Despite it always being highly unlikely, I was rather hopeful that today’s vote would result in an EU referendum taking place.
I agree with each of the main party leaders that deciding whether we should be in the Euro at all would send a terrible message to the rest of the Continent at precisely the wrong time. The finances of Europe are a mess and weekend reading of the subject in the Sunday papers hasn’t left me feeling any more confident that 2012 will deliver brighter days, certainly not with Silvio Berlusconi in place as Italy’s leader at least. We shouldn’t be rocking the boat when it’s already so close to capsizing. However, we live in a democracy and poll after poll has shown that the UK at large is at best deeply sceptical of the benefits of EU membership so why not put that commitment to the test?
The reason I would like to see a referendum take place would be to take the opportunity to nail my blue and yellow-starred colours to the European mast, humming Ode to Joy as I go. Allowing the Scottish pro-EU silent majority to be heard loud and clear would be a tremendous fillip for our standing within the Union, even if (or should that be especially if) England chose not to.
It may not be clear at this stage whether joining the Euro will ever be a realistic prospect for the UK or an independent Scotland, we simply need to see what comes of these rounds after rounds of talks, notably whether fiscal union will take place and what form it takes. It is only fair that the SNP is allowed time to reflect on what happens next for the Euro before it outlines what its policy may be on joining the troubled currency.
Nonetheless, the European Union remains an important bloc that it is well worth Scotland being a part of.
The twin pillars of logic that underpin our membership are:
(1) Shared problems need shared solutions and
(2) free trade stops wars
World War Three isn’t going to start up in this continent, whether through a monarch assassination or the rise of a fascist, while all countries are in the same room having discussions, even if one felt the need to tell the other to ‘shut up’ recently. And climate change and transport and Defence and taxation and minimum wage are best fought at supra-national level, as well as being addressed within member nations. It’s a bit like two brothers trying to do the best for their family without talking to each other. Unthinkable really.
The only losers today will be the whips. Neither Labour nor the Lib Dems promised a referendum in their manifestos so the public cannot feel disenfranchised when the rebels are voted down but stifling democracy by forcing MPs to vote along party lines is always a sad sight and it is triply embarrassing that each of the Tories, Labour and (will they ever learn?) the Lib Dems felt the need to pull out the verbal cat o nine tails for anyone stepping out of line, representing their constituency and thinking for themselves.
Indeed, it is worth recalling Nick Clegg’s words from the last parliamentary term to see how much of a volte face this whipping business actually is (h/t Guardian):
The debate about Europe has been a thorn in the side of British politics for decades. Now the wound has become infected. Europhile and Eurosceptic trading blows about the Lisbon treaty in grand rhetoric that obscures the facts. If you’re pro-European, as I am, you’re accused of being a sellout. If you’re anti-European, like most Conservatives, you’re accused of being a headbanger. It isn’t new, but it isn’t edifying either.
It’s time we pulled out the thorn and healed the wound, time for a debate politicians have been too cowardly to hold for 30 years – time for a referendum on the big question. Do we want to be in or out?
Scotland in Britain in Europe is a powerful position for our nation to be in and is certainly more powerful than Scotland in UK out of Europe.
For now though, rightly or wrongly, we’ll have to satisfy ourselves with the Tories cracking at the seams over Europe once more. Not a bad consolation prize to be fair.
#1 by Barbarian on October 24, 2011 - 5:20 pm
I think Europe is going to cause the SNP a lot of problems as we approach the Referendum. True, much will depend on the situation at the time, but with the levels of debt and bailouts needed, I cannot see membership of the EU being particularly attractive, or at the very least as source of political conflict and heated debate.
I agree that holding a referendum on the EU at present is a dangerous distraction, but there are divisions over Europe in every party, the difference is that the Tories tend to let them come to the surface – a sign of weak leadership.
Do we really want to be tied to a single currency, bearing in mind what is currently ongoing, or can remain as part of the trading bloc only. Personally, I think the latter choice would more acceptable to the Scottish people.
