European Union - what next?

The ratification of the Lisbon Treaty/Constitution will involve massive changes in all the member countries. There will be a considerable extension in the number of areas where the EU has taken over from national governments.

In competition rules, customs union, monetary policy (in the eurozone area), commercial policy, and in marine and biological conservation the EU has exclusive legislation rights.

In other others there will shared competence, where national governments may enact legislation so long as the EU has chosen not to act, or the national government may add. Under this heading come international aid, R & D, agriculture and fisheries, environment, transport, energy, the environment, social policy, the internal market, etc.

In other areas the EU may support, coordinate or take complementary action. This covers health, tourism, culture, education, sport, civil protection, industry, etc.

The EU is now also the catalyst/coordinator on national economic and social policies, the development of a foreign and security policy and defence policy.

This seems a full list of dominance. So what areas remain for Cameron to "defend" by means of a referendum? There are still some where the EU wishes to make a common policy, and which will require a further treaty.

They are:
- Common Taxation throughout the Union.
- European Army
- European foreign policy (after all, there is to be a high representative, with embassies, etc.)

As I hinted in an earlier posting, we could also be awkward and uncooperative. In the 1990s the French under Chirac defied the EU in refusing to import UK beef during the BSE crisis. In the end, after several years the French did give in, unpunished, but had gained economically and politically and gave notice to the EU.

In an interesting article in the Spectator this week, Fraser Nelson, quotes this example, and suggests that temporary disobedience could increase power, not merely isolate as europhiles love to suggest.

No one is quite sure of the consequence of a British Bill of Rights, which would claim supremacy of British Law over the HR Court at Strasbourg. Our legal system could again become different, and in many people's eyes better.

The ultimate sanction we have is to withhold money. The EU would pressurise us, and use legal means, but would they risk driving us out, if Cameron set up a referendum and revealed feeling here? They would prefer our membership and money, - we are one of the largest net contributors, and would not wish to drive others to rebel.

Until we are in the USE, we have some leverage, and we are in a position, if the public wishes it, to scupper further integration.

Until the recent treaty, and all the underhand and disgraceful subversion of democracy, I was emotionally in favour, even though as an economist I am not convinced that there is any great economic benefit now. I have always felt that EFTA was a much more attractive economic proposition than the sclerotic, corrupt and dishonest EU.