Written Evidence submitted by David Donaldson Barbour for the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee’s inquiry into Northern Ireland and the EU Referendum (EUN0008)
1.0 Summary
The population of the EU is in serious decline and predicted to be 7% of world and one third of Africa by 2050. Nigeria, China, India and America will be the largest populations. EU will have a large proportion of elderly and a small percentage of 15 year olds. They will have a much larger responsibility to support dependants than developing nations. History and academic research show that Patriotism and Nationalism is stronger than Internationalism even when applied to products and services (consumer ethnocentrism) Nations eventually cast off Imperialism to reassert their sovereignty. Leading UK politicians are accused of misleading their people, cajoling, threatening parliament and ignoring our systems of democracy. The EU is engaged in considerable world trade while not wanting members to be totally free to negotiate their own deals. UK trade growth with the world is growing faster than with the EU. Difficulties in costs for UK in not trading enough with EU are mentioned but friends in US whilst in current trade talks with the EU feel it will be difficult to achieve and would do everything to form a partnership with Britain if it left EU.
2.0 World Population Pressures
The total population of Europe is heading toward major crises. A forecast predicts that Europe will be only 7% of the world population and one third of Africa by 2050. The world population will increase by 39% reaching 9.6 billion by 2050. Those people 15 years and younger will only increase by 10% as the result of lower birth rates. People 65yrs and over will triple to 1.5 billion. The rest of the world will gray faster than in the US that will also share the same age ratio by 2050; nevertheless US will grow faster than other developed nations such as Europe and some East Asian countries. Whilst some Latin American countries have now got a higher number of young people this will not be the case by 2050. US, China and India are currently the largest populations but this will change with Nigeria pushing US to fourth place, and India passing China. It is predicted that around 49 developing countries will double to 1.8 billion by 2050. The oldest people are predicted to be in Japan, South Korea, Germany, Russia and some Latin American (P.E.W research centre, Washington, D.C.) The EC’s large internal market is therefore facing catastrophic labour shortages, an example is Portugal where toy shops and schools are being replaced by Nursing Homes. Native European women are having fewer children than immigrants arriving from non-EC countries. There is need of workers from non-EC nations. It is not surprising that Germany recently accepted large numbers of immigrants although other EC countries are pulling back from the large influx; especially those states freed from the oppression of USSR and lying within what is usually seen as a Christian based Europe; also afraid of a massive influx of Muslim refugees bombed out Syria by Russian air – strikes. (Daily Mail Feb 6th 2016)
Sub-Conclusion. The EC has failed to provide sustainable population growth. Non-European nations signify where larger consumer needs will occur. Expanding nations dominating the world is well established to be India, China, Africa, and the US. This raises questions on how the EU has been controlling population growth. One media outlet sees Europe in terminal decline (Daily Express Feb 4th 2016).
3.0 International Imperalism vs Nationalism
The Roman Empire founded by Caesar Augustus ruled large parts of the world including most of Europe until it gradually fell asunder. The Holy Roman Empire arose and claiming a line from previous Emperors. Charles fifth a Habsburg, Holy Roman Emperor tried rule of Europe in the 16th century failed. Napoleon the emperor of France later tried it as well. Hitler was the only one who came near to total domination. Lenin in his blood drenched experiment saw himself as the leader of an international workers brotherhood. He saw the red flag flying over Europe erasing centuries of history, national differences, pulling down borders, and uniting people under a Communist dictatorship. Europe was the prize over many centuries. French national Jean Monnet, non-elected bureaucrat during the foundation of the EEC said that national sovereignty was finished; there was no future for the people of Europe other than in a union. During the 1990’s Chancellor Helmut Kohl of Germany, visiting the Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, declared that retreat from further political integration in Europe could plunge the continent into new nationalistic wars in the next century. He was not advocating a super-state but did not want a return to the nation state of old. He paid tribute to the late French President Francois Mitterrand who believed that nationalism is war. (Daily Mail Feb 6th 2016) Other opinion on modern Europe see it as continuous interaction between rivalling forms of internationalism and diverse kinds of nationalism motivated by different kinds of ideology. This has influenced the international politics of the region, particularly since the Second World War. (The Palgrave Macmillan History of International Thought, 2003.)
Indian Nationalism with Britain
Mahatma Gandhi, India’s, leader of independence described his Nationalism as wanting freedom so that other countries may learn something from his free country so, that India’s resources can benefit mankind. Just as the cult of patriotism teaches us that various community strata will die for their group so that the country may die if necessary for the benefit of the world. His love and idea of nationalism was that his country becomes free if need be to die so that the human race many live. There is no room for race hatred there. Let that be our nationalism. (GIV, p 171)
Academic Study on the impact of Patriotism, Nationalism and Internationalism.
