about the direction Europe wants to go," Blair said. "Because the fact is, the competition that Europe's economies face from the emerging economies of the world - never mind America, but the new economies, China and India - mean that we simply cannot afford to give up our flexibility."

While it is all very well to be concerned about the long hours that we may work and what that means for our physical and psychological health, no government has the right to force us to work less. We all put in hours that we consider adequate to sustain ourselves, our families and our ways of life, and it is no business of the bureaucracies in Brussels or Strasbourg to declare us workaholics if we happen to clock more than 48 hours a week. Not only is this a classic case of nanny state syndrome, but Blair asserts that the 48-hour limit will hamper Britain's global competitiveness - and he's right.

"This is a very disappointing result for British business," said James Walsh of the Institute of Directors. "At a time when Europe is supposed to be committed to a more flexible and more competitive economy, this takes us in completely the wrong direction."

Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, also opposes the 48-hour a week mandate. Brown, whose budgets over the past eight years of New Labour rule have resulted in a robust British economy, should be in a position to speak authoritatively. But yet, the EU Parliament in Strasbourg ruled by a vote of 355-272 to force Britons to work shorter hours.

The spat over working hours also made the Prime Minister more determined to go forward with the national referendum on the European Constitution, which he first announced last year. Originally, Blair was very keen to move Britain into a federated Europe. Now, the Prime Minister seems to be backing off and deems it important that the people have their say.

(France may actually come to Blair's rescue, making Britain's vote irrelevant. The French, bless their wine-drenched, froggy souls, are poised to vote no on the European Constitution come May 29, effectively killing the dream of a "United States of Europe.")

Blair was overruled by Labour backbenchers, who are calling for his resignation and keen to return to the socialist Labour party of old. As Shadow Foreign Secretary Liam Fox aptly put it, "Once again, we get one message from the Labour leadership, and another from Labour's elected representatives. Are they on the side of Britain, or our competitors?"

Oddly enough, Blair received more support to protect working hour flexibility from his Conservative and Liberal Democrat rivals. Labour, although having received a historic third consecutive term in power from the General Election on May 5, saw its parliamentary majority nearly halved, fostering rebellion in the ranks.

But, despite the back-stabbing treachery of his fellow Labourites, Blair may just have the last laugh. Despite all the clapping and ass-slapping that took place in Strasbourg, it remains unlikely that the proposal will survive a final review. The issue of working hours will now go to a summit of EU ministers and heads of state using qualified majority voting. British government sources, meanwhile, believe they can muster a blocking vote.

Let us hope so, because the future of Britain's global competitiveness depends on this blocking vote.