Sunday 29 May 2016

If you hope the younger people don't vote in EU Referendum, then heaven help the future of UK Democracy.....

I was watching the Champions League Final in a pub in a sleepy village, near Stockton-On-Tees in the North-East of England.

The ridiculous shenanigans of Real Madrid's Pepe was very much a topic of discussion, amongst a group of men mainly aged over 50.  There was perhaps one bloke of a similar age to myself.

There was another issue which these men digressed to, and that was a desire for Brexit.

Some people who are aware of my pro-EU Remain views, may think this would make me totally feel uncomfortable.

Well, although I have consistently as an adult been pro-european, I have accepted for a few years that a referendum on Britain's EU membership would be inevitable.

The subject to Britain's membership of the EU not only divides the Conservative Party, it divides the nation.  There are also divisions in the Labour Party, albeit not to the same extent as Tory divisions.

One of these chaps in the sleepy village pub spoke of his desire for Brexit, however did concede that the younger voters will probably swing the referendum for Remain.

One of the voices subsequently touched on the issue of younger voters not voting, and one of the men clearly stated he hoped the young would not vote!

Where would that leave the future of democracy in the UK?  As it is, our democracy is in crisis, in part due to an outdated electoral system which gives too many MPs a job for life in safe parliamentary seats.

Although the opinion polls (on the whole) and the bookies currently suggest I will get my way, it is not yet a done deal.

WHATEVER THE OUTCOME ON JUNE 23, SUGGESTING HOPE THAT YOUNGER PEOPLE DON'T VOTE IS MORE ABSURD THAN THE SCARE STORIES WHICH HAVE BEEN PEDDLED ON BOTH SIDES DURING THIS REFERENDUM CAMPAIGN!


Saturday 7 May 2016

Why I am voting to REMAIN in the EU

Introduction

Over the past 20 odd years since I have been eligible to vote, I have not always kept a loyalty to the same political tribe.

However, I have always been sort of middle of the road.  When I used to support the Tories a long time ago, my loyalties were always towards the moderate and Pro-European left wing, as opposed to the Thatcherite right.

At times when I have voted Labour, it has been because they were in a cycle of fighting for the middle-ground, and the influence of their left wing was very much reduced.

I have voted Liberal Democrat on some occasions also, and being a centrist was very much at the forefront of my mind when I decided to join the Lib Dems within a week or so of Jeremy Corbyn being elected Labour leader in September of last year.

There is one particular issue in which my views have always been fairly consistent on, and that is Britain's membership of the European Union.  Let there be no misunderstanding here: I have always been pragmatically Pro-European.

I will be VOTING TO REMAIN IN THE EU, and I will now move on to explain why.


Identity

I am proud to be English and British.  I am proud of my family roots in and around Liverpool.  I also have an affinity with Warrington, where I have lived for almost all of my adult life.

But none of the above is a contradiction to being European, and vice versa.  After all, 24 european nations will be participating in the Euro 2016 football tournament this summer in France.  And of course, only 6 of those nations are not members of the EU.


How does the EU work?

In the passing of EU legislation, there are three main institutions.  They are the Commission, the European Council of Ministers (which consists of elected government ministers from across the Member States, who will vary depending upon which topic is up for discussion), and the European Parliament (which elects representatives from across all Member States for five year terms).

The laws are proposed by the Commission.  The Council and Parliament vote to pass the laws.  The Commission subsequently ensures laws are properly applied and implemented.

Another EU institution is the Court of Justice (ECJ).  The ECJ's role is to ensure that European law is interpreted and applied correctly across all Member States.


EU being labelled undemocratic

Some eurosceptics have often made reference to laws being passed by unelected officials.

Whilst I will not pretend the EU is perfect, the brief explanation I have given in the above section does show that laws need to be approved by elected government ministers and MEPS (Members of the European Parliament).

Regards domestic politics in the UK, I am a supporter of reforming the electoral system used to elect MPs to the House of Commons (known as First Past The Post).  There is an important point here regards the argument on democratic deficits, which does link in with the EU.

Amongst the reasons for my viewpoint on House of Commons electoral reform is the low share of the vote needed in some recent general elections for one party to form a majority government. 

