If Only We Had Had An In/Out EU Referendum
Chris Bowers wishes we did have a EU referendum, but he doesn't think that is an option now.
19 Dec 2011, 09:45
Too late for a referendum?
As the dust settles on David Cameron’s Great British EU veto, one thing has become crystal clear: the reason for Nick Clegg’s wish for any referendum on the EU to be fought on an ‘in or out’ basis rather than on a technicality of a treaty revision.
It seemed a bit odd when he first floated it in 2008. Why should the leader of Britain’s leading pro-European party want to put Britain’s membership at stake? And surely in the current Eurosceptic climate there’s more likelihood of an ‘out’ vote than an ‘in’?
Well no, actually. Whether a referendum was on the treaty or on membership, there’s no doubt it would be fought on ‘in’ or ‘out’ lines. The level of EU debate in Britain has at times been appalling, with the worst proponent of misinformation being the viscerally anti-European Daily Express – it doesn’t matter if a European matter has nothing to do with the EU, if a body has the word ‘European’ in its name, by Daily Express logic it shows how bad the EU is.
Because of all this discussion, there’s an implicit assumption that a referendum would be won by the EU-sceptics, whatever the exact wording of the question. Quite the contrary. Any EU referendum would record a ‘stay in’ vote by a landslide, despite what the current opinion polls suggest.
There are two reasons for this. The first is that the EU is a subject that people like to rant about. It’s a good scapegoat – blame it all on ‘Europe’. But a lot of people know that, for all its faults (and there are plenty), the EU is of much greater benefit to Britain than disbenefit. It has guaranteed peace among the continent’s leading nations, it has created a minimum of trade barriers, it has introduced social and environmental minimum safeguards that apply to all 27 member states, and it is responsible for numerous UK jobs.
Given that the British economy is heavily dependent on trade with EU members, all pulling out of the EU would do would be to abdicate our ability to influence rules and laws which we’d have to stick to anyway. Similar to what David Cameron did in exercising the British veto on the euro rescue package, only covering every issue. If that’s not a suicide mission, I don’t know what is.
The second reason is more sinister but no less powerful. Big business wants us to stay in the EU, so big business will fund the campaign for an ‘in’ vote. It would be amusing to see what those big business advertisers who keep the Daily Express and other anti-European rags afloat would say if it came to a referendum campaign. I hope they wouldn’t say to the editor ‘Friend, you tone down your anti-EU rhetoric or we withdraw ouradvertising’ – that would be a real blow to press freedom, but let’s not pretend it couldn’t happen.
In the early 1990s, Austria negotiated to join the EU. Its population was deeply sceptical, because as a transit country Austrians could see themselves being swamped by an avalanche of transit lorries from which they’d pick up all the costs and gain none of the benefit. Opinion polls suggested the vote would be close, and might reject joining the EU.
Until campaigning began, that is. Then everything changed, because the ‘in’ campaign was being bankrolled by big business. All the major advertising in the newspapers was for the ‘in’ campaign, editorials that had previously been sceptical suddenly extolled the virtues of joining, and the knife-edge referendum recorded a 66-33 vote in favour of joining.
Of course it couldn’t happen here, could it? Well it did. In 1975 when Britain had the referendum on staying in or leaving the-then EEC, the vote was 2:1 in favour of staying in. A few months later, it was revealed that the ‘in’ campaign had a 5:1 advantage over the ‘out’ campaign in terms of finance. It makes the ‘out’ campaign’s 33 per cent look quite reasonable.
I can’t say I like this interference with the democratic process, but I wish people would stop pretending that Britain might be close to leaving the EU. It isn’t, and such a move would be crazy. I just wish we had had the in/out referendum, because if we had, there’s no way the Eurosceptics in the Conservative party would have been powerful enough to cause Cameron to exercise his damaging veto over the euro rescue package.
We’re not going to get a referendum on anything in the near future, but we do have the massive problem of the potentially catastrophic demise of the euro. I hope the veto proves to be the pinnacle of Britain’s Euroscepticism, and that future dealings with Europe are more constructive,so people can stop playing politics with fatuous in/out questions and get on with dealing with the task at hand.
Comments (4)
Subscribe to this posts's comments feed
A referendum now would be a disaster. The majority of the media twist the EU stories to such an extent that a proper debate can never take place.
1975 was much the same with the 'No' camp having no chance.
This time the 'Yes' camp would have no chance.
19/12/2011 09:54Yup! the EU is indeed a wonderful institution for GB.
19/12/2011 11:31Let's consider what it gives us for a measly £50 million/day.
Rules/laws and diktats over which we have no control.
Open borders leading to massive immigration to put further pressure on our public services. With the added bonus of keeping millions of British citizens unemployed.
Democratic government reduced to a talking shop while the German/French fourth Reich gradually gain control over all the countries of Europe.
I mean what would be the alternative to the EU?
Perhaps independence? along the lines of oohh! let's say Switzerland. No! that would be no good, look at the state the Swiss are in!!!
Well now, here' s a surprise - a turkey that doesn't vote for Christmas ......."He left in 1990 to become the founder director of the Environmental Transport Association, and he also played a role in the development of the European Federation for Transport and Environment, a Brussels-based umbrella of NGOs for whom he still works today."
19/12/2011 21:47As the majority of the Uk public is brainwashed by ant-EU rhetoric from what was originally called Fleet Street, the outcome of a referendum at this point would be predictable and the result economic suicide.
30/12/2011 13:24The answer to the UK's problems does not lie in Brussels. There should be some regulation of the press, to ensure they print news, as opposed opinion.
The UK media have practiced freedom of expression and have, for some time, abused that right. I am calling for some form of regulation to ensure that they report on something novel for them - the news.