#2 by ReasonableNat on October 25, 2011 - 12:16 am
Interesting listening to newsnight tonight, previously I may have held the same concerns. Having said that, on hearing the areas of power that the Tories are interested in repatriating I suspect this could go in favour of independence: employees rights, working time directive….
#3 by Stuart Winton on October 25, 2011 - 1:44 am
Indeed, and with monetary AND fiscal sovereignty at the European level looking increasingly necessary to hold the whole euro project together, it would hardly fit the premise of an independent Scotland if Frankfurt was deciding our interest AND tax and spending plans.
#4 by Angus McLellan on October 25, 2011 - 2:13 am
If the SNP offer a referendum before signing any EU treaty they’ll be offering more than the Conservatives, and much more than Labour and the Lib Dems.
And there’s certainly no need to be worrying about the Euro. The SNP’s current plans make membership highly improbable. Joining the EMS is a necessary step to joining the Euro, but that could only happen while a Sterling link was in place if the UK joined the EMS too. How likely is that really?
And even with a separate currency, joining the Euro is always optional. Ask the Swedes and the Czechs.
#5 by Random Lurking Scotsman on October 24, 2011 - 5:27 pm
Scottish independence, Welsh law-making powers, now apparently the EU… it seems that the 2010s will go down in UK history as the Decade of Referenda. I suppose though it’s a good thing that people are getting consulted more on the big issues, as politicians taking “decisions too complex for the public” never ends well.
It is definitely an issue that needs sorting out, as the “EU is Nazi Germany mk II!” boil perpetuated by the likes of the Daily Mail needs lancing, and it might actually get the UK to think properly about Europe for once. I don’t actually know anyone in real life who knows what it does or why we’re a part of it, so to actually clarify it to the general public might do wonders.
I do wonder what would happen if Scotland and other regions vote yes but England votes no. Holding the referendum might open up another can of worms for Westminster…
#6 by Kininvie on October 24, 2011 - 5:36 pm
There’s a third pillar – Scotland’s historical ties to Europe (for long periods closer than those to England). Scotland was once an important player in European diplomatic, military, commercial, academic and ecclesiastical affairs. It is part of our identity as a nation, and I look forward to an independent Scotland reviving those ancient links, free of the eurosceptic infection which – for reasons I have never fully understood – continues to contaminate UK politics.
#7 by Barbarian on October 24, 2011 - 6:56 pm
Forget the ancient links, what is happening now is different, with a single currency that is now falling apart and causing huge problems.
Keep the trading links, but joining the currency as things stand? No way.
#8 by Ken on October 24, 2011 - 6:29 pm
“we’ll have to satisfy ourselves with the Tories cracking at the seams over Europe once more”
And it’s hi-larious….
#9 by Observer on October 24, 2011 - 8:08 pm
Who would lead the campaign to stay in the EU? That is a serious question because they would have to be good to combat all the tabloid drivel which is printed every day. The danger here is that if a referendum is called then people in England would vote to leave! There are more of them than us. That would be a disaster, & would completely undermine any campaign for Scottish independence. Most questions that genuinely worry people can be answered with one sentence. We will be in the EU.
Cameron needs to call his rabid dogs in, & while he is at it be a bit more positive about the EU. Get Ken Clarke on the telly, he can usually duff up the Euro-sceptics with his eyes closed.
#10 by Jeff on October 24, 2011 - 8:48 pm
Nick Clegg could lead it. After the AV referendum, he’s due a win… 😉
No, Salmond and the next Labour leader could front a Yes campaign. They’d romp home which would be good for Nats out there if England returned a No.
Not that there’s going to be a vote of course…
#11 by Observer on October 24, 2011 - 8:30 pm
Got a bit carried away there! There is no danger of a referendum being called, & for once I am on Dave’s side.
