To What Extent Is Deeper European Integration in the National Interest of Britain Today - Essay Example

Running Head: Integration in the national interest Of Britain today To what extent is deeper European integration in the national interest of Britain today [Name of the writer] [Name of the institution] To what extent is deeper European integration in the national interest of Britain today Almost every aspect f United Kingdom politics and policy-making is affected by the EU in some manner. I shall examine the concept f Europeanization and the different definitions that academics have attributed to this phrase. My discussions will then focus on areas f UK politics that have been significantly impacted by the EU such as policy-making, the judicial system and devolution and those which have been subjected to its influences to a lesser extent. 'Europeanization' defined It has been argued by Buller and Gamble that academics have been overly hasty in deciding what Europeanization is, and thus endangering the discussions on this subject with confusion and perhaps even impeding its' theoretical progression. Kassim (2000) observed that Europeanization is an "essentially contested" concept exemplified by Buller and Gamble's rejection f the five current usages f the term. In brief the different conceptions are: 1. The process f European-level institutionalisation i.e. development f institutions f governance at the European level. 2. The domestic impact f these institutions. 3. The export f European forms f political organization and governance beyond Europe. 4. The territorial expansion f Europe's (or the EU's) borders, known as enlargement. 5. The achievement f the political unification f Europe as a political ambition and the strengthening f European integration. How does the term 'Europeanization' differ from 'European integration' This is a complex theoretical debate without a definite answer. My personal opinion is that European integration focuses on the process f institution building and political integration at the European level more so whereas, the phrase Europeanization is more all encompassing and is used to analyse the dynamics f European integration, how it occurs and more importantly how it impacts on the domestic politics f member states. Some academics believe that the two definitions are interchangeable and the term Europeanization should be scrapped so as to avoid further conceptual confusion. (Smith 2003, 14-16) I think all the five definitions have some relevance in helping to conceptualise the term but I particularly think that an analysis f 1) and 2) are the two most important elements to help understand the transformations currently taking place in the EU. Combined they provide a two way analysis; 'top down' and 'bottom up' allowing us to examine the interplay between the EU system and the British polity which is said to be "characterized by complex feedback loops". These loops reflect the complex interaction f global, European, national and sub-national processes. Similarly, I have conceptualised the Europeanization f UK politics as a two-way process with a slight emphasis on the downward causation from EU to domestic structure: "a process whereby domestic politics becomes increasingly subjected to European policy-making". This is a broad yet useful definition which can focus on the EU becoming part f the 'organisational logic' or administrative practices f the UK government (Evetts 1998, 438-440; Knill, 2001) and it can also include the informal rules, beliefs, paradigms, styles, ideologies and culture that infiltrate through to the member states. I will examine the extent to which this process has occurred and look at limiting factors such as globalisation and xenophobia. The domestic impact f European-level institutions The multitude f processes and mechanisms involved in EU development mean that member states are transformed differently across domestic institutions and policy areas. Policy issues There has been increased interest in European policy implementation over the course f the 1990's. Policy implementation is a fundamental feature f any political system and the EU's capacity to implement policy is an integral part f the European policy-making process and Europeanization as a whole. The effective implementation f EU policy will have a strong bearing on its impact within the member state and makes an important contribution to the overall legitimacy f the EU. As a consequence, the improvement f implementation was laid down in the TEU 1991 saying that: "each Member State should fully and accurately transpose into national law the Community directives addressed to it within the deadlines laid down" to ensure that EU law is "applied with the same effectiveness and rigour as.... national law. (Article 226). This reflects the legal supremacy f the European Treaties, sometimes referred to as the 'acquis communitaire' over all national laws in the areas covered by the European treaties and reinforces the extent to which the UK is being europeanised. The Commission has an important role to play in ensuring that member states do not implement policy to pursue their own agendas at the expense f a general European interest. The UK has held back from giving too much responsibility to EU institutions, given their view that European integration is as much about co-operation between levels f national government as it is about top-down control. The successful 'uploading' f British policies on labour market flexibility to EU level illustrates the 'bottom up' element f co-operation. (Shutt 1998, 700-709; Hay 2005, 124-158) In policy areas that have budgetary implications for the member state (as is usually the case), the UK will have more discretion as to how the policy should be implemented. This has a limiting effect on the power f EU institutions upon national policy and the process f Europeanization. Key policy developments such as privatisation, the restructuring f the health and education services are still largely dominated by national government rather than EU. However, policy makers in Westminster and Whitehall recognise that it must be compatible with European norms. Legal issues and the judicial system Law is one f the key instruments used to realise the objectives f Europeanization and the ECJ have continuously emphasised the importance f interpreting and applying Community law in a uniform way and ultimately this will have the effect f bringing the UK towards an ever