Skip to main content

Goodbye Europe? No, Goodbye Britain

In 26 European Union countries, (and one acceding country, Croatia) today is something of a celebration, albeit a muted one, given the circumstances of continued economic hardship- the European Union will formally receive recognition as the winner of the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize. In one other European Union member state it is the occasion of ridicule and disbelief. Admittedly the contemptible British press prefers to hypocritically attack an Australian radio programme for an unfortunate prank that went badly wrong, so probably remarkably few people in the UK may be aware of the special recognition that the EU is getting, unless they encounter some sneering comment on page 17.

Across the British political spectrum, the European Union has become a bogeyman for all of the ills that afflict the dis-United Kingdom. "Brussels bureaucrats"- although there are actually fairly few of them- are the first in line in the British political blame game. Britain is allowed to opt out of more than half of the activity of the EU, and yet "Brussels" continues to be accused of unwanted meddling. It is a fantasy, but those who protest are branded as obsessive Europhiles. In fact, as my friend Willis Pickard points out, Leveson has condemned the anti-European newspapers for "fabrication" and "careless misrepresentation of the facts". He also makes clear the impact of the unrelenting hostility of the press has had on government policy making. It is essentially impossible to make a positive case for engagement with the EU without receiving a barrage of negative coverage. Alone of the EU leaders, Gordon Brown chose to sign the treaty of Lisbon late and in a locked room- a pitiable display of cowardice, to be sure, but one that underlines how far the UK is now from the mainstream, even of agreements it actually signs. 

Funnily enough support for British membership of the EU has slumped to a new low.

The result is now that the once unthinkable idea of British withdrawal from the European Union is now being taken seriously. Yet the principle proponents of this one-way ticket have failed to explain what they would settle for. The Economist, not a notably left-wing publication, points out just how reckless an EU exit could be- the fact is that the only way to gain the supposed benefits that the anti-Europeans expect from withdrawal would be not the "simple commercial/trade relationship" that the Tories and UKIP wish for, but in fact a complete withdrawal- including from the single market, which the Tories still profess to hold so dear. The fact is that the Europhobes have been either breathtakingly naive or willfully blind- out will indeed mean out and that means completely out, otherwise there is simply no point in leaving at all. Rather like the SNP, who have also been caught out by their wishful, rather than practical, view of EU membership, the Tories can not have it both ways. Yet despite their abject failure to address the critical issue, the noisy Europhobes are still being taken seriously by their friends in the press- if by ever fewer people elsewhere.

The European Union would be diminished by a "Brexit". Yet the European Union will survive- indeed it still seems likely to acquire even more members. It would be recognizably the same institution. Can the same be said for the United Kingdom? 

The foundation of the success of the SNP in Scotland has been "independence in Europe". Could it be that new life is breathed into the sickly support for Scottish separatism if a post-EU United Kingdom finds its economy trashed and its political clout reduced to the same level as Malaysia? Far from the reinvigorated Kingdom that UKIP and the Tories proclaim, we could instead see the rapid end of the British state. To my mind it is at least as likely as any other outcome from this reckless, ill planned and ill judged policy.

So I believe in two Federal ideas: the British Federation and the European one. They are complimentary, not opposed. To break the EU, as UKIP and its allies propose, would not be good news for the EU, but it could be utterly disastrous for Britain.


Popular posts from this blog

Concert and Blues

Tallinn is full tonight... Big concerts on at the Song field The Weeknd and Bonnie Tyler (!). The place is buzzing and some sixty thousand concert goers have booked every bed for thirty miles around Tallinn. It should be a busy high summer, but it isn´t. Tourism is down sharply overall. Only 70 cruise ships calling this season, versus over 300 before Ukraine. Since no one goes to St Pete, demand has fallen, and of course people think that Estonia is not safe. We are tired. The economy is still under big pressure, and the fall of tourism is a significant part of that. The credit rating for Estonia has been downgraded as the government struggles with spending. The summer has been a little gloomy, and soon the long and slow autumn will drift into the dark of the year. Yesterday I met with more refugees: the usual horrible stories, the usual tears. I try to make myself immune, but I can´t. These people are wounded in spirit, carrying their grief in a terrible cradling. I try to project hop

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo

Bournemouth absence

Although I had hoped to get down to the Liberal Democrat conference in Bournemouth this year, simple pressure of work has now made that impossible. I must admit to great disappointment. The last conference before the General Election was always likely to show a few fireworks, and indeed the conference has attracted more headlines than any other over the past three years. Some of these headlines show a significant change of course in terms of economic policy. Scepticism about the size of government expenditure has given way to concern and now it is clear that reducing government expenditure will need to be the most urgent priority of the next government. So far it has been the Liberal Democrats that have made the running, and although the Conservatives are now belatedly recognising that cuts will be required they continue to fail to provide even the slightest detail as to what they think should guide their decisions in this area. This political cowardice means that we are expected to ch