#12 by Scottish republic on October 24, 2011 - 9:24 pm
The British nationalists fear losing their cultural identity as Europe seeps into the mix. That’s the basic fear – a fear unfounded.
The SNP won’t have any problems with Europe, they’ll deal with Europe as a nation and see how it works out.
We can always join the Norwegians.
#13 by Barbarian on October 24, 2011 - 9:46 pm
I’m watching the debate and there are some good arguments on both sides.
But one message is coming through – why can’t the people decide?
As I type, one Tory MP has just blown a Lib Dem out of the water! Apparently the LIb Dem website still demands a referendum!
This is surprisingly good viewing for a Monday night!
#14 by Nikostratos on October 24, 2011 - 9:51 pm
(1) they lost the first referendum big time and it didn;t stop them(they are all barking)
(2) watching the Eurosceptics on the televisual (does any body else watch bbc Parliament ) and seeing up close and personal how vile hate filled xenophobic English Tory MPs are make me let alone any one else wonder why?? i support the ‘Union'(they are all barking)
They keep on about the ‘Nation’ but where is it and who lives there because from what i see its only white male middle class English Torys who reside there and any one else aint wanted at all.(they are all barking)
#15 by Iain Menzies on October 25, 2011 - 7:14 pm
Giesla stewart (Labour) is German, and Kate Hoey (Labour) Is N Irish. This isnt an english thing. One of the glasgow MPS was talking for the ref as well
#16 by Tearlach on October 24, 2011 - 10:46 pm
In my opinion the best way of looking at the UK is that it was a very early form of the European Union – formed in 1707 – and then added to in 1800, as an economic and political union to do two things – prevent war, and promote free trade through a single currency. Sound familiar? Yep – Jean Monet was 250 years late in coming up with the idea of free trade zones and economic growth through free movement of goods, services and people.
And what’s the Pound Sterling – it’s only a 300 year old version of the Euro.
But something that many folk seem to have missed is that in joining the EEC in 1974 (as it was then) the UK and Scotland joined a loose political union that has turned out to be a bit of a game changer. The sort of benefits that the UK used to supply to Scotland – especially access to markets and capital, and free movement of labour have long gone.
The Euros problems are issues of today, and will be sorted out one way or the other, but the basic principle of the EU – free trade, free movement of people and capital, joint institutions and the wider European Institutions of justice and fairness will remain, whether you are in the EU, or like EFTA (Norway, Switzerland ) more of an associate status.
So Scotland does not need the UK, as we have the EU.
You see that’s its clear that smaller EU and EFTA nations – such as Ireland, Finland, Sweden, Norway and even Iceland have many more fiscal and economic tools at their disposal to ensure that their populace are ready to face up to the challenges of developing modern, open, knowledge based economies than anything that can be seen coming out of Westminster. (And doing that without being burdened with the trappings of empire – two lame duck aircraft carriers anyone?). They can regulate their own banks (for better in the case of Norway, or for worse, in the case of Iceland, but at least they can regulate their own banks) set Corporation Tax levels, invest the profits from a commodity – oil – in a high yield savings policy, or like the Danes use a public-private-community partnership to create a world lead in a Manufacturing industry like on-shore wind turbines.
So success through National self determination all within the common framework of European confederation. A nice model for Scotland to follow.
#17 by Craig Gallagher on October 26, 2011 - 4:21 am
A semantic but important point Jeff: we live in a republic (in the electoral sense), not a democracy. It’s moronic to a spectacular degree that the Coalition passed a law guaranteeing a debate in Parliament if any petition got enough votes.
We elect our representatives to do the decision-making for us; we had a chance to change that earlier in the year with the AV referendum, but didn’t. Referenda are important for major constitutional changes, in my mind, and the questions “Should the UK stay within the European Union?” would qualify as such, but for our elected representatives to bow and scrape to a euroskeptic petition that in no way reflects the opinion of the majority of the population is government by demagoguery. Why do we insist on lurching towards American and French notions of equality?