If Britain chose to leave the European Union, it would not only have an effect inside the UK, but also on the rest of Europe. In the final month of the referendum campaign, we will be featuring comments from some of Europe’s Ambassadors to the UK on how they view a potential Brexit. Daniel Mulhall, Ireland’s Ambassador, writes on why he hopes Britain will remain in the European Union.
Why is it that Ireland has a firm view about the upcoming UK referendum on EU membership? It is because this is a major watershed moment for the UK and for the European Union of which Ireland is, and will continue to be, a committed member.
In Ireland, we do not have a say in the coming referendum (except that British people in Ireland and Irish people in Britain do have a vote on 23 June), but we do have a view and, as friendly neighbours, it is incumbent on us to let our position be known. We would not be good neighbours if we failed to express the very real concerns we have about the risks and potential consequences for Ireland and Europe of a British exit from the EU.
As someone with a deep interest in European history, I can see that the past 70 years have been one of the most peaceful periods Europeans have ever experienced. Today’s Europe is also a notably prosperous part of the world and the EU can, I believe, claim at least some of the credit for this. Furthermore, there are no guarantees about our future and, in my view, it makes far more sense for Europeans to band together in pursuit of shared interests instead of going their separate ways with all of the risks a British exit will entail.
In my long experience of EU affairs, I do not recognise the European Union as a nascent super state. The fact is that the EU can only deepen its integration with the unanimous approval of its 28 Member States including Ireland and the UK. Under Article 49 of the Treaty on European Union, any further enlargement of the EU will also require every member of the current Union to agree. This means that all 28 have a veto over the entry of any new members.
The charge often levelled against the EU that it is bureaucratically driven does not square with my own experience. All key EU decisions are taken by politicians with electoral mandates – Government Ministers meeting in the Council of Ministers and democratically-elected members of the European Parliament. National parliaments also have a role to play in overseeing EU legislation. Furthermore, some of the key issues of public policy – health, education, social welfare, personal taxation, justice and defence – are dealt with solely or almost exclusively at the national level.
As far as sovereignty is concerned, our view is that effective sovereignty is enhanced by being pooled at the EU level. We have always been comfortable with the concept of pooled sovereignty, which, it seems to me, is more valid than ever in a world where so many issues are clearly best dealt with by means of concerted action.
EU membership has been very good for Ireland, enabling us to strengthen and diversify our economy and attract high quality inward investment. It has also been good for our relations with the UK, which have never been stronger than they are today. We have learned to understand each other better and to value the many things we have in common. We would miss the UK around the EU table if it were to decide to leave.
Membership has also had a positive impact on North-South ties in Ireland, having brought about the open border that exists today to the benefit of both parts of Ireland. The EU has also been supportive of the Northern Ireland peace process, providing valuable funding and encouragement.
The evidence is mounting – from the IMF, the OECD, the UK Treasury, the Bank of England and others – to the effect that a UK exit would damage the UK, EU and international economies. Ireland cannot expect to be untouched by this kind of development as our economic ties with the UK are vitally important to us. Trade and investment flows between us, which are facilitated by EU membership, benefit both our economies very substantially.
Two-way trade between Ireland and the UK reached €65 billion in 2015 and its volume is growing steadily. Our Economic and Social Research Institute has warned that our trade with the UK could be reduced by 20% or more as a result of the impact of a UK exit. Any significant curtailment of our trading links would hurt both countries and threaten jobs and prosperity on both sides of the Irish Sea.
My conclusion is that a UK exit from the EU carries many risks – for Ireland, for our relations with the UK, for North-South ties in Ireland and for Europe. The current open border between North and South in Ireland could not be guaranteed to continue unchanged in a post-Brexit scenario. In the event of the UK leaving, we would also miss the productive partnership we have developed within the EU, where our two countries have discovered that we have very similar approaches to many of the issues on the EU policy agenda. It would, therefore, be a great pity if Ireland and the UK were to find ourselves pushed apart as a consequence of a UK exit from the EU.
As a country that has committed its future to membership of the European Union, we hope that our nearest neighbours will continue to accompany us on that journey of partnership within the EU that has served us both so well this past 43 years and that has helped promote peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland.
