Should we stay or should we go?
- 2016-03-31
- By ReimaginingEurope
- Posted in Barry Morgan, EU Referendum
The binary choice the electorate will face on June 23 belies the complex and far-reaching factors involved in our membership of the EU. Coming hard on the heels of a General Election, and even closer to the most crucial elections so far for the devolved governments of Wales and Scotland, the danger is that the referendum result will be guided more by how things feel on the spur of the moment, than by the principles which should inform such a monumental decision. The outcome will shape our countries – all those distinctive units which make up the union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – for a lifetime and more.
Most of the public arguments so far have focussed on economics – and on pretty shameless self-interest. Are we, as countries or regions, net gainers or losers from our EU contributions? Does the EU generate jobs here, or would we manage just as well without it? Are businesses aided by EU trading links, or burdened by too much Eurocratic red tape? Would the companies that settle here for access to the European market move out, taking their business with them; or could we independently establish such lucrative relationships across the globe that we would never notice the difference?
It’s a useful soundbite that Wales is a net gainer from EU contributions. From the long-awaited ‘dualling’ of the famous Heads of the Valleys Road, to the 870-mile-long leisure attraction of the Coastal Path; education and early years work with Communities First and Flying Start; the enviably successful Jobs Growth Wales; Swansea’s cutting-edge Institute for Life Sciences, and much more – over £500m per year comes in from EU schemes for infrastructure and community projects.
Claiming payments through the Common Agricultural Policy may be bureaucratic and time-consuming, but more than 1600 farms, the bedrock of rural communities and a vital source of food security, are supported annually by £200m-worth of subsidies – and more in business assistance. Communities across the 80% of Wales that is rural benefit from the Welsh Government’s EU-matched Rural Development Programme.
The tally is impressive. Since 2007, nearly 12000 Welsh enterprises have been established, 35600 jobs created, over 70000 people have been helped into work, and nearly a third of a million Welsh people have been enabled to gain qualifications and training. 4% of our GDP derives from overseas students, mostly from the EU; and Welsh students can benefit from EU schemes promoting study or work abroad. Meanwhile, companies such as Airbus and BAE Systems – themselves keen supporters of their local communities – undoubtedly benefit hugely from unfettered access to the rest of Europe.
But belonging to the EU is not just about doing the sums. It is about belonging to a union of distinct nations, whose ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversities are protected by EU laws, who agree to work together for the common good, to pursue peace, and to help members who are less fortunate than others. Yes, when we joined in 1973, and endorsed that in 1975, it was called the Common Market; but the EU hasn’t lost the plot: emerging as it did from the horrors of the Second World War, the principles of peace, co-operation, rule of law and democracy have always been integral.
And positioned as we are on the edge of a large and powerful neighbour, sharing with most of our European partners the experience of a land border, a diversity of languages, and being a small nation, Wales may be more conscious than other parts of the UK of the huge benefits in banding together – both for self-interest, and for influence in the world.
Let’s not forget what a powerful force the EU has been for the spread of freedom, democracy and human rights. For citizens of the former ‘Eastern bloc’, EU membership doesn’t just mean being able to buy Levi jeans or openly listen to Britpop, or even the freedom to travel and work in other countries.
Queuing to join the EU brought the right to vote in genuinely contestable elections, the freedom to practice and teach religion openly, and even to campaign against the government’s point of view without being sent to prison. Racism, homophobia, and discrimination on the grounds of gender, disability or faith are all explicitly against the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; and even beyond its borders, the EU strives to be an influence for good by supporting campaigns and action to promote the rights of children, women, vulnerable groups and minorities. EU development aid directly benefits independent NGOs, delivers more clout than the sum of individual countries working independently, and acts as a powerful tool for mutual encouragement. The London Conference in February secured a pledge of €1bn (to which the UK is the biggest contributor) for ‘Supporting Syria and the Region’ over the next 2 years; and the EU now follows the UK’s example of allocating 0.7% of its income to overseas aid.
Of course the EU isn’t perfect. It is – like all of us! – a work in progress, and every participating country has the chance to influence its future. In the interests of us all, we should not abandon the most successful project for peace, freedom and democracy the world has ever seen.
About the author
Dr Barry Morgan is currently the Archbishop of Wales and Bishop of Llandaff but previously served as Bishop of Bangor from 1993-1999. Born in South Wales, he read History at London, Theology at Cambridge and trained for the ministry at Westcott House, Cambridge. He has worked in a range of ministerial contexts – in parish ministry, as a university and theological college lecturer and university chaplain, as an Archdeacon, Director of Ordinands and as a Continuing Ministerial Education Officer. He has served on the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches and until recently also served on the Primates Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion. He has published a number of articles and books, his latest being a study of the work of the Welsh poet R S Thomas called “Strangely Orthodox”. He is a Fellow of the Learned Society of Wales and Pro Chancellor of the University of Wales and a Fellow of several Welsh universities.
Thanks for this. I see you make the economic case for Wales while saying it is not central.
