Britain and EU membership

Membership of the EU has been the most contentious issue in British politics since 1973. Indeed no other foreign policy issue has caused so much divisions and bellicose debates in modern Britain.

While Britain's membership of the EU is now largely taken for granted and none of the serious political parties—save for groups on the periphery, in particular the UK Independence Party—argue for withdrawal from the EU, the extent of Britain's involvement with the Union remains a highly contentious issue. This is especially the case with economic issues and in particular membership of the Euro, which according to almost all of the opinion polls remains highly unpopular in Britain.

This report looks at 3 studies into Britain's continuing membership in the EU and outlines what the authors regard as advantages and disadvantages, in particular from an economic perspective. Given the importance of this issue to nearly all aspects of British life, it is hardly surprising that there is a vast amount of literature on the subject. This report has selected three recent reports for appraisal and regards these to be broadly representative of the prevailing opinions in Britain today. As a conclusion, the author of this report presents his own evaluation of the arguments.

The most important issue in the EU debate today is Britain's ratification of the constitutional treaty for the European Union. A recent report by the Foreign Policy Centre addresses this issue from the perspective of the voting British public. The report accurately contends that since the referendum of June 1975 (which confirmed British membership in the "European Community") the British public have not been given any opportunity to decisively shape the Europe debate in the country. However the expansion of the EU—to accommodate 10 new member states—is perceived to be such a momentous event that many existing member governments (including the UK) feel the need to involve their publics in the decision making process.

This report contends that the outcome of a referendum on the issue of EU expansion, will inevitably pose fundamental questions regarding Britain's involvement with the Union. In other words a "no" vote may well throw into question the legitimacy of Britain's membership in the EU, while a "yes" vote will most likely deepen Britain's influence and involvement in Europe. Therefore, insofar as the authors of this report are concerned, Britain's continuing membership in the EU can not be taken for granted. In this respect the report is unique, since the vast majority of other studies rarely consider the "fundamental" questions anymore. More broadly this report presents samples of opinions across the divide and hence outlines the core issues from the perspective of the British public. This is another unique feature of the report, since the "Europe" debate in the UK has mostly been an elitist issue for the past 30 years.

Meanwhile a report by Delphi presents a comprehensive breakdown of how different "actors" in the British political and media elites perceive the debate over "Europe". While this report reduces much of the dividing line between British elites to arguments over the "extent" of British involvement in the EU, it is still original insofar as it tries to transcend the classic Europhile and Eurosceptic divide. In other words it looks at how different features of the EU (and the way it impacts on British life) animate different political and media actors in the UK. This is a refreshing way of looking at the EU debate in Britain, since over the past 30 years the dominant theme has been the oft heated (and distorted) arguments of the Europhiles and Eurosceptics. A particularly interesting feature of this report is its analysis of the role of British NGO's in the debate. While the report concludes that the NGO's ultimately fall into the Europhile and Eurosceptic dichotomy, their opinions still constitute a "special case".

The economic dimensions of British membership in the EU are undoubtedly the most important features of the debate. Indeed much of the expert and amateurish debates on the EU revolve around its perceived costs and benefits to the UK economy. An online report by "Civitas" presents an interesting Eurosceptic evaluation of the economic costs of continuing membership in the EU. The report makes the bold claim that upon leaving the EU, Britain would be anywhere between £17 billion to £40 billion better off on an annual basis. The most interesting feature of this report is its analysis of any potential adverse economic developments following Britain's withdrawal from the Union. While it boldly asserts that there would be no net losses of jobs or trade, it does concede that much of the projections depend on complex calculations that are influenced by "assumptions". This statement eloquently captures much of the essence of the debate over economic costs and benefits; namely that they are ultimately driven by assumptions and political agendas.

Conclusion

The most immediate conclusion is that the EU remains an astoundingly divisive issue in British political life—much more so than in other member states. Despite the massive opposition to deeper British involvement in the Union, it is unlikely that Britain would ever seriously consider withdrawing from the Union altogether. However the prevailing Eurosceptic mood means that serious issues, namely the referendum on the EU constitution and Britain's adoption of the "Euro" are likely to remain mired in divisions and controversy for many years to come.

Sign up and be the first to receive our latest offers: