EITHER: Does Britain still have an important role to play in international relations?

OR: How has being a member of the EU affected British Government and policies? The issue of Britain's relationship with the other twenty six member states of the European Union has arguably been a topic of contention for decades. Supporters of the EU and the self-proclaimed 'eurosceptics' have seemingly been offering up arguments both in defence of and opposing Britain's being a member for years now whilst membership has continued. But with Europe reeling from the recent financial crisis seen in the Eurozone, there seems to be no better a time to analyse how the EU impacts upon Britain as a member state in terms of governance and policy-making, and to look at whether or not the partnership overall poses greater benefits or losses to the country as a whole. A major argument posed by eurosceptics against Britain being a member of the EU is that by being a member we effectively offer up control away from the powers of the country and hand it over to that of Europe at large. This is discussed by Neil Nugent in 'Political Issues In Britain Today' (1996, p.122) when he states how many of the policies which are pursued and the laws which apply in Britain are now no longer determined by national decision-makers but are the outcome of EC decision-making processes. He goes on to talk about how such decisions can be, and often are, decided by a qualified majority vote within the rest of the member states, suggesting that often the fate of potential British policies are in fact either passed or rejected by the rest of the EU member countries. Although Nugent does state that Britain has an important input into such processes, he further mentions that such an input is not always a decisive one. This suggests that Britain's membership of the European Union has affected the amount of control the British government has over creating and passing it's own legislation by effectively offering it up to a vote amongst the other member states. Although such a protocol will be in place for other member countries wishing to pass their own laws and policies, it does overall point to something of a lessened degree of power in terms of independent law-making, with potential legislation being scrapped if an overall majority disagrees with the terms of the policy. EU membership has also posed an issue for the British government in that they have to think about their international relations on a whole other level, and to try and develop a relationship with other member states following years of doubt and scepticism. 'Political Issues In Britain Today' (1996) discusses Britain's less than perfect past record with EU matters by describing how Britain's relations with the European Union have evolved over the years from the distanced to the uneasy. Since the European Union's inception back in DATE, Britain has inarguably maintained a less than enthusiastic approach towards membership. 'Politics UK' discusses Britain's early attitude towards the formation of a unified European organisation as one of complete detachment, further backed up in 'Political Issues In Britain Today', who cites a whole host of reasons for Britain's noncommittal attitude towards joining the EU, ranging from fear of Commonwealth estrangement to ANOTHER REASON. 'Exploring British Politics' builds on this, stating how the UK rejected invitations to become a founder member of the organisations which went on to become the European Union as we know it today, citing former the prime ministers Clement Atlee and Anthony Eden's respective government's fear of the loss of sovereignty that joining such an organisation would entail. Indeed, 'Politics UK' further discusses how it wasn't until Harold Macmillan's government came into power that steps were initially taken towards European integration in 1961, attempts which were rebuffed due to French Prime Minister Charles De Gaulle's. Such deep-rooted scepticism and reluctance to join has lead to the UK being seen as something of a less than willing contributor to the EU, even after it's entry into the organisation. Therefore, even in it's modern day context, the UK is still thought to be viewed by many as what 'Exploring British Politics' refers to as an 'awkward partner', a member which is present, yet thought to be 'wary of deeper political and economic integration'. What this means for Britain's government today is that they arguably have to prove themselves as legitimate members of the organisation whilst dealing with over fifty years of

arguably fractured relationships. This is not aided by the fact the tone surrounding the EU within the British public is still less than positive. As Britain entered the EU without ever holding an official referendum, public opinion surrounding the benefit's of being a member and whether the British public actually want to be in the EU has been questionable at best. A contributing factor towards such negative attitudes could be said to be the unshakable idea that being a part of the EU somehow undermines the sense of national sovereignty and identity within the country. According to Politics UK, the British Government had initially presented the European Union as an organisation which posed little major threat to sovereignty and that final and absolute authority would remain with the UK and not be challenged from outside (PAGE 790). Today however, the situation is arguably much different. With a council of other nations voting upon legislative decisions for the country, the process is arguably the reverse of that initially promised to the country during the fledgling stages of it's membership. This is arguably reinforced by 'Political Issues In Britain Today', which discusses how many decisions taken by the EU have legal status and that if a conflict arose between EU and national lawthe former must prevail. This suggests that if such a situation did arise, the upper hand lies with the powers of Europe rather than the UK in making decisions that affect the country (page 392). The way in which British people see and refer to the EU is also discussed by 'Political Issues In Britain Today', which talks about how politicians and the media frequently make assertations along the lines of 'Brussels has decided that. This use of what they refer to as shorthand to discuss EU decision-making suggests that such decisions are being made by people who cannot quite be identified, who are not accountable, and who are certainly not British. It is perhaps this, this idea of losing a certain 'Britishness' which fuels the suspicion that 'Political Issues In Britain Today' states exists in many quarters of Britain (page 386). What this means for the government is that they're having to work within EU guidelines under the pressure of a growing level of adversity from an uncertain public. Another factor for the Government to think about is the financial impact of being an EU member. According to Neil Fugent in 'Political Issues In Britain Today', it has been a commonly held The view amongst Eurosceptics that Britain does not get a very good financial deal from being a member of the European Union. Indeed, UKIP arguably the EU's staunchest critic - state that one of the reasons that they are so against Britain being within the EU is that it costs around 50 million a day to be a member of the EU (UKIP.com) and the resulting benefits of membership are few and hard to justify in the face of existing debt. Furthermore, according to the party, Britain is having to borrow money in order to just cover the cost of membership. Such a sum seems quite astronomical, and, if accurate, could be said to affect the British Government by offsetting money that could arguably be spent elsewhere within the country in areas such as healthcare and education and instead offering up to the EU. In addition to the costs of being part of the EU, The Telegraph have also taken issue with the decision to involve Britain within the recent Eurozone crisis, asking the questions of why at a time of austerity at home (Telegraph.co.uk) should Britain be expected to help bail out a currency that the country didn't join. Such matters could arguably be said to have rightly affected the British Government in recent months due to how David Cameron called for a substantial (Telegprah.co.uk) cut to the future EU budget a few months ago. The move was later hailed a victory (theguardian.co.uk) by The Guardian, further stating how the country has secured an undertaking from European leaders that future rises in EU spending will be linked to the budgets of member states that are planning austere fiscal measures. Cameron himself was quoted on the success of the call for a lowering of EU financial contribution as saying how Britain has secured an unprecedented and important new principle and that, frankly, was long overdue. Such quotes suggest the precedence of the EU's financial effects on budgets within member states is quite high on the mind's of Britain's leaders.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/8758023/Britain-wins-allies-in-calling-forsubstantial-cut-to-European-budget.html http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100115606/britain-is-sent-the-bill-to-prop-up-acurrency-it-didnt-join/ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/29/david-cameron-victory-eu-budget