Our membership of the EU: why yes and why not?

[SpeedyGonzalez]

I posted this in another thread but didn't get a response as the thread was on its last legs, so thought I'd give it another go:

(1) Why do you think EU membership is a good thing for the UK, and;
(2) If you are anti, what's our alternative?

I mean, granted, the EU has its flaws; many flaws, I'm sure. But isn't that just the way life is? Perfection doesn't exist. And in 2010, bearing in mind that the world has changed enormously in the past 100 years, what is our alternative in terms of remaining a significant player on the global stage?

1. Ally ourselves with the US? (guffaw! Aren't we already their lapdog? Why humiliate ourselves further?)
2. Ally ourselves with Russia and China? (guffaw again)
3. Go it alone? (guffaw once more)

In spite of my guffaws, this is a genuine question. It seems to me that while full or partial membership of Europe may bring its downsides, it is the only realistic option to take in the modern age. But I've never heard anyone make a stab at what I would call a well-considered and realistic alternative, so I'm genuinely open to hearing what else is available to us.

It isn't a binary choice - in or out.

We should be in the EU for all the trade advantages - and at the same time, do all we can shape it to be more accountable, less interfering, less wasteful, and less federalist.

I agree with longfingernails, we need to be in it for trade reasons, but I am completely against social policy being decided at this level - mainly because the European Commission who make all the policies are completely unelected.

The EU is a very undemocratic organisation, the MEPs we elect have very little power (less in many ways than a local councillor as they aren't even allowed to draft legislation), the accounts haven't been signed off for years and they waste millions every year moving the parliament to Strasbourg every month for a week. Completely whacko.

I love European places though so I'm not being a zenophobe - just someone who likes democracy and efficient use of taxpayers money.

The original intent of the EU was a bloc of trading relationships. A common market, voted for in a referendum by the people in the UK in the 70's. There was no vote on the pervasive and insidious creep towards political and monetary union. We haven't been asked by anyone. Has anyone ever asked us whether we want to defer to the European courts - no. All british laws have to be interpretated to give effect to European law.

The debacle over the Lisbon Treaty was an absolute disgrace. GB sneaking in by the back door to sign it after reneging on a referendum promise. In the the vote in the UK over whether to hold a referendum, the Labour party voted against a referendum and the Lib Dems also reneged on their promise to support a referendum with Nick Clegg ordering his MP's to abstain in the vote. The tories voted for a referendum. The stitch up between the labour party and the LIB dem's over this treaty was unfavorgiveable and was, I think, a fraud on the electorate.

An in/ out referendum is now I think impractical as we still need to maintain a trading relationship and let's cooperate on major issues by all means but wouldn't most people prefer our laws to be made here?. Don't we want to follow our own agenda rather than anyone else's? I think enough is enough. No more transfer of powers (the LIB Dems are Eurocrats/Europhiles - they scare the hell out of me) Let's get our rebate reinstated in some form and determine our own destiny.

Tashtodd you put a whole load of points that I wanted to make SO elegantly.

Round of applause for Tashtodd everyone please

Better rights for consumers, cheaper electricity, gas, phones and mobiles, cheaper plane tickets, better emloyment rights like 4 weeks' holiday, parental and adoption leave, rights for part-time workers.

Co-operation on cross border crime like drug smuggling and terrorism.

Free medical help on holiday, cheap second homes. Something like 2 million UK migrants - sorry, ex pats - living in Spain.

About two thirds of trade is with Europe - to imagine you can just dip in and out and occasionally make abusive remarks from the sidelines like Nigel Farage is living in a different age (where we still have an empire).

I want a trading relationship, not political and monetary union. Unfortunately it is only the latter which is on offer. Therefore I want out.

People were offered a referendum based on a lie in 1975. Labour and the Conservatives (including Thatcher) were quite well aware of what the eventual outcome was to be. Papers released under the 30 year rule showed that.

The alternative is bi-lateral trade agreements. Even Tony Blair admitted that we could "probably" get an agreement like Switzerland's. I'd say it was a near certainty with our huge trade deficit with the other member states. They'd have nothing to gain by being petty. Our voice in the world will be reduced as things stand as 'our' voice will be an EU voice with the EU Common Foreign and Security policy. That's fine for those who feel the EU will speak for them, but we should all have been asked. As an independent country, our voice will be what we make it. If we can't make much of it, I'll learn to live with it, like most independent countries have to.

It has to be better than selling out our democracy to the unaccountable, anti-democratic, and hugely costly entity that is the EU.

But then again we only need to change currency once when we go abroad. That makes it all worthwhile, I'm sure.

