As he had promised during the last general election in Britain, Prime Minister Cameron has now gone on the hustings again to justify, and seek the support of the British electorate for continued membership of the European Union (EU).
The propulsion for his decision has largely come from within his own party, so much so that he felt forced to announce it prior to the last election; and it has no doubt been reinforced by the appearance last week, on the No platform, of a longtime stalwart of the Conservative party, former Chancellor of the Exchequer Nigel Lawson. But accompanying this, and really as part of his campaign of persuasion, has been Cameron’s government’s insistence that support in a referendum, to be held probably in late 2016, on whether a negotiated arrangement is acceptable or not, is really the specific pathway that will finalise discussion, and end division, on the issue.
Nonetheless, as Cameron’s recent political movements have also indicated, he has recognised that the question that his government puts to the British people must have two aspects. The first is that the terms of the continued membership that he wishes to seek must, in some large measure have the support particularly of the major countries of the EU, whose weight inside that institution must be sufficient to persuade the full complement of members to be supportive. And for this purpose he has been having consultations with those countries as a basis, no doubt, for being able to comfortably assure the British people that what he is proposing to them already has the support of the major players in the EU.
No British government, certainly since the era of that of the Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson in the 1970’s, has found it easy to combat the opposition in Britain to membership of the EU (formerly European Economic Community). Neither of the two main parties has had complete unanimity on the matter this, in part resulting in the feeling that Britain has always been destined to play an autonomous role in international diplomacy, and must have a free hand to do so. But as the notion of Commonwealth as a substantial foundation for that diplomacy has waned in Britain, an increasing number of, certainly members of the British House of Commons, have become more open to the idea of the EU as a substantial platform for British diplomacy.
However, the extent to which the House of Commons can produce the desired parliamentary majority may perhaps have been thrown into some doubt, consequent upon the changes in the leadership of the British Labour Party that have indicated a swing to the left – not always fully committed to the Economic Community and then Economic Union. But as time goes on, the party’s approach will probably be indicated by the response of its members to the campaign for a Brexit (British exit from the EU) led, though, by persons who are substantially members of, or have been affiliated to the Conservatives. And indeed, some observers suggest that Cameron’s decision to go the way of a referendum was almost forced upon him by the showing of supporters of Brexit in some constituencies during the last election.
Even among the decision-making elite in both the private and public sectors, there have been signs of a lack of unanimity in support for retaining, or at least further strengthening, membership. As the campaign has begun, significant individuals who might have been thought to be supportive, have indicated their wariness of deeper integration into the EU. Thus, the Chairman of a major British financial institution, Lloyds Bank, Norman Blackwell, who is also a Conservative member of the House of Lords, has indicated that his assent cannot be given if there is not “significant change” in the character of the EU.
But on the other hand, as would probably be expected, there is a degree of evenness emerging within the British business community, as indicated in support for negotiating an appropriate membership arrangement by other stalwarts, such as a former Chairman of the British commercial group Marks and Spencer, and the aviation entrepreneur Richard Branson.
From the perspective of countries of the Commonwealth, the decision on a Brexit clearly does not have the salience that Britain’s original decision to join the European Community had. On this occasion there is little substantial change in economic relations likely, and while Britain seems unlikely to join the euro arrangement, it will undoubtedly attempt to insist on the singularity of the pound, particularly, it is argued, from the perspective of maintaining the independence and prominence of the City of London.
In addition, it is clear that in foreign relations, Britain is already a substantial actor within the EU even as it seeks to continue to maintain some degree of autonomy in its relations with the United States. Yet there can be little doubt that the country will have to come to terms with the increasing prominence of Germany in EU foreign policy, though some might argue that that prominence is being demonstrated largely in terms of the activities of the EU itself; while others will point out that Germany’s diplomacy towards Russia and its relations with countries of the wider European continent, for example on the issue of Ukraine, has suggested its prominence in guiding EU diplomacy as a whole.
From a Caribbean perspective, the issue of British concern with immigration from this part of the world in an earlier period, has now taken a turn towards concern with European immigration, a significant aspect of the last British general election, leading to defections from the Conservative Party. It is left to be seen whether political actors of the significance of a Nigel Lawson will choose to adopt this element of the Brexit campaign during the last general elections.
In sum, there seems little indication that Britain’s decision to, in effect, further integrate with the EU (regardless of some measures granted by the EU really designed to reduce opposition in Britain) will raise substantial concern in our Region, compared to her original decision to join the European Community.
