Rejuvenated Prime Minister redoubles efforts towards ratification. Major now turns his sights on Tory rebels

rejected the Maastricht Treaty.

Still basking in the glory of his ''message of hope'' summit success,

the Prime Minister will leave the treaty in the care of the Danes less

than three weeks from now and turn his attention to dealing with his own

rebellious back benchers who want to wreck British ratification.

Having saved Maastricht for the Community and won international praise

for the first time since the sterling crisis almost ended his

premiership, the rejuvenated Mr Major will now redouble his efforts to

steer ratification through the Commons where the Tory Euro-sceptics are

planning all sorts of ambushes and blocking tactics.

But some of the results of Mr Major's ''hard pounding'' in Edinburgh

are still far from clear. Although the heads of state and government

reached agreement on financing for the post-Maastricht era -- until

almost next century -- the Danes could still torpedo the treaty itself

with a second ''no''.

Mr Poul Schluter, the Danish Prime Minister, voiced confidence that

the narrow rejection in the first referendum could be consigned to

history.''I honestly think that everybody at home will be able to see

that the result is so good that we can confidently vote Yes,'' he said.

The danger for Mr Schluter, and Maastricht, now is that the grouping

together of all but one of Denmark's many political parties in a

''national compromise'' might not hold much longer. A return to a more

even split seems likely and that would mean a rerun of the campaign

which led to the first rejection of the treaty.

In April or May Danish voters will be asked if they will now accept

Maastricht with a series of legally-binding opt-outs added on. These

involve a single currency, a European defence policy, sovereignty and

citizenship. The status of the opt-outs, which are quite separate from

the unaltered text of the treaty, is in some doubt.

According to Mr Major they are legally binding between governments.

Some observers were wondering last night if they were ''justiciable'',

in other words if they could be tested in court. Mr Major said they were

not. If the opt-outs are merely agreements then they would not enjoy the

status of legislation.

Mr Douglas Hurd, Foreign Secretary, yesterday on BBC television ruled

out the prospect of a two-speed Europe, with the Danes being left behind

on the road to a single currency and stronger political union.

Although no firm lifespan was given for the opt-outs, it seems likely

they will come under scrutiny when the Maastricht Treaty is reviewed in

1996. This also raises the prospect of some future summit having to take

into account the widespread electoral suspicion with which political and

economic union is held in most EC nations.

This is exactly the type of problem which the summit's embrace of

openness is supposed to tackle. From now on, under the terms of the

Edinburgh conclusions, the EC should be more willing to explain itself

and its workings to the citizens of Europe.

There were admissions by Mr Jacques Delors, EC Commission president,

and others at Edinburgh, that Maastricht is far from perfect. Quite

possibly some of its more contentious elements might have to be unpicked

later when the ratification process for a revised version gets under

way.

But for Mr Major these are distant problems. His success in brokering

a summit deal was all dependent finally on money. As expected, he gave

way and in effect challenged the complaining Spaniards, ringleaders in

the fight for more money for the four poorest EC countries, to wreck the

whole gathering -- and live with the consequences.

The Spanish had little choice but to back down with as good grace as

they could muster.

In that respect the swing towards Mr Major's tough line on spending

proved to be the turning point of the summit. Even the Germans showed

themselves willing to find more money for Spain, Portugal, Greece, and

Ireland -- a change of heart which forced Mr Major to concede.

In the end the Irish Prime Minister, Mr Albert Reynolds, who had

threatened to veto enlargement if more money was not forthcoming, wound

up heaping praise of Mr Major and hailing the British ''triumph''.

Mr Reynolds said: ''It was a very successful presidency in all

respects.'' That sort of statement would have been regarded as

impossible just a month ago.

Mr Delors, whose ambitious spending plans were also curtailed, also

appeared happy with the outcome, claiming he had won 85% of his original

proposals.

For two years there will be a freeze on EC spending, followed by

staged increases from 1.2% of the community's gross national product to

1.27% in 1999. The Cohesion Fund for the ''poor four'', which will

enable them to bring their economies into line with the better off

nations in time for a single currency, will be #12 billion. This will

cover the period from 1993 to 1999. The EC's Structural Fund will be

increased to #24 billion in 1999.

EC leaders also finally agreed their long-awaited package for economic

growth.

The European Investment Fund will have an initial #1.6 billion to

spend to boost business confidence in the EC. But Mr Major gave no

concessions to the Scots -- despite the noisy proximity of 20,000

demonstrators on Saturday calling for a Scottish parliament. Home rule

in the Prime Minister's vocabulary is not synonymous with subsidiarity.