Tashtod is dead right. The EU is fundamentally undemocratic. It's a political and bureaucractic class pursuing its own interests without any reference to the actual voters. No-one ever voted for EU law to take precedence over national law - the EU or whatever it was calling itself at that point just dreamed it up.

I am all for co-operation between nations but I am deeply, deeply suspicious of the way the EU has operated and the lack of democratic control or credibility. The auditors have refused to sign off the accounts for year after year after year because the whole thing is so corrupt - yet no-one ever does anything about it, it all just carries on.

"the LIB Dems are Eurocrats/Europhiles - they scare the hell out of me"

Yet Clegg on Radio 4 lunchtime (Election Call Q+A started around 24m into show) last week said that while he believes in co-operation, and that there would be benefits in using the Euro, if the Lib Dems were elected then a referendum would be the plan, not on just the Euro, but on whether to stay in the EU.

Seems like that is what many people are calling for. A veto on the Treaty would not have taken us out of the EU, and I don't know the full reasons behind the Lib Dems abstaining at the time, so won't try to defend history...

I do feel it worth pointing out what's future rather than dragging over past faults of all the parties...

Then it should be reformed, which can only happen from within. However flawed and bureaucratic it is, a debate that pretends we can simply step out of it without a huge and disastrous economic and diplomatic loss for the UK is not realistic.

the eu as an institution is inefficient and has its problems, but we should be wrking to fix those rather than threatening to leave (or even to repatriate some powers).

to those who think social policy shouldn't be decided at eu level: a) if some countries had more holiday etc than others then that would mean trade wouldn't be fair and b) so far eu social policy has given us compulsory paid holiday, rights against unfair dismissal after 1 year (it was 2), and hopefully soon will give agency workers more rights. it's not really a bad thing.

Webdude. I do think the behaviour of the past can inform on behaviour in the future given that the same people are involved. The fact is both the labour Party and the Lib dems made a commitment to give the electorate a referendum on the Lisbon treaty (the constitution in all but name) and when the crunch came - they failed us. It is indefensible whichever way you try and spin it. The trust has gone - at least for me.

Mum in London: It will never be reformed. We need to redefine our own relationship with and within it.

FWIW given the growth in use of the Euro, we are going to be left out on a limb by not using it.

The pound used to be a strong currency in the world of trade, before the Euro came into use. There are now two major currencies, in use by hundreds of millions of people.
(a) US Dollar and (b) Euro

As more and more trade will be done in those currencies, the possibility of us not getting favourable rates will increase.

Compare the cost of tracks on iTunes. Not that long ago the price in the UK was 99p (vs $1.29 in the USA, or around 81p, and 0.99 Euro in Germany, or 86p) {figures from the Guardian, May 2009}

As long as we stay out of one or other "mass" currency, we will lose out. OK, part of the difference is because of VAT (Sales Tax is lower in the USA) but it would make no sense to align ourselves with the US$ over the Euro.

While there might be some dying cinders of a "special relationship" with the USA, many see it with us now as the "kid brother" - we seem to have one-sided extradition treaties and for all the past history, I doubt the USA will consider the UK as important as the EU when it comes to future trade or military agreements.

So we could leave Europe and go it alone, perhaps, but I am far from convinced it would leave us in a strong position.

Good points, webdude. The US and China would not have the same interest in us without our capacity to influence others within the EU and we have better bargaining options and power. I've never been as sure of euro membership as I have of all the trade, employment, diplomatic and social benefits but the euro is still a stronger currency than the pound. And outside the EU the pound could drop to absurdly low levels - lower if we pulled out on idealogical grounds than if we had never joined on the first place.

Because geographically we are in Europe, so surely it makes sense to be "in the club" (and if necessary, arguing in a constructive way for reform) rather than sitting on the sidelines trying to pretend we are some kind of special case and "better" than all our neighbouring countries.

'a) if some countries had more holiday etc than others then that would mean trade wouldn't be fair', but they do. Belgian holidays and UK holidays are different - Belgian workers get a '13th payment' and holiday pay to boot.

I entirely agree with Tashtodd and Edam - we need to renegotiate where we are with Europe.

The alternative is perhaps an English speaking union - bloc with the US, Canada, Aus, NZ etc.

However much we argue for EU reform it won't happen because it is not in the vested interest for that to happen. We ceded our rebate for CAP reform - did that happen? Hell, no, Sarkozy blocked it. Our fishermen are screwed by the Fisheries policy; boats in Cornwall and other areas can't make livings any more. Those who benefit from Brussels - the Kinnocks, Mandelson etc, all preach socialism, but from their very nice salaried/expensed and huge pensioned positions, paid for by us. Kinnock was instrumental in getting the EU auditor sacked who blew the whistle on the accounts.