A study was conducted to investigate the impact of patriotism, nationalism, and internationalism as antecedents to consumer ethnocentric tendencies in Turkey and the Czech Republic. Consumer ethnocentrism described as an inherent condition where individuals judge other groups relative to their own ethnic group or culture, especially language, behaviour, customs, and religion. The study explored views held by consumers in one country, the in-group, towards products from another country, the out-group (Shimp & Sharma, 1987) A main focus of the study was controlling for demographics, the practice of artificially altering the rate of growth of a human population. Findings indicated that the impact of patriotism and nationalism is not consistent across the two countries. Consumer ethnocentrism in Turkey was fuelled by patriotism and in the Czech Republic by nationalism. Internationalism does not therefore have a significant effect on consumer ethnocentrism in either country. (George Balabanis, Adamantios Diamantopoulos, Rene Dentiste Mueller and T.C. Melewar, Journal of International Business Studies Vol. 32, No. 1 (1st Qtr., 2001), pp. 157-175)
Sub-Conclusion. History shows how attempts to manipulate populations when imposing forms of ‘international imperialism’ on sovereign nations has repeatedly failed. It is apparent over time that nationalism and patriotism has mostly been reasserted and influences even the trading of goods and services.
Let us retain peoples wish for sovereign independence and freedom to live the lives they want to live.
4.0 Delusion vs Reality
Vernon Coleman, highly respected author, challenges the way that Prime Minister Edward Heath took Britain into the EEC. He claims that in enacting the European Communities Bill through an ordinary vote in the House of Commons he breached the constitutional convention which requires a prior consultation of the people, either by a general election, or any measure involving constitutional change. A general election or referendum must take place before any related parliamentary debate. Britain has no straightforward written constitution but, the singing of the Common Market entrance documents was, without doubt, a breach of the spirit of the constitution. Just before the 1970 general election Heath declared it would be wrong not to have ‘the full hearted consent of Parliament and people’. However, in 1972 when it became evident the British people were not in favour by a margin of two to one he reneged and signed the documents that took us into what became the European Union on the basis alone that Parliament had passed the European Communities Bill of 1972. He therefore used Parliament’s sovereignty in a presidential way to deny the sovereign will of the electorate. Coleman alleges that our constitution whilst not like America, is, nevertheless enshrined and codified in the Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Right (1628), the Bill of Rights (1689) and the Act of Settlement (1701)
The 1689 Bill of Rights contains the following oath: ‘ I do declare that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state or potentate hath or ought to have jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence or authority within this Realm’ Since the Bill has not been repealed, Coleman holds that every treaty Britain signed with the EU has been illegal. He says that Harold Wilson tried to remedy Heath’s error by a retrospective referendum but the wording of ‘stay in’ was deceptive as the nation had not legally joined. Coleman also claims that the Wilson solution was illegal as it was based on former illegal behaviour. Wilson’s referendum was passed after much heavy one-sided propaganda. It is claimed that Heath later admitted he mislead the public. There is a notion that leaving the EU will be difficult because of the behaviour of some politicians. It has been suggested that Parliament could repeal the 1972 European Communities Act. (Copyright Veron Coleman 2011, book OFPIS)
The 1992 Maastricht Treaty was an amendment to the Treaty of Rome, with 12 members including Britain changing the EC to the EU and providing a timetable and framework for economic and monetary union. This was seen by critics as giving the European central bank the power to set and police monetary policy including interest rates. Founding father Max Konstamm of the EU said “Judged by the European Community’s slow development, Maastricht was a giant step toward a more united Europe” He mentioned the awesome challenges for both the EU and the outside world toward a much more ambitious journey. With 28 members now in place we might guess some of his ambition. There is fear that the European Court could find Britain’s position outside the Euro as illegal. Lord Spicer MP, former chair of the 1922 committee said regarding, Maastrich, that Major was humiliated by losing the vote in Parliament. However, he reintroduced the motion the next day with a threat that if it was not ratified he would resign and call an election. The Tory sceptics did not want to bring down the government so they modified their position. (Total Politics)
The Lisbon Treaty amended the two treaties which formed the constitutional basis of the EU, The Masstricht Treaty and the Treaty of Rome signed by a Labour Prime Minister. Those against, argued that it centralised more powers in the EU by transferring sovereignty from member states. It created the first President of Europe, a European Foreign Minister and ended Britain’s right to veto new EU rules in more than 40 different policy areas and made the Union’s Bill of Rights, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, legally binding. When P.M. Gordon Brown signed after the Czechs who had resisted for 8 years; he hailed the Czech singing as an historic moment. (Telegraph 3rd Nov 2009) William Hague, in opposition, said that as the treaty has become EU law and is going into force, it meant that a referendum can no longer prevent the creation of the President of the European council, and the loss of British vetoes. These things will have happened, and a referendum cannot unwind or prevent them. It was not placed in an election manifesto so British citizens had no chance to cast their vote. Daniel Hannan, Tory MEP referred to the march to a super-state and likened it to the boot continuing to stamp on the human face.