closer union. The ECJ has been working closely with UK courts to help clarify EU law and requests for preliminary rulings by the national courts (these are rulings by the ECJ to assist the national court to arrive at a judgement) have increased significantly. (Howe 2002, 1027-1038) Indirect implementation is the most common form f implementing European law and policy; it is a lengthy two-step process. Implementing European legislation often requires repealing domestic laws (if they clash with EU legislation) before they are approved by national parliaments. This is because EU law takes precedence over national law (the doctrine f supremacy), even in the UK where home courts may not challenge their own parliaments' laws. This clearly illustrates how the English judicial system and our legislative process is increasingly subject to influences from the EU. (Carl 2003, 475-500) Direct implementation involves the Commission having substantial authority for 'common policies' covering areas such as humanitarian aid programmes, common fisheries policy and assistance to Central and Eastern Europe. One f the key areas where direct implementation occurs is competition policy where the Commission can have direct impact on decisions that firms my take with regard to restrictive practices or mergers. British trade policy is another area that is more or less wholly europeanised as the principles f the single market demands regulation at the supranational level. The doctrine f direct effect means that certain Regulations and Decisions do not have to be approved by national legislatures before it is applied so there is minimal input from Parliament. This is seen to threaten Parliamentary sovereignty but is an inevitable and accepted consequence f European institutionalisation and one which has significant legal as well as political ramifications. (Dorn 2004, 533-550; Kilpatrick 1998, 120-121) However, it appears that for the past few years the EU is more sympathetic to Member State's different historical experiences, geopolitical interests and socio-economic structures. This is illustrated in 'Europe a la carte' (a method f differentiated integration), which allows member states to pick and choose their European policies in the face f increasing heterogeneity f the EU. The UK has supported this notion in certain policy areas which reflects our reluctance to transfer sovereignty to the EU level. This is most evident on the EMU issue where Britain and Denmark were allowed to opt-out highlighting the limited extent f enforced Europeanization. Devolution The doctrine f subsidiarity marked the EU's first attempt to focus on the growth f sub-national politics in national jurisdictions. The doctrine f subsidiarity (the principle that power should be exercised at as low a level f political organisation as possible i.e. the national or sub-national) has been a useful argument for the Scottish, Welsh and the Northern Irish to support their aspirations to have devolved governments. (Wathern 1988, 95-104) The European Commission encouraged the development f regions in the EU and in 1992 a Committee f the Regions was set up in Brussels. The effect was further transference f powers from member states to European institutions. This has had a dramatic effect on the British political constitution. Political parties The future direction f European integration have become vital issues in UK political life. Different ideas and opinions about EU issues have sometimes divided parties; exemplified by the Jenkins resignation in 1972, the abandonment f collective responsibility in 1975, the split in the Labour Party which led to the formation f the SDP in 1981. The formation f the UK Independence Party concerned with the single issue f the EU is evidence f how significant a political theme it is. Further examples include Margaret Thatcher's stance on Europe which lead to her decline and John Major can attribute part f his leadership victory on his promise to unite the party over Europe. Now, Tony Blair is faced with the ubiquitous and hugely controversial issue f when UK should join EMU. European issues are ever present. (Gore 2004, 123-141) National identity and EU support The Euro scepticism which exists in the UK may appear as a sideline issue to whether the UK is undergoing a process f Europeanization, but one cannot underestimate the importance f the political arena's culture and the ensuing willingness for the British people to embrace the European project. The 'Europhobia' which exists is partly incensed by the media, partly the UK politicians and an element f British snobbery; together this hinders sensible debate on EU issues. The appalling turn out at European Parliamentary elections 1999 highlight the lack f inspiration that Europe inspires. The European Commission's own opinion polls in December 2003 showed that less than half f EU citizens (48%) agreed that their country's membership was beneficial, the lowest level ever recorded. This proves that British sentiment is not isolated. Wallace (1999) observes: "..... while extensive penetration f domestic institutions by the EU is taking place in some spheres, there are also many examples f protected spaces, stubborn resistance and non-penetration. Goetz is a proponent f the idea that European level changes are just one amongst several drivers f domestic change and distinguishing the effects f globalisation and Europeanization are proving quite a challenge. It has been observed that even a form f Americanisation has crept into British social policy (e.g. welfare to work). Since 1997 the Blair administration has cited globalisation rather than European integration as the decisive constraint on policy choice. This is partly to appease the 'Europhobes'. The revival in nationalism and ethnic-based identities may represent a major source f potential resistance to Europeanization. With such concerns brimming, a European Convention was convened in 2001 to think more openly about the functions f the EU and a draft European Convention 2002 was drawn up. The UK, in particular Jack Straw (then Foreign Secretary) advanced its vision f the EU as an intergovernmental body rather than a federal super-state. This slightly cautious approach reinforces Britain as the 'awkward partner' in the EU and its guarded stance on the process f Europeanization. The British would support Radaelli's definition f this process as a non-convergence model that retains national diversity "albeit under