The EU is profoundly anti-democratic (look at the Irish vote happening twice) and the fonctionnaires are solely interested in their tax free salaries and in preaching to the rest of us how we should live our lives. It wants to regulate every aspect of what we do.

The US doesn't give a shit about the EU at a military level because it has no teeth and no clout. The US interest is NATO, which is a completely different animal. The EU tries to mimic NATO militarily, but can't, as it doesn't have the size or the number of military staff to do so. It can police areas like Georgia, and off Somalia with Op Atalanta, but that's about it.

As for the Euro - if you want prices to go through the roof go ahead. It is far more expensive to live in Belgium for instance than it is in the UK. Looking at what is happening with Greece at the moment, I'm glad we are not in the Euro, as we do not have to pay to bail them out.

I also fail to see how it would be a diplomatic loss to leave the EU. The High Representative is not doing stinkingly well and is being sidelined by players who have been in this game far longer than she has. I don't want the EU to speak on my behalf thanks; especially as we have a perfectly competent foreign office of our own.

The EU is a behemoth that wants to change things because it can, not because they need to be changed and I loathe it.

I've given a whole raft of reasons on my OP for UKIP who definately want out of EU. The thread turned into a bear-baiting contest about immigration! with me as the bear! The net cash for this year given to the EU is £9.7 billion. I wouldn't argue the toss on this site, as it falls on deaf ears, and one or two of the more nasty posters get together and start attacking you. I must say I always find Claigs posts the best as he always appears polite and doesn't personnaly attack the OP.

EDAM The Eu has not signed of the accounts for 15 years!.

From some other posts, I thought that the last 2 years of EU accounts had been accepted and signed off.

I'm another one who can see the advantages of a free trade area but does not want political union. I'm cross that politicians try to bring it down to a simplistic in/out debate - I want a shade of grey inbetween where we keep our sovereignty.
I hope the Greece / Portugal / Spain Euro debacle brings it back down to basics.

I always think it strange when politicians go on as if it is a good thing that Europe is our major trading partner. Does anybody here work for a company who thinks that it is great to have most of your business with only one customer? We should be trying to diversify, not get even more entangled with them.

Come, come, it's not "just one customer" but trading with Europe makes a lot of sense because transport costs (ever increasing with fuel costs) are lower with Europe than elsewhere. I'm not an economist but have worked for a transport consultancy and know that by use of the channel tunnel for freight, we have easier and cheaper methods for getting goods in and out.

Also, as far as any trade tariffs are concerned, there's no way for "protectionist" strategies to block UK trade (or artificially increase the cost making it uncompetitive). Common safety standards and so on also give a larger market than having multiple tests (with associated costs for each country) before new items are accepted for import from the UK.

Forgot to add, in terms of trade, the EU has been growing because of generally high levels of disposable income and no "buy American" push the way they do &over there^.

Many thanks for asking this question. The EU is something i have wondered about for a long time. My husband has always said we would be better off out of it but i have been worried when people say things such as the amount we export to Europe.
I don't really understand it all.
I think a free trade area plus cooperation on crime and other similar things is good. Why do we have to have the political aspect of it. How can you legislate for such a huge number of vastly different nations.
As to the cost!!!!! The money wasted on moving base between Brussels and Strasbourg!! How did that come to be agreed to. It beggers belief.
The fact that the accounts have never? been signed off.
Truely a gravy train and yet it continues year after year.

Strasbourg happened because the French wanted it and got it.

You have to be careful with the cooperation on crime as you end up potentially with an EU police force who would override the UK police. Not good. You have the case today of the man being extradited to Portugal under an Eu arrest warrant, although the UK courts don't agree.

Not just UK but France and Netherlands probably have trading partners outside Europe. However, for products from Commonwealth countries, there are probably few within Europe supplying similar things, so not sure there's conflict to be fair.

On co-operation re police and laws, yes, there are good and bad points. Not sure whether fairness is being achieved (eg the football fan who was locked up under trumped up charges and when someone else admitted their guilt, innocent party was still unable to get sentence quashed).

If there are lopsided situations (UK-USA UK-Portugal) then those are areas where future governments much re-write treaties or withdraw deal until they are seen to be fair to all, not {as it appears} leaving UK citizens at a disadvantage.

Clearly unable to blame those situations on the Lib Dems, as they haven't been party to signing such agreements.