More important, you make a case for the individual countries retaining their individuality and willingly joining together for complementary benefit.
While I guess many would contest this, it is important because it is very different from the movements towards political union/ uniformity that many claim and reject. It is also important because it serves to explain the length of time it takes to obtain agreements on contentious issues. I get confused about what some people want - so, a solution to the migrant problem should of course be found quickly - but if it were quick it would either have been obvious or because a very few people had imposed a solution.
Obtaining agreement among friends takes time and effort and more so when we are not sure how friendly we want to be. All the more reason to stay committed to talking in whatever framework is helpful.
It is important to note, that whilst Wales is a net gainer from EEC membership, it is British money that they get, as the EEC money, the UK pays in, some is given back.
As a whole the UK is a net loser, as we pay in, lots more than we get back.
So, when you say funded by the EEC, the truth is, funded by the UK.
There is no reason to suppose, that leaving the EU, would be harmful to Wales, or any other part of the UK.
In fact, as we would no longer have to pay our EEC membership, there would be more money available, to help poorer areas of the UK, such as Wales, Cornwall, Cumbria, NE England, & parts of Scotland.
The British parliament is democratic. It proposes legislation, and enacts it.
MP’s, can even try to get a Private Members bill through.
The European Parliament, lamentably, is not democratic.
MEP’s, can not propose legislation, they can only vote on what is put to them, by unelected Commissioners.
If they reject what the Commissioners propose, then these unelected people, can overrule the elected MEP’s, and force their proposals through, into law.
We have had a pretty peaceful Europe, since 1945.
But that is not due to the EEC, but NATO, and we would still be part of NATO, outside of the EEC.
Thanks as ever John.
Please note the archbishop’s comments “Most of the public arguments so far have focussed on economics – and on pretty shameless self-interest… belonging to the EU is not just about doing the sums.” So focussing on the UK being a net loser is entirely missing the point of what he’s saying.
Whilst “there is no reason to suppose, that leaving the EU, would be harmful to Wales, or any other part of the UK” it surely would be harmful to other EU nations who are the net gainers, and it doesn’t take a lot to work out there is a reason why they are the net gainers, ie there is a good argument that they need it more than the UK does.
But if we are fixated on being a net loser, then we’re certainly a net loser financially as far as NATO is concerned but that doesn’t seem to be an issue.
Finally, re your comment “If the words are true, then they are worth repeating”. No problem with that, but when the words equate the EU to Sodom and repeatedly talk about corruption then they veer into opinions rather than truth - or do you have evidence that the EU is corrupt because if so that would be a useful contribution to the debate which I would appreciate reading?
Let’s leave it there for now, but please do bear in mind that there isn’t one obvious Christian answer to this debate - otherwise this blog would be fairly pointless - which could be why there are a number of Christian contributors advocating that we should remain. How confident are you that you have a better understanding than they all do and have you tried to see things from their point of view?
One of the characteristics of the referendum debate, thus far, is how it hasn’t really engaged with the issues of how leaving the EU would disproportionally hit the poorer communities, regions and nations of the UK. The Archbishop’s comments are well thought through in terms of the broader issues.
Leaving the EU would cause Wales immense harm. In the Welsh experience, without the combined levers of devolution and the EU, Westminster is rarely inclined towards granting poorer areas additional funding. Experience - especially prior to 1999 - would suggest strongly that Wales would be at a considerable loss. Westminster’s instincts gravitated then, and far more so now, towards lower taxation levels.
One of the first realisations for the newly formed National Assembly for Wales in July 1999 was that during the previous five years, compared with the extra Wales should have received with true additionality from the UK Treasury, there was a shortfall of some £250 million. Wales should have received some £50 million a year more – but didn’t.
There is also another matter which should worry Christians in particular. Wales would be at a significant loss in terms of family life if the UK found itself outside the European Economic Area. Given the average wage in some areas, it would be virtually impossible for people in Wales to marry non UK citizens and remain in Wales. They don’t meet the financial threshold.
The debate, thus far, seems to have focused on the rich and their sovereignty issues.
world war 2 gave me two experiences that shaped my life: first, in 1939, my parents accepted into our household a family of Austrian Jews- labelled as ‘enemy aliens’ by government and press, but as ‘refugees from persecution’ by us. Second, in 1945, I was called up into the RAF, which gave me a little opportunity to feel that I was engaging in the struggle against the forces that had created that persecution. World War 2 was a terrible, destructive disaster for the whole planet; but it was only the most recent example of the way in which nationalistic ambitions had steered the peoples of Europe, including Britain, into hugely expensive wars over many centuries. the European Union was, from the outset, created to overcome this legacy of conflict by interlocking our economies and our societies so closely that we could not again go to war against each other. Now, the crises of migration and of terrorism are putting this project under greater strain than ever before. The call for us to leave has strong appeal; but it is an appeal of cowardice and desertion; and our continental partners are going to see it in that light. No number-crunching of finances, no fantasy of outdated ‘national sovereignty’ should deter us from the primary purposes of the EU; stick with it, and improve it from within.