Hardly anyone even in Britain understands the constitutional relationship between Britain and Europe, let alone the changes that have been proposed. Most of my American friends think that the European Union is a good thing because it is some sort of continental federation, like the United States. They suspect Britain of being isolationist in resisting further integration of the European Union. Almost all Democrats are europhile, in the sense that they support expanding the powers of the European Commission, Court and Court of Justice to the prejudice of the independent sovereignty of the independent nations. In the United States, European federalism is regarded as a politically correct and progressive cause.
Even on the right of American politics, there are few supporters of European national rights. Unless they have had some reason to investigate the European treaties, conservatives as well as liberals tend to approve the principle of "ever closer union" for Europe, as against the defence of democracy, or the European equivalent of states' rights. In American politics most conservatives want to protect the remnants of state independence, and they suspect the claims of the Imperial Presidency. When they go back into opposition, the Republicans can be expected to revive their enthusiasm for states' rights, in America but not in Europe.
Americans have little knowledge of the constitution of the European Union and assume that it is substantially the same as that of the United States. That is a mistake. Europe does not yet have a President, nor is Europe a democracy. The European Parliament has very limited powers relative to those of the Congress. The closest parallel of powers is that between the Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice, both of which have the ultimate authority derived from being the final court of appeal. Power in the American Constitution lies in the separate powers on the Presidency, which is the executive branch, the Congress and the Supreme Court, both the President and the Congress being democratically elected. In Europe the sole power of initiating legislation belongs to the Commission, an appointed bureaucratic body; the power of decision belongs to the Council, which is drawn from the European Governments, and is therefore indirectly elected. The Parliament is directly elected, and has the power to dismiss the Commission.
The U.S. Constitution is therefore a democratic constitution with a non-democratic Supreme Court structure; the European constitution is primarily bureaucratic; despite the existence of the European Parliament.
Most British Eurosceptics still wish to maintain a European system, but want to rebalance the European constitution by transferring some powers, called "competences" in the European jargon, back to the individual nations. A common Eurosceptic view is that Europe would be the better for a close shave with Ockham's Razor. The European Union should only have powers which are necessary, and should not invade the proper area of national independence. Of course there are arguments about the appropriate division of functions, but the principle would be one based on necessity.
Next week - on October 17th - 18th - the new reform law for the European Constitution will be finalised in Lisbon, though it will not be signed until December. The Eurosceptics in Britain want to have a referendum on the EU Treaty; they are on the side of national independence and democracy. They may or may not prevail, but their arguments are both legitimate and democratic. Americans should not turn their backs on them, since their objectives are similar to those of many of the Founding Fathers of the United States.
William Rees-Mogg
for The Daily Reckoning Australia
P.S. to get The Daily Reckoning direct to your inbox sign up to our free e-mail newsletter or if you prefer to use RSS, subscribe to the Daily Reckoning RSS feed.
Related Articles:
- None Found
About the Author
Leading political editor William Rees-Mogg is former editor-in-chief for The Times and a member of the House of Lords. He has been credited with accurately forecasting glasnost and the fall of the Berlin Wall – as well as the 1987 crash. His political commentary appears in The Times every Monday. His financial insights can only be found in the Fleet Street Letter, the UK's longest-running investment newsletter.
Comment by kage on 12 October 2007:
This is the same paradoxical argument about group dynamics, only at the international level. Ultimately this argument in the political arena resolves itself into legislation recognizing (and thus reinforcing) individual status and identity, at the expense of individual character and ability. Consequently the European economy will bear additional strains, burdened as it is with British and Spanish housing bubbles, Italian apathy, and multitude of east european issues.
Comment by Anne Palmer on 12 October 2007:
As a very ordinary person that has tasted the freedom we fought for in 1939-45, I decided, once I realised what was taking place through our involvement in the European Union, to find out why our government was losing so much of its powers (authority) on the 'world stage'. I have read the proposed Reform Treaty but unlike a great many "Eurosceptics, I am not asking for a referendum for two reasons. a) I no longer trust the present Government to hold a true and fair referendum and b) Any person under solemn oath of allegiance to the Crown and their own Country, which our MP's are, should reject this proposed treacherous EU (Reform)Treaty outright.
Under the British Constitution, the British people have always been able to do what they like as long as there is no law against it. Under EU law, a person may only do something if there is a law that says they can, and there is a great difference between the two.
Through a deliberate lie thirty-five years ago, (although we did not realise it was a lie at that time) the people of this Country have suffered thousands of EU Regulations, EU Directives and laws that, in the incorporating into this country has resulted in removing many of the people’s rights and freedoms and the people have found with shame that politicians accepted on our behalf a Treaty which would allow EU laws to automatically override our very own Common Law Constitution. That is not acceptable to the vast majority of people in this Country. I doubt it would be acceptable to Americans or Australians. We have our own Constitution, and it is to that we should and must look to now. WE have paid many Billions of pounds (approx £200 billion plus) over the years to the EU, we simply cannot afford to continue doing so.
We obviously realise that both sides of the argument regarding the EU's Reform Treaty cannot possibly be right. The people have had enough of lies, spin and manipulation over the last ten years, they are sick to the teeth of it and the end result in all this is that even those that tell the truth may not be believed. For a once great British Houses of Parliament once admired throughout the world this is indeed a sad state of affairs.
The matter is all about WHO Governs Britain. If other countries choose to let the EU Govern them permanently now and in the future, then that is their choice, although I understand it will be their politicians that will make that choice and not the people. All I do know is that there is every likelihood of much unrest, for the people will not rest easy in what their politicians are signing on their behalf.
There is no democracy in the EU. It wants the break up of each Country into REGIONS "to bring democracy closer to the people" and then dare not let the people have their say in a referendum.
At present, we continue to pay and vote for our MP’s to sit in the Houses of Parliament, yet who eventually governs this our Country that was made free in 1945 apparently is too important to leave now in the hands of any British politician for the British appear to want to give it away and the foreigners want it all. The people are sickened by what they see as sheer treachery that is taking place in our Parliament at present.
If the people voted "Yes" to the Treaty and then found out they were told lies,(again) that politicians knew all along the guarding of certain parts of the Treaty by so called red-lines would never hold, can I or anyone else prevent what will eventually be written down in history? Will the people just simply accept another thirty-five years of EU Rule? Does anyone other than the present Government really think they will?
Comment by Jonnie Armstrong on 15 September 2008:
In response to the reply above - I totally agree with every word. I am sick to the back teeth about Europeans telling the british what must and must not do.