The Government’s devious handling of the imminent EU Treaty, and its implications for British sovereignty, continues to encourage calls from within the UK for a referendum, but it may be pressure from beyond the UK that raises broader questions over Britain’s continued participation in EU Integration, writes Edmund van der Byl-Knoefel.
Coulisses de Bruxelles, the Blog of French newspaper Liberation, shows an article critical of the UK’s commitment to the EU, entitled “La Grande-Bretagne, in or out?”. The article heavily criticises what the author sees as Britain’s desire “to have one foot in and one foot out” of the EU. They incorporate an extract from Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the ex president of the European Convention, speaking on French radio station France Inter:
There should be proposed an ‘individual status’ for Great Britain since this country “no longer wishes to participate in advances in European integration. It will be necessary to draw decisions from them. If the British would like to be situated apart, it is necessary to be able to propose this and for them to accept it” because “one should not discourage the desire for integration of the Europeans, vital for our continent”.
These are strong words from a man who has, for so long, been intimately involved in the processes of EU integration, but are useful as a tool to gauge a wider continental view of the UK’s situation in Europe. It seems perfectly reasonable to want what is best for one’s country but, as Valery Giscard d’Estaing contends, woe betide anyone who fails to commit fully to EU integration. Otherwise you may find yourself with ‘individual status’, living in a limbo-land, neither fully in nor out of the EU. Angela Merkel has repeatedly asserted her opposition to a two-tier EU that she believes would weaken Europe.
Gordon Brown is swimming against two currents: on one side, the pressure from the EU for further integration in the form of the EU Treaty. On the other side, the concerted pressure from within for a referendum on the issue, amid claims that those UK red lines, ‘secured’ on contentious aspects of the EU Treaty, may not materialise upon ratification, or last long after it.
German centre-right MEP Elmar Brok advised caution over thoughts of referendum in Britain: "It would be very unfair of the UK if, having more or less got what it wanted in the new treaty, it were then to turn round and put this to a popular vote", as it would “undermine” the work of the summits and IGC.
But, Mr Brok, has the UK in fact got “more or less got what it wanted” vis-à-vis EU integration, or are we trying to have one foot in and one foot out, and as a result, falling between two stools, to the consternation of those in both the UK and EU?
Comments (1)
I constantly hear talk of Britain's attitude towards the EU, but I suspect that much of the suspicion about European integration and reluctance for it to go further comes from the English more than the Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish.
Some members of the UKIP already realise this and have defected to English only parties such as the EDP. Most, however, still ignore devolutionary trends and their consequences.
It seems to me that the Scots and Welsh, like all small nations set to benefit from EU funds, love the EU far more than the 50 million English who, given independence from Britain, would prosper quite well outside of Europe and remain members of one of the world's major powers.
If we are seriously to consider life outside of a European superstate, then we must think English rather than British. Britain will inevitably break up as an single state - it already has in all but name thanks to New Labour's lop-sided devolution policies - and so we should get this process over with as soon as possible so that the other British nations who wish to throw away their sovereignty are not dragged along by the wishes of the English to retain theirs.
Posted by T Payne | August 27, 2007 10:29 AM
Posted on August 27, 2007 10:29