changed conditions and in a new form". Conclusion Membership f the EU has changed the way in which the conventional institutions f national government operate. The implications for our political system are massive as seen by the many impacts which have been discussed. The British political system and even style is seen by many to be on a convergence path with Europe - from more devolved structures f government to more consensual politics, a greater emphasis on human rights and independence f institutions such as the Bank f England; these are just the tip f the iceberg. However, the relatively unitary character f the British state remains an important shaper f the character f Europeanization in the UK. Thus, established national patterns are resistant but also flexible enough to cope with changes at European level. Finally, with EU integration taking place at differentiated levels there is the possibility that the future f the EU will consist f a core group f highly integrated states (especially those in EMU) and secondary groups such as the UK and Denmark whom have always viewed European integration as a matter f co-operation rather than a transfer f power to a supranational authority. Despite this, however protective the UK tries to be with its domestic political system (most recently witnessed by our lukewarm response to the European Constitution) it seems that further Europeanization is inevitable. It seems to be the case that national professional associations are having to put greater emphasis on their own European professional societies and federations. They are required to do this in order to maintain their influence and control over regulation and to affect the legislation and directives that are developed in Europe. Thus, it is the European societies and federations (rather than the national) that are increasingly recognized by the European Commission and by EU institutions and law development agencies in the framing f drafts and agreements. Consequently, the authority f these European bodies is increasing and is called upon by the national associations in attempts to limit and confine the remit f EU directives. The increasing influence f the European bodies can also be demonstrated by recognizing the limitations f legal instruments such as directives. Directives (e.g. on mutual recognition f initial education) can never be more than a broad-brush, a pointer and a guide. This leaves the detailed work, the negotiations and the compromises, to be done in other contexts. The European professional societies and federations are the most likely fora for such negotiations and, indeed, it is under their auspices that the detailed work on mutual recognition f initial qualifications, and on quality assurance and equivalence with respect to CPD, is being done. Clearly the negotiations are on-going and agreements are subject to adaptation (as the EuroEta development indicates), and national licensing arrangements are bound to be affected (as the UK Engineering Council's SARTOR changes illustrate). These European negotiations and agreements inevitably produce tensions and disagreements within national professional institutions. There are important and legitimate concerns about loss f sovereignty, and loss f control over licensing and quality assurance. The foremost concerns are perhaps the fears about loss f autonomous decision-making, along with anxieties about the possible decline f national professional standards f entry and continuing expertise. An associated concern is how much power should be allocated to European societies and federations such as SEFI and FEANI. At the moment, these bodies at most monitor only national standards; their role is advisory and to produce recommendations. In engineering there is a plethora f international bodies that are consultative and discussion groups. None are regulatory bodies as such; they have no sanctions, only persuasion. They are, however, a forum from which regulatory needs (such as CPD) have and will continue to emerge and where possible solutions might be developed. Agreements and recommendations produced by these European bodies do have significant advantages (particularly in comparison with European directives), however. Their work on the detail f international agreements (as with CPD) with fellow professionals means they are more likely to produce consensus agreements. These agreements are field-specific, and because they are produced by experienced professional practitioners (in this case, engineers) they are more likely to command acceptance in the professional community and among employers. References Carl, Jenny. European Integration and Multiple Identities: Changing Allegiances in Post-Devolution UK Perspectives on European Politics & Society, Dec2003, Vol. 4 Issue 3, p475-500 Community or Communities f Courts in European Integration Sex Equality Dialogues Between UK Courts and the ECJ. European Law Journal, Jun98, Vol. 4 Issue 2, p121 Containing Reform: The UK Stance On The European Community Eia Directive. Policy Studies Review, Autumn88, Vol. 8 Issue 1, p95-104 Continuing professional development for engineers: UK and European dynamics. European Journal f Engineering Education, Dec98, Vol. 23 Issue 4, p443 Dorn, Nicholas., UK Policing f Drug Traffickers And Users: Policy Implementation In The Contexts f National Law, European Traditions, International Drug Conventions And Security After 2001. Journal f Drug Issues, Summer2004, Vol. 34 Issue 3, p533-550 Gore, Tony. The Open Method f Coordination and Policy Mainstreaming: The European Employment Strategy and Regional Conversion Programmes in the UK. European Planning Studies, Jan2004, Vol. 12 Issue 1, p123-141 Hay, Colin; Smith, Nicola., Horses for Courses The Political Discourse f Globalisation and European Integration in the UK and Ireland. West European Politics, Jan2005, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p124-158 Howe, Joe; White, Iain.The Potential Implications f the European Union Water Framework Directive on Domestic Planning Systems: A UK Case Study. European Planning Studies, Dec2002, Vol. 10 Issue 8, p1027-1038 Shutt, John; Colwell, Adrian. Towards 2006: European Union Regional Policy and UK Local Government: A New Regional Agenda. European Planning Studies, 1998, Vol. 6 Issue 6, p700-709 Smith, Michael L.Creating a New Space: UK European Studies Programmes at the Crossroads. Journal f Contemporary European Studies, May2003, Vol. 11 Issue 1, p14-16 Read More