Please read our comments policy before commenting.
Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy, nor of the London School of Economics.
Shortened URL for this post: http://bit.ly/22o7HPw
_________________________________
Daniel Mulhall
Daniel Mulhall is Ireland’s Ambassador in London. He is available on Twitter @DanMulhall
What a rosy view of the EU !
And yet another piece of unfounded scare-mongering.
“The evidence is mounting – from the IMF, the OECD, the UK Treasury, the Bank of England and others – to the effect that a UK exit would damage the UK, EU and international economies “
“Evidence” ? What “evidence”?
These are unknowable predictions, based on worst possible scnarios.
Garbage in – garbage out !
The Author cites the ESRI:
“Our Economic and Social Research Institute has warned that our trade with the UK could be reduced by 20% or more as a result of the impact of a UK exit. “
Let’s look at ESRI assumptions:
i) ESRI says:
“increased trade barriers for the most important products would have a particularly significant impact on total trade volumes”
Why assume trade barriers ?
Will French wine-growers and German car-makers lobby for barriers?
Why would the EU which exports twice as much to the UK as it imports risk disrupting an important market? It makes no sense.
ii) ESRI says:
“If the electricity market in Britain remains independent of the rest of the EU,
enhanced interconnection with Britain would leave Ireland vulnerable to any
problems in the British market”
Interconnection is a fact of geography – not the EU.
If ROI wants to diversify its connections to reduce risk of “problems” – it should do so regardless of the UK’s EU membership.
iii) This one is pathetic !
“More broadly, the imposition of passport controls at the border with Northern Ireland would be at best inconvenient and at worst a worryingly regressive step in terms of facilitating cooperation between both parts of the island. “
For historic reasons of language, culture and proximity, the UK and ROI have shared much – including the right of ROI citizens to vote in UK General Elections (a right not reciprocated ?)
Because ROI and NI share an island, passport controls can be more relaxed.
The UK leaving the EU will change none of this – unless ROI joins Schengen or there is a secuty scare.
I respect the comments but I think they are flawed and as a people we have the right to decide.
For me the issues are far more detailed and specific. I really want to vote Remain but will vote to leave. In large part the Remain campaign has persuaded me. The following are my reasons but they ARE NOT in priority order:
Security: I think it is complete rubbish to suggest that security and peace is dependent on the UK being in the EU. Firstly, I think NATO should be a more important organisation for security and peace. Secondly and very importantly (in so many ways), if we leave the EU then either (1) our politicians should be able to almost immediately reach agreement for information sharing, arrest warrants, etc. (it is in our mutual interest so there should be no issues with this) or (2) if that isn’t possible then imho our Politicians should not be in their jobs and are incompetent. If we have competent politicians (in the UK AND THE EU) and the UK leaves then they should be able to easily agree arrangements for peace and security or they aren’t (imo) doing their jobs properly.
Immigration: I enjoy being in a multicultural society. I love diversity. I have no problem with the concept of immigration. HOWEVER, for me it isn’t about the individuals. It is about the affect on the Country. I am a conservationist who loves the countryside. I simply do not think that we can sustain building a medium size city every year indefinitely. Net immigration of 250k-300k+ per year is equivalent to building a city the size of Derby EVERY YEAR just to support immigration (in addition to domestic demand). In an interview with the BBC Hilary Benn (Labour Remain) said that the problem wasn’t with immigration and essentially said any level of immigration was good but said that the problem was merely our ability to build enough houses. I could disagree more fundamentally. I do not want to live in a Country where the countryside is decimated by urbanisation. In addition, immigration has got to a level where it is corrosive on communities, services and the overall net happiness of the nation (perhaps I should move to Bhutan). Perhaps the rest of Europe simply does not understand these issues because they are not face with them themselves. I would prefer politics that priorities gross national happiness rather than purely focusing on economic wealth. The immigration not only contributes to the destruction of countryside and affects communities and services but significantly exacerbates house prices and the lack of affordable housing.
