Analysis of UKs Review of EU Laws - Essay Example

Analysis of UK’s review of EU laws Number Department Introduction The government of United Kingdom willcarry out a comprehensive review of European Union laws and their effect on the country (Wilding, 2012). Foreign Secretary William Hague communicated the government’s interest to examine every part of EU laws in July 2012. The government program is intended to achieve reform in Europe. The audit process is expected to last for two years. Labour Party emphasized that the initiative is important as would enable the government to gain a clearer picture of its report card under the EU (Gurfinkiel, 2005). The legal basis for the audit is to inspire cost reduction efforts in the management of EU affairs at the national level by reducing bureaucracy and external interference in issues that should be resolved at the national level. The audit is also aimed at enhancing better participation of UK in the international body and safeguarding UK’s internal democratic ideals and structures. According the William Hague, the EU needs change in how current challenges should be best handled. The reform would streamline competitiveness; guarantee member countries and the entire region a stable Eurozone and expanded democratic goals (Rostron, 2006). Finally, the UK government believes that a clear structure of authority that spans from local, national, and international levels should prevail in order to eliminate chances of duplication of duties and meddling by parties who lack the locus standi in such jurisdictions. Legal basis Justice and law enforcement The European Union has imposed 130 crime and law enforcement regulations including warrant of arrest (Costello, 2012). Although, some parties believe the regulations enhance the effort of many enforcement agencies and security apparatus in the war against cross-border crime, the UK government believes such laws infringe on its sovereignty. Additionally, it is difficult to selectively implement the EU laws as suggested by Tory MPs (Kramer, Xu, & Kesselheim, 2012). In a nutshell, the UK government feels that there is a superior and more powerful government other than the national one and nation states have been forced to play a second fiddle in policies issues. Employment law The EU’s employment and social law envisages the working-time policy whereby there is a limit on the number of hours of service for employees a day. The rationale is based on health and safety grounds. The EU has also imposed policies which regulate casual workforce environment. Long perceived in Conservative lens as a breach of UK’s open labour market, the employment law has brought the Tories and the Liberal Democrats together. The government of the UK feels that there is a decrease in productivity because local investors are forced to adhere to stricter EU terms instead of working under UK’s free labour market. Financial sector The expected establishment of a common banking union has created panic among investors in the banking industry in regard to whether the new measures might infringe on the local and smaller financial institutions (Vletter-van & Helene, 2012). The UK government wants to protect its national interests but it may not be easily achieved under the current status quo. EU’s influence is enormous in the sector. Regional policy EU’s regulation policy has also prompted Britain to review the rules. One of the fundamental issues raised by detractors of the EU is that the body’s mandate is somewhat unclear. For instance, how come the international body takes colossal sums of money from Britain only to re-channel the money back to the country’s economically weak sectors? (Rostron, 2006) UK’s regions such as Merseyside and Northern Ireland have in the recent past gained lots of support from EU. Like the UK government, critics argue that the country would be better placed to reform EU’s policies and use the money in more productive national sectors. Potential Criticisms Firstly, the government has emphasized that it is its sole responsibility formulate policies that would increase greater socio-economic and political opportunities for Britain in Europe. However, the UK national interests may contradict the EU laws rather than streamline the latter laws for national good and effective integration (Costello, 2012). Secondly, in order to influence its ties with European member states in the umbrella body, fundamental reforms would be better championed by several EU member states rather than by Britain alone, especially if the country aims to win national interest in liberalized trade, open markets and better integration. Thirdly, the UK seems to be time-barred in its initiative, at least for now. The comprehensive proposals for better economic integration are not expected to feature in the deliberations at a European Union meeting scheduled at the end of the year. Finally, the audit would consume a lot of resources and may paint Britain as a troublemaker among its EU allies. Mr Hague announced that the review would be meticulously done so as to present a credible measurement of the scope of EU powers in nation states, and would offer valuable facts for future planning by the government. This translates to billions of pounds and two years. The government intends to bestow upon its departments the task of consulting and welcoming evidence from the public and professionals with an understanding of the EU’s operations (Vletter-van, & Helene, 2012). Organizing parliamentary committees and the lower government tiers; the corporate world civil society, other interested individuals and or organizations with knowledge in each area would be involved in the audit can be a daunting task. The government is expecting representatives from the motor industry to provide evidence about product standards in the EU; NGOs to express their opinions about environmental policies; and security experts to talk about the most effective ways of curbing cotemporary security threats. On the other hand, proponents of the move by the UK government have pointed out that it is a positive step to not only enlighten the British people on the European Union laws, but engage them in charting a positive cause for their own country in the greater European society (Wilding, 2012; Gurfinkiel, 2005). According to Costello (2012), if the reform takes effect, the British society would take the credit for championing reform not only within the state but internationally as well. Conclusion Generally, the UK government intends to implement an audit assessing the impact of European Union regulations on the country. The primary issues that have attracted the government’s anger and where it feels its authority is being undermined by the powerful EU body include; justice and law enforcement; the application of employment law, especially on the recommended employee hours of service; the financial sector and regional policy implementation. The UK government believes that with a thorough audit of the impacts of the EU laws on its various sectors, it would achieve accurate facts on to how to press for the reform of the EU laws to reduce government budgets, and the bureaucracy as well as put a stop to the current state of external interference in issues that it believes can be best handled by nation-states. Whereas, the move is a positive step toward safeguarding the national interest, the painstaking measures that the government is expected to embark on could be interpreted as a deliberate attempt to pull out from the EU altogether. References Costello, C. 2012. Human Rights and the Elusive Universal Subject: Immigration Detention Under International Human Rights and EU Law. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies,19 (1), pp257-303. Gurfinkiel, M. 2005. Europe's "No." Commentary, 120(1), pp39-45. Kramer, D.B., Xu, S., & Kesselheim, A.S. 2012. How Does Medical Device Regulation Perform in the United States and the European Union? A Systematic Review. PLoS Medicine, 9(7), pp1-10. Rostron, J. 2006. Integrated pollution prevention and control: A review of English and European Union Law and Regulation. Environmental Quality Management, 16(2), pp61-72. Vletter-van D., & Helene, M. 2012. Some Challenges Facing European Central Banks as Supervising Authority. European Company & Financial Law Review, 9(2), pp131-155. Wilding, P. 2012. The time has come: William Hague to launch full 'audit' of EU law. Retrieved from . [Accessed Oct. 30, 2012]. Read More