Crucial questions ahead of the 2009 Euro election

Civitas, 13 May 2009

A debate hosted yesterday by Open Europe asked Does Westminster or Brussels rules Britain? The  distinguished panel discussed many aspects of EU politics, including next month’s European parliament election, the Lisbon Treaty and the need for reform in the EU:

Lorraine Mullally, Director of Open Europe, began by asserting that, ahead of the up-coming European Parliament elections next month, people need to know how much the EU affects their lives, so we must ask: How much regulation comes from the EU? To answer this question, Open Europe recently published a report studying Government impact Assessments from 1998-2008 to take a “snapshot” of the impact of EU regulation on the UK. Lorraine Mullally said the report concluded that a vast majority of the most costly legislation comes from the EU.

Gisela Stuart (Labour MP for Birmingham Edgbaston since 1997) asserted that because MEP candidates are decided by national parties in a ‘Closed List’ system, there is no real mechanism for the EP election to be useful. People don’t know who to vote for in Euro elections because it is unclear what the Parties at the European Level stand for because Euro election campaigns are not about the EU, they are fought on national issues. She called for greater political accountability because EU Directives implemented by “statutory instruments” are not scrutinised by the UK Parliament, so who do we hold accountable for those Directives? She concluded that for the people to hold the EU to account, we must know who makes the decisions.

Lord Trimble (former First Minister of the Northern Ireland Assembly (1998-2003) and member of the European Union Select Committee in the House of Lords) argued that counting EU regulations is not enough because some regulation is good and others are bad. He noted that the UK public approves of much EU regulation (e.g. on the Single Market and free movement), but disproves of other EU regulation (e.g. furthering centralisation and integration). Therefore, we need to focus on the areas that we need to change. Lord Trimble warned that we need real separation of powers  within the EU because the Executive should not make laws (as it does in the EU) and that every time there is a new Commission, proposals from the previous Commission should be scrapped. Lord Trimble also said that the UK Parliament must change how it scrutinises EU legislation. He argued that increased co-determination (decision making shared between the European Parliament (EP) and National Ministers in the European Council) is making things worse because deals are made in secret within the Council and top groups in the EP. Lord Trimble concluded that we need more scrutiny because EU Treaties change our constitution when they become part of UK law.

Baroness Sarah Ludford (Liberal Democrats MEP and a life peer in the House of Lords) began by stating that EP elections are important. She argued that whilst the EU is complicated, Westminster is too and people roughly understand enough to vote in General Elections. She called on people to stop bickering about the EU’s pros and cons to focus on practical issues, including the ‘Sunset Clause’ (terminating parts of law after a specific date), lapsed proposals, and improving impact assessments in the Commission. She also stated that the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) needs reform because it is too centralised. She called for documents to be available for the public to see and for there to be committee votes, so that there is a record of the committee’s position on certain issues. Finally she called for better scrutiny of EU laws in Westminster. Baroness Ludford asserted that we need to reform the EU, not destroy it. She said that the Liberal Democrats want smart regulation and that, for example, anti-discrimination legislation benefits the economy. She argued that the Lisbon Treaty’s new “yellow card system” (if 1/3 of member states’ parliaments vote against a proposal, the EU Council must abandon it) will provide an incentive for better scrutiny in national parliaments and mentioned the work of the Campaign for Parliamentary Reform. She recognised that the EU must be aware of the burden of certain regulation, suggesting that all amendments added at the committee stage should also be assessed for their impact and that “gold plating” Directives (extra measures being “added on”) must stop. She said that the Liberal  Democrats oppose the EU Working Time Directive, the EU Services Directive and EU law extending paid maternity leave. Baroness Ludford concluded that the EU should only enact broad legislation and that specific legislation should be left for member states to decide.

Rt Hon David Heathcoat-Amory  (Conservative MP for Wells. UK Parliamentary Representative to the Convention on the Future of Europe, which drafted the European Constitution in 2002) called for an acknowledgement of the EU’s affect on the UK constitution. He also warned that a centralised authority compromises any chance for organic development within Europe. He argued that  Parliamentary Sovereignty is now a myth because power has gradually transferred from the elected to the unelected (to the EU Treaties and the European Court of Justice (ECJ) -which is not an impartial arbitrator). He argued that Parliament has the right to do anything except to give away its power. He said that the 1975 referendum in the UK was about the EU’s Common Market – but the EU today is unrecognisably different.  David Heathcoat-Amory was concerned that the EU is enacting incremental constitutional change because the EU is now encroaching on criminal justice (the Lisbon Treaty will entrench the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR) into UK law). He also warned that if we give away power we won’t get it back. He called for real debate on the important issues, but warned that if the EU has already decided something you can’t do anything about it, which is why turnout at Euro elections has dropped at every EP election despite the EP being given more powers. David Heathcoat-Amory called for reform to ensure that the legislative process is open and transparent, stating that we must have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, repatriate power over social and employment legislation and reform our own procedures in the House of Commons

Questions included:

If Ireland vote ‘No’ to the Lisbon Treaty a second time, will there be a third referendum?
Lord Trimble: Any election or referendum refers to many different issues, particularly when it is about a centralising Treaty. The Irish are aware that they are in a desperate economic state, which  is made worse by the euro (interest rates were reduced when they needed to rise), but they are “clinging to Europe” because they think the EU will help them out of the situation. In reality, the IMF will be tougher on them that the EU Commission.
Gisela Stuart: Politicians must respect the referendum, but big decisions are decided at the inter-governmental level, so this will continue to happen even without the Lisbon Treaty.
Rt Hon. Heathcoat-Amory: If the Lisbon Treaty is not ratified by the next general election, the Conservatives will hold a referendum.
Baroness Ludford: If the Irish vote ‘No’ again, there won’t be another referendum. I respect the result of the Irish referendum, but I still support the Lisbon Treaty because I think it benefits the EU. To implement the Treaty we need all member states to ratify it, otherwise we will make the most of the current system.

Why can’t the UK be the same as Norway or Switzerland?
Gisela Stuart: Norway has the highest implementation of EU Directives, so it is as good as a member state, except that it doesn’t have a Commissioner or representatives in the EP. It is also outside of the CFP. When the UK left the EFTA and joined the EU, it removed the choice between political and economic integration.
Baroness Ludford: I wouldn’t want the UK to be like Norway – it implements all EU legislation without having any say on it. I want us to engage in the decision making process. I believe that we are more protected if we pool sovereignty within the EU.
Lord Trimble: The UK is very different to Norway; we have a far larger population and economy. The UK is failing to “punch its weight” in Europe.