Barroso is too pessimistic on EU renegotiation
Jonathan Lindsell, 21 October 2014
The prime minster has rejected claims from the EU that Britain will not be able to get reforms concerning aspects of membership. David Cameron asserted that the British people were his ‘boss’, not Brussels.
Cameron claims he ‘will not take no for an answer’ and has vowed to ‘get what Britain needs’ in renegotiating the EU’s membership terms, but on this Barroso made a good point – renegotiation of the EU’s terms will be very difficult if Cameron cannot gain the support of central and eastern European countries, who strongly support their nationals’ free movement rights. Cameron’s comments on Polish workers claiming child benefit for their children abroad infuriated the Polish government, formerly a close ally.
Under pressure from Ukip’s election win in the Clacton by-election and the upcoming contest in Rochester, the Conservatives have promised to set out plans for limiting EU migration before Christmas. This may come in the form of a cap on national Insurance numbers given out to low-skilled EU workers, which would limit both those able to work in Britain and their ability to claim benefits like tax credits.
Another leaked suggestion was to copy the current Croatian policy, which requires foreign workers prove their residence, health insurance, clean criminal record and proof of the ability to support themselves before they are allowed to work. However, these are Croatia’s ‘transitional controls’ (applying to Britain and other EU member states) which will lapse in 2020, just as Britain’s limit on Croatian free movement is set to end in that year. It’s unclear whether transitional controls could be established on the basis of an ‘emergency brake’.
Speaking to Chatham House, the outgoing European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso suggested any ‘arbitrary cap’ on migrant workers would break EU law. He said the EU would take British concerns over the abuse of free movement seriously – but did not discuss the fact that many British Eurosceptics oppose not the free movement principle’s abuse, but its existence.
The Commission President also questioned whether Britain would have a place on the world stage after exit – he said the country would have ‘zero’ influence. One of his specific examples was on the recent ebola crisis – he noted that ‘Cameron wrote to all of us about Ebola…What would be the influence of a prime minister of Britain if it was not part of the European Union?’ This seems an odd choice, since surely after exit a prime minister would still be able to write to other nations’ leaders, just as Barack Obama or Xi Jinping can currently contact the EU and individual EU members’ governments.
Barroso’s other example concerned negotiating with the USA and China, as the EU is currently doing. He claimed Britain would be unable to meet large states ‘on an equal footing’ because of its small relative size, ignoring how little countries like Switzerland and Iceland have succeeded in agreeing free trade deals with China. They certainly have more than ‘marginal relevance’.
The best we can hope for is that Cameron gets carried away by the present circumstances – especially the imminent general election – and commits himself and his party so emphatically on the question of EU immigration that if the Tories win a majority in 2015, he would have to argue for the UK to leave the EU after the EU laughs at his “renegotiation demands”.
The idea that the 27 other EU members will agree to any radical change to free movement is fanciful. At least half of the member states have large numbers of their nationals in Britain already, with huge numbers potentially ready to come if the economic circumstances of the Eurozone worsen, as they look like doing.
Surplus labour coming to Britain both eases a Eurozone state’s welfare costs and provides a substantial source of foreign currency as immigrants to the UK remit money or simply return home having saved a decent amount. There is also the practice of coming to the UK, earning up to the single person’ tax allowance (£10,000 at present) and then returning to their own country where they reclaim any tax paid. Add in the various in and out of work benefits which can be claimed after a few months in Britain, the payment of child benefit for children left in the immigrant’s home country and ready access to the NHS and it is easy to see why many of EU members would vote to keep the status quo.
As for the idea that Britain would lose influence outside of the EU, why should that be?. Britain would still be a permanent member of the UN security council with the power to veto any UN proposal, would still have her privileged position within the IMF and World Bank, would still be one of the largest players in NATO and most importantly would be able to make her own decisions.