Last year, the Conservative Party won a small parliamentary majority with just 37% of the popular vote.  Ten years previously, the Labour Party won an even bigger majority with a smaller share of the vote!

Another reason I would like to see the system reformed is that the majority of people pretty much know who their MP will be as they enter the polling station.  This is due to one party being dominant, and holding a safe constituency seat.

The consequence of an MP holding a safe seat means he or she is more accountable to their local constituency party association than their local electorate!

So how does this issue link into the EU?  The last major reform to British democracy was in 1918, when women obtained the right to vote.

By contrast, the elected European Parliament has gained more powers during the forty three years which Britain has been a member of the EU.

Furthermore, with British MEPs being elected by a system of proportional representation, meaning that a party's share of the national vote closely matches the number of MEPs elected, one can argue that MEPs are potentially more accountable to the electorate than their Westminster counterparts.


The Single Market and the EU

The European Single Market came into force in 1993, enabling EU Member States to be able to trade with each other without restrictions or tariffs.  Citizens of each Member State do not need a work permit to work in another country.

The Single Market has been extended to include Norway, Iceland, and Lichenstein (all non-EU Countries) through agreement in the form of the European Economic Area (EEA).

Switzerland (as another non-EU State) also has access through bilateral treaties.  I will now explain briefly how Norway and Switzerland's relationship with the EU works.


The Norwegian Option

As a member of the EEA, Norway has full access to the European Single Market.  Two notable exceptions though are Agriculture and Fisheries.

As Norway is part of the Single Market, a worker from any part of the Single Market can go to work in Norway without the need for a work permit. 

Despite not being a full member of the EU, Norway still makes significant contributions to the EU budget.

With the Norwegians not being full EU members, there is no Norwegian participation in the European Council of Ministers or the European Parliament.

Therefore, the voting process involved in the passing of EU laws means the Norwegians do not get any say, and European laws will still be applied in Norway.

Norway's current Prime Minister Erna Solberg and her predecessor Jens Stoltenberg (now NATO Secretary General), have both recently gone on record expressing a viewpoint for Britain to remain in the EU.


The Swiss Option

A former Swiss President has described his country's relationship with the EU as complex.  This is because they have around 120 bilateral agreements with the EU.

In simpler terms, the arrangement covers 10 areas.  The Swiss also make significant contributions to the EU budget, and (like Norway) have no say on EU rules.

From a British angle, it is important to note that this bilateral treaty model does not at present permit any cross-border access for financial services, which is a big sector in Britain's economy.

Therefore, comparing Switzerland to the UK is clearly not like for like.

One of those areas in which the bilateral agreements do cover is the Free Movement of People.

In 2014, Switzerland voted in a referendum to limit the freedom of movement of foreign citizens.

If these limits were to be introduced, there could be implications not just for this area of the bilateral agreements, but also for 6 of the other 9 areas within the bilateral agreements.

Should the Swiss enter a re-negotiation of it's entire relationship with the EU, the question to ask is who has the upper hand?

Would that be the country with a population of 8.4 Million, or the block with 500 Million people?


Other post-Brexit options

We could simply do our own trade agreements around the world via the World Trade Organisation.

One issue with doing that is we would have less bargaining power as a nation of 70 Million, as opposed to being part of a 500 Million strong block.

Furthermore, we would be unable to avoid tariffs in our dealings with the EU, who are our closest and largest market.

Other post-Brexit options include the Turkey Customs Union model.  As Turkey see this as a stepping stone to EU membership, I hardly think this route is worthy of any serious consideration.

More generally, I consider that any arguments made by Leave campaigners are devoid of any credible exit plan.


IN SUMMARY

Being European does not need to be a contradiction to being British.

Whilst there is room for improvement in terms of EU democracy, I believe there is even more room for improvement with regards British democracy.

I believe by following the examples like the Swiss or Norwegian models outside the EU, that we would effectively become some EU Associate Member with no voting rights.

Europe is our closest and largest market, and I feel that pro-Brexiteers have no credible exit plan. 

SO PLEASE VOTE TO REMAIN ON JUNE 23.