The Daily Mail sees the current performance of Prime Minister David Cameron as a great delusion after he stood accused of selling Britain short on 2nd February 2016 when he hailed a deal to keep Britain in the EU. The public are now aware of his attempt to gag his Ministers and Euro Sceptics. He also told Tory Associations to ignore the opinions of local members. His behaviour is described by a media normally sympathetic, that his deal is full of spin and sell-outs. Leading British Judge Sir Konrad Schlemann, who served in the Court of Appeal and the European Court of Justice, said it was perfectly clear that European Law would remain supreme here and rubbished The Prime Minister’s claims. (Daily Mail Wednesday February 3rd 2016) In regard to Treaty change, top Brussels bureaucrat Jean-Claude Juncker is says that what the EU recently agreed with David Cameron was fair to everyone. What sceptics say is that more than two-thirds of voters think the European Union reform proposals on the table are bad for Britain. A Sky News survey of more than 1,000 people, 69% said the current deal was unacceptable. It is claimed that European President Donald Tusk’s letter made it clear there was no treaty change; no powers returned to Britain; and no control over our borders at all (Daily Express February 4th 2016).
Sub Conclusion. Unfortunately, Prime Ministers of Conservative and Labour Parties are seen to be circumventing the will of their electorate. Large sections of the British people have expressed their desire to retain their self determination. Britain lived through ancient and modern history with tribal wars, invasions and foreign battles to finally arrive where we enjoy a modern western liberal democracy. People are annoyed to see EU diluting their sovereign powers which inevitably affects their national identity, customs and laws and subsume us into a new political nationhood. People must place their trust in themselves and take their nation back again, hoping it is not too late.
5. 0. The Double Game.
The European Commission Directorate – General for Trade states that EU is in prime position for Global Trade as they are the largest single market with 500 million consumers looking for quality goods served by a secure legal investment framework for everyone. There is admission that growth in EU is slow. Trade partners do not need to deal with 28 different trading strategies. EU are deeply integrated into global markets and provide a table showing trade in terms of billions of Euros. They state that they account for 16% of world imports and exports and list the EU, US, Latin America, China and Japan. (trade in goods and commercial services 2013).
Britain’s dilemma
John Springford senior research fellow at the Centre for European Reform, admits that Britain’s trade with the rest of the world is growing faster than with the EU but EU will continue to be the largest trade partner for decades to come. He states that other EU members will not let Britain cherry-pick what EU markets they might wish to use if they chose a half-in half-out option. They also state that from 1996 – 2010 the total reduction in Britain’s trade costs contributed to by their world trade agreements was less than one-third of the EU. Free Trade Agreements add costs to their products to cover such things as shipping and transport etc. He thinks EU is better placed to maximise better deals. He warns that Britain would find it difficult to do as well outside the EU and compares them with countries such as Canada’s and Australia’s FTA with the US where cost benefits were not as glorious as desired. He based his data on World Bank’s measurements. Christian Odendahl, chief economist at the Centre for European Reform however, admits that Europe has been lagging behind US in terms of productivity growth for more than a decade. He scolds EU for dwelling too much on competitiveness as a solution after a financial crises and raises the matter of productivity as a better focus. He illustrates where Germany relied too much on foreign trade financed by German capital which was evidence of low demand at home. During that crises German investors lost almost half a trillion euros on their foreign investments. He pleads for structural reform, a pluralist democracy, fair elections and an independent press. Nile Gardiner, Director of the Margaret Thatcher Centre for Freedom, and John Springford, senior research fellow provide hope for Britain if it leaves EU membership. They reveal that US are currently in talks with the EU to try and agree a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and say there are increasing doubts if ever it will be achieved. Policymakers in Congress are worried about increased bureaucracy and loss of sovereignty through harmonisation and regulation. They hold that Britain would be welcome and when liberated from EU state their own terms for the first time since 1973. London and New York are the largest financial capitals in the world. UK would not be lumbered by lesser EU cities and a new US – UK partnership would be a powerful statement of our special relationships. They note that one quarter of US corporate assets are based in UK. He admits that the Obama administration is not in favour of Britain leaving the EU but remarks that the current US government will be gone by January 2017.
Sub – Conclusion. The EU while boasting of its internal market which studies show a declining population is still looking for Trade Agreements with the rest of the world. Members of the EU are bound by EU regulations that concerns the less regulated US who are well ahead of the EU in terms of growth. Britain has friends in US prepared to strengthen trading partnerships with UK and actively promote prosperity for both. EU may not allow Britain an easy passage if they leave.