The EU in-out question of Great Britain – Debate at St. John’s College, Portsmouth
The EU debate, that took place 11 February 2013 at St. John’s College in Portsmouth, considered whether Great Britain should stay-in or stay-out of the EU. Since Prime Minister David Cameron’s speech on 23 January 2013 in which he suggested an in/out referendum in 2017, debates surrounding Great Britain’s “europeaness” have gained a lot of media attention. The debate was commenced by Nigel Farage MEP, the fiercely anti- EU leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), and as his adversary there was Roy Perry, a member of the Conservative Party and former MEP. The debate gave the politicians an opportunity to promote their points of view, to criticise the opponent’s opinions and finally to win over the audience. Also the audience was welcomed to comment on the politician’s declarations. This last dimension of the debate created a highly explosive cocktail, but it also turned it into a real and interesting debate. The strength of the two politicians in holding speeches, in facing confrontations and in reaching and convincing the audience with their arguments was, unfortunately, not equally balanced. While Farage argued in a clear, loud and demanding voice, supporting his arguments with intense body language, Perry countered in a calm, distanced and advisory tone, as one would expect from a patient grand-father, hardly heard or accepted by the audience.
The eurosceptic Nigel Farage, who was compared to Hitler by one audient because of his radical opinions and forceful way of speaking –was of the opinion that GB should leave the political EU. He tried to convince the audience that they had been told “lies” and were “tricked” when they voted for a continued membership of the European Economic Community in the 1975 referendum. According to him, people were led to believe they were voting for an economic “common market”, a “free trade area”, while in truth the membership signified a political and economic “customs union”, leading towards the unwanted “United States of Europe”. With the upcoming referendum in 2017, Farage believes, the British establishment is trying to “cheat us once again”, forcing people towards an “ever closer union, whose currency is the Euro”. For this reason, Farage stressed that British citizens have to raise their voices and say “NO” to the EU in 2017. On the other hand he also tried to point out that he is not anti-European at all, that he still wants to trade with Europe, but in a democratic way, which to him requires a separation from the political Union. He referred to the loss of sovereignty that the country suffers, as 75% of all British laws are created in Brussels according to him. Since he claims that this is destroying the country’s democracy, Farage wants Great Britain to leave the European Union. He does not see an advantage for Britain’s future economy in Europe, because the country’s “exports to the EU only account for a small amount and now figures are even declining”, he explained. Only Germany will benefit from trade with the EU, while Britain’s future lies in the rest of the world and in the Commonwealth, with its common culture and language. In the EU, Farage said, Britain will not have a voice because the “overregulated EU with its 27 unelected bureaucrats place the country in a permanent minority anyway”. Everything that happens in Brussels will affect the country and its citizens and, therefore, Great Britain should rather make its own rules. Nonetheless, he claimed to be in favour of international cooperation, such as the membership with NATO, where participation is “voluntary”. The EU to him however, is not cooperation but an “assimilation” that does not allow control over immigration to this already “overcrowded island”, especially from Eastern EU countries. The leader of UKIP furthermore argued that membership of the EU is too expensive, calling it “a waste of money” and explaining that GB’s contribution has raised up to £50 million per day, despite that the EU budget was reduced in February 2012.
In contrast, MEP Roy Perry clearly supports the membership of the UK in the European Union. Although the predominantly eurosceptic audience did not support him very much, he raised a few, highly qualified arguments. Firstly, Perry explained that, having taken part in the 1975 referendum himself, it was obvious this would lead to more than just a free trade area, namely an economic area. With the signing of the ‘Single European Act’ (SEA) in 1986, Margaret Thatcher paved the way for a successful economy, which now belongs to the most prosperous economic block in the world. Perry compared Cameron’s speech with the one of Thatcher from 1988, when the Iron Lady argued that Britain did not dream of an isolated existence, but that the country’s destiny lay in Europe as a part of the Community. Similarly Cameron this year stated, that “Great Britain shall play an active role in the EU”. Then, Perry referred to the US’s interests, which according to him clearly support a strong UK within a strong Europe. Another argument of Perry’s was the power of diplomatic skills instead of military ones. In response to Ferage’s claims of a constraining membership in the EU, Perry describes the EU as a “free Union of talk and agreements” and that an opt-out would bring about “nasty consequences”. The UK would find itself outside of the decision making process, but it would still be affected, regardless of membership status. Great Britain’s voice would be ignored completely, and in addition to being a permanent minority, this would end the country’s influence forever. In Perry’s point of view, the UK’s chances of surviving without the EU are “unrealistic”. On the contrary, he finally asserted, the EU is of “benefit to our children who can live in a free and prosperous country”.
In conclusion, if this particular debate with its audience is any indication of what the general British stance on the stay-in/stay-out question is right now, it suggested a clear tendency towards opting-out of the European Union. Nigel Farage obviously enjoyed the consent from the majority of the audience with his rather narrow-minded arguments and his strong and loud dictions, although a small minority confronted him with apathy. Roy Perry did not succeed in reaching the listeners with his few albeit good points, perhaps due to his reluctant and conservative demeanour, or maybe it was simply because he did not say what the audience wanted to hear. All in all, it was a very enthusiastic debate, which presented the pros and cons of the British membership in the European Union, although the outcome of the referendum in 2017 was left an open question.
You may also like
Written by Kirsten Grastorff
Archives
Calendar
M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |