It’s very nearly forty years since the UK joined the European Economic Community, the body which has now evolved into the European Union. The last – and indeed only – time that Britons gave their assent to our membership was way back in 1975, meaning that no-one under the age of 55 has ever been able properly to register their support for, or opposition to, UK membership.
Public dissatisfaction with the cost of the EU and the massive burdens it places on the UK and businesses here remains as high as ever. Now, with the prospect of a new referendum on the issue being mooted (albeit not for another few years), people are increasingly wondering what the future holds for UK-EU relations and what form they might take if a decision is made to withdraw from the EU in its current form.
The principal benefit of EU membership is access to the single market covering much of the continent. However, we do not need to be a member of the EU to enjoy that access: it is afforded to members of EFTA under the European Economic Area (EEA) agreement of 1994, which, in turn, are not bound by all manner of other EU policies covering areas such as foreign policy, home affairs and agriculture.
Some claim that the EFTA model amounts to “government by fax”, whereby countries have to fulfil all kinds of obligations set by European Union legislation over which they have no influence.
But this myth is exploded in a paper by TPA Research Fellow, Dr Lee Rotherham, Controversies, which considers this very issue, among others.
He cites figures from the Norwegian and Icelandic governments showing that those EFTA members only have to enforce a small proportion (10%-20%) of EU regulations and that there are ample opportunities to influence new EU legislation in areas covered by the EEA agreement. And all that without the common supreme court in the form of the European Court of Justice and with the European Commission having no power to fine you.
Then there is Switzerland, which is outside the EEA, but has its own separate trading agreements with the EU, meaning that Swiss laws only have to be compatible with EU law when there is an existing bilateral sectoral agreement. The Swiss Government estimated a few years ago that joining the EU would cost 3.4 billion Swiss Francs per year (net), whereas continuing with the current arrangements was costing a fraction of that, just 557 million Swiss Francs per year.
Rotherham comes to the following conclusions:
“The image of the “fax democracy” is far from the reality. The claim by supporters of full EU membership (who strangely tend to come from EU countries themselves) that EEA countries have to endure rules just faxed through from Brussels to their parliaments is far from the reality. If there is such a thing as a fax democracy, it applies rather to the full member of the EU, and particularly where an issue is now being decided by QMV. Reflect for a moment on when the Commons last rejected an EU law.
“The EEA proves that there is no uniform model of EU association. Countries already can and do pick and choose what form of association they want with the EU. Provided no politician rises to power seeking closer cooperation (at which point ratchet principles apply), association countries can retain their status for as long as they like. This is before we even reflect on the differing levels of cooperation contained in EU treaties with countries spread even more distantly across the world, for which Canada provides just one more potential trading model.
“The comparative cost for associated members is clearly far lower than for full members, and definite ‘pick n mix’ principles apply. More damaging regulations can be avoided, while like goods are still treated with trading parity. Meanwhile, domestic business does not have to face the same burdens; more of the economy can escape red tape; less acquis is required since issues beyond trade are exempted; and democratic accountability continues for decisions reached through the EEA, and continues unabated in the majority of areas across the board.”
Taxpayers seeking better value out of our relations with the EU should take note.