You are here:   2013 Local Elections > Cameron's Too Late To Tame the UKIP Tiger
 

Two conflicting forces have been at work in the British debate over the EU in the last 25 years, opening up a large space between what people wanted and what their government meant to deliver. But politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum. The rise of the UK Independence Party has started to fill the empty space, creating an extraordinarily uncertain and fascinating backdrop to the 2014 European elections and the 2015 general election. The eventual result may well be that Britain leaves the European Union, but the process of withdrawal could be complex and messy, and its outcome ambiguous and incomplete. UKIP has been in existence for 20 years, but in some respects its work has only just begun.

Out of touch: UKIP supporters demonstrate against Tory Europhilia  

The first of the two conflicting forces stemmed from the Single European Act of 1986 and later treaties that transferred "competences" from the nation states of Europe to EU institutions, above all to the European Commission in Brussels. This led to an anomalous situation in which every nation had two governments, one in its capital city and the other in Brussels, and the two governments vied with each other for power. As the nation states were unwilling to hand over the powers to tax and spend, the Brussels agenda was to grow the EU's constitutional remit by introducing ever more rules and regulations. These were incorporated in the purportedly irreversible acquis communautaire. Meanwhile, European courts passed judgments that widened their own jurisdiction, obviously at the expense of the national legal systems. 

The expansion of the acquis imposed extra burdens on finance and industry, and seriously undermined the efficiency of Europe's economies, including Britain's. Virtually every business faced additional costs that had no clear benefit to anyone, while many small businesses ceased to be viable because of one or another EU regulation. The EU's popularity declined as its regulations proliferated. Opinion polls showed a steady erosion of public support for "the European construction", so that by, say, 2005 and certainly by 2010 more people in the UK were against the EU than were for it. Resentment towards European integration was exacerbated by frankly silly verdicts from the European Court of Human Rights which, under the treaties, had to be accepted by Her Majesty's Government. 

The second of the two conflicting forces was that a majority of the British political elite became more comfortable with the European construction, and more eager to work within the EU framework. For them the transfer of competences was welcome and to be promoted. Close assimilation with the EU was most obvious within the Civil Service, as the UK and EU bureaucracies worked together on the drafting of new directives and regulations. These European "laws" were endorsed in the EU Council of Ministers and, over ever more areas of national life, our own Parliament could do nothing but rubber-stamp the Council's decisions. It might have been expected that Britain's parliamentarians would early have recognised the enormity of the constitutional hijack that was under way. Such figures as Enoch Powell and Margaret Thatcher did articulate great concern. However, the Conservative Party, the party that might have been expected to defend Britain's traditions and institutions, actively participated in the hijack, and marginalised the efforts of Powell, Thatcher and numerous others to halt or reverse it.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Commentator
June 18th, 2013
1:06 PM
Not the old canard that the public are uninterested in the EU. The opinion polls suggest quite the opposite: they are very interested in their falling standard of living, the economic and social damage caused by Britain's policy of open-door immigration and the ongoing economic meltdown across the Channel. All of these have more than plenty to do with the EU although David Cameron's courtiers are desperate to tell you otherwise.

Ian
June 15th, 2013
8:06 AM
This somewhat hysterical article seems to take as a given that the rise in UKIP support reflects popular concern about the EU, whereas most of the evidence suggests precisely the opposite: most people don't care greatly about the EU issue one way or the other, and the UKiP 'surge' reflects general discontent with the economy and the established political parties, in difficult times.

PDoodle
June 8th, 2013
7:06 AM
Anonymous: You're off-topic. This article is about the EU and the difficulty of extricating ourselves from it. As far as generational differences are concerned, perhaps the younger ones, lacking depth of experience, are more easily taken in by media europhilia. It will be interesting to see how that shapes up as Euroland moves ever closer to econimic and social breakdown.

Jabba the Cat
June 7th, 2013
9:06 PM
Lol...for anyone who has doubts that UKIP is inhabited by swivel eyed loons, look no further than this interview outside the Bilderberg conference in Watford, by prime US conspiracy nut Alex Jones and his subject, UKIP conspiracy nut Gerard Batten... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=iBfrf-qqE3w

Dave B
June 7th, 2013
10:06 AM
The Electoral Commission figures only refer to donations over a threshold. £7,500 a year. They do not record smaller donations. http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/party-finance/party-finance-analys...

Anonymous
June 1st, 2013
11:06 AM
The rest of the UKIP manifesto is as illiberal and authoritarian as it gets. Presumably that's ok, providing it is "native Brits" who are impinging on the liberties of others... God help the vast majority of 18-35 year olds who continue to favour EU membership but whose future is subject to the will of coffin-dodgers.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.