EU and decision making: I believe that the EU is fundamentally broken. I also think that the deal that David Cameron got it largely gloss and worthless. It isn’t in a treaty and in most part isn’t binding. In addition, it includes important provisions that are time limited and will therefore simply expire in a few years and are therefore irrelevant. Fundamentally, I don’t think the EU is able to make good and effective decisions. How many times has the EU Parliament voted to stop the monthly trips to Strasbourg but these decisions by the Parliament have been overridden by one nation. The inability to properly reform (let alone scrap) the Common Agricultural Policy is another example of the EU’s inability work effectively.
Euro and Federalism: I think it is inevitable that the EU has to adopt a completely federal structure. Even if there is more than one currency (ie the UK retains Sterling) I believe that the decisions already taken, which aren’t going to be reversed, require a federal structure and common economic and social policies. I simply don’t have any confidence in the EU’s ability to create a stable fair democratic federal solution for the whole of Europe. At present youth unemployment in Mediterranean Europe is between 40% and 50% and the Euro Zone has accepted this as a cost of its policies and own ambition. The latter I think is one of my main subjective grips; that the political elite in Europe are vested in their own vision of the EU rather than the people and will try deliver that vision whatever the cost and irrespective of real merit. The fact that TTIP was being negotiated in private reflects a politics that refuses to be open and only when elements of TTIP were leaked did the EU agree to limited consultation. That does not reflect an organisation that is democratic, open and represents the people. If you are scared of criticism and debate, then it does not bode well for the future. Also, the EU is, if anything, becoming more protectionist, less free market, less democratic. The threats to the UK people that the EU political elite will “punish” the UK people if we vote to leave and will delay or deny free trade just re-enforces that. I simply do not want to be part of something that operates by fear, threat and intimidation. If the EU had said “We’ll respect the UK decision and do everything possible to quickly conclude a free trade deal if you leave because that’s in everyone’s interests” I would have actually been more likely to vote Remain. I feel politics has to change and at present the EU reflects much that is bad (TTIP, CAP, threats to punish the UK, youth unemployment…).
Technology Revolution and Technological Unemployment: As widely predicted by experts, I believe that we are about to experience a technology revolution that will profoundly change employment and will create far higher levels of employment. Potentially it also puts massive power in the hands of corporations and we therefore need our politicians to act for the people not the corporations in order to ensure protection and balance. In the next decade or so we’ll see massive changes to employment. I don’t believe many people realise how substantial and significant this will be. I do believe that an independent UK will be more able to fairly and democratically not only deal with this but see it as an opportunity. I have significant concerns about the EU’s ability to simultaneously deal with the massive problems with the Euro, deal with social economic issues within the EU and deal with Technological Unemployment having already created 50% youth unemployment in some areas. Thus I think there are substantial risk to remaining in the EU and significant opportunity is we leave.
House Prices and UK Economy: I believe that the risks of staying in the EU are not being really debated in the Brexit debate. However, I believe that staying in the EU represents substantial risk. I believe that the EU has to go to a federal structure and I believe that there are significant economic risks in the EU and Euro and the UK will be exposed to them and is already a major net financial contributor to the EU. In addition, the Remain campaign has tried to scaremonger people by suggesting that house prices may not rise as quickly if we leave the EU compared to us remaining. GOOD I want to leave because house prices are already too high, there is a lack of affordable housing and this has a negative effect on national happiness and society. However, that immediate response aside; part of the net immigration to the UK is economic migration and that will continue for some time if the UK remains in the EU. One scenario is that the EU/Euro suffers major economic problems and (if we remain) immigration to the UK continues for the long term. However, assuming that the EU gets its finances and economies working then wages in Eastern Europe will risk, Euro Zone unemployment will decrease and the incentive for financial immigration will reduce and eventually be nominal (or even negative – ie large numbers of Brits start to move to Europe for economic reasons). If that happens the crash in house prices will be even more dramatic than some modest adjustment in house prices now because of Brexit. In addition the UK would face net emigration of its economically active population and so risks a major financial crisis. The fact that the Euro Zone has accepted 50% youth employment in some areas suggests (for me) that the EU would stand by and not do anything meaningful to help the UK in these circumstances and would simply take the gain in other parts of the EU.