The EU Referendum

As part of the Conservative party’s manifesto, a referendum on the topic of EU membership of the UK will be held before the end of 2017. David Cameron is now suggesting that this could occur later this year. There are pros and cons to both sides of the argument and the opinion polls show that Britain is very evenly divided, so the outcome of this referendum remains unclear. But what would leaving the EU mean for the UK and why is a referendum even taking place?

When it was announced by the Conservatives that a referendum would take place, David Cameron promised that changes within the EU for the benefit of the UK would first be sought. These changes were suggested to target what Britons were worried about with the EU and which led to demands for a referendum in the first place. So, at the EU summit in December, David Cameron asked the other member states for reforms in four areas. These were: that immigrants to the UK from the EU would not be given benefits until they had lived here for four years (this has proved to be problematic, as it requires a treaty change); that individual parliaments of the member states should be given greater control enabling them to block EU legislation; recognition that currencies other than the Euro exist within the EU and that the UK would be allowed to opt out of closer union of the European people. Cameron hopes that a deal will be decided upon in February, but so soon seems unlikely. For one, many of the Eastern European countries did not like that their workers would be paid less for their work than a British citizen and believe that this would be discriminatory.

In the latest opinion polls, it seems that Britons narrowly favour leaving the EU. 40% questioned said that they supported leaving, 38% supported remaining a member, 16% are undecided and 6% said that they would not vote. But why do people want to leave? What are the benefits? Many people believe that the billions of pounds of membership fees for the EU is not worth it and gives us few benefits. Also, groups such as Ukip want the UK to have greater control about the number of migrants coming here to work. One benefit of leaving would be that the rules and regulations decided by the EU regarding trade, agriculture and industry would no longer restrict the UK and more relevant ones for the UK could be put in place. This has been seen previously in Norway and they now have greater freedom in this matter.

However, there are many risks involved with an EU exit, which has been dubbed a ‘Brexit’. It is estimated that this could lead to a 2.2% decline in GDP, as Britain would no longer be able to benefit from free trade in Europe. Therefore, trading overseas could become both more difficult and more expensive. Additionally, a reduce in immigration would reduce the number of workers that employers have to choose from, most of whom are keen and help to fuel economic growth. Nick Clegg argues that 3 million jobs depend on Britain’s involvement in the EU. Others believe that a ‘Brexit’ would lessen Britain’s military influence and general status in both Europe and the world.

I believe, however, that the greatest risk in leaving the EU is that there is no clear plan of what would happen if this occurs. It is all fine to say what is bad about the EU, but Britons are not able to evaluate the alternative, as there isn’t really one yet. We have been a part of the EU since 1973, and we shall have to wait for the outcome of the referendum, to see if we will be for much longer.

AE

Vote at 16?

Should the voting age be lowered to 16?  The issue is back on the agenda as Alex Salmond is keen for 16-17 year olds to take part in the Scottish Referendum in 2014.

This rather bad-tempered article from the Guardian suggests there is little point in doing so, as "young people" are too involved in their personal lives to bother to vote.

"At a time when the non-voting habit, civil disengagement, is creeping upwards towards 30...I see little point in making the turnout figures even worse by inviting 16-year-olds to join an election party most of them won't want to attend."
Do you agree with this analysis? What can be done to stop apathy amongst young voters? Please let us know.
PS: Here is the official "Votes at 16" campaign's website.

AV Referendum tomorrow

The Referendum is nearly upon as, as are the elections for the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly, Northern Ireland Assembly and English local councils. This BBC page is a helpful one-stop shop for analysis of what is taking place, including Jeremy Vine's short video guide with the usual whizzy graphics. If you missed them, here are the campaign broadcasts for the Yes and No campaigns for the referendum.

This is another attempt to explain AV to the wider public and here is BBC3's attempt to debate the subject with young voters (and Richard Bacon).

How do you think it's all going to turn out? Please let us have your predictions!

Electoral results

An election and referendum result in one day! The Barnsley Central By-election was won by Labour with 61% of the vote, up from 50% at the General Election 2010. The Liberal Democrats were pushed into sixth place which will obviously leave Nick Clegg with some questions from his party. Two different interpretations of the results: one from the Guardian lauding the success of the Labour Party and one from the Telegraph delighting in the Liberal Democrats' humiliation.
The Welsh Referendum on whether to devolve further powers to the Assembly was successful with 63% voting yes. This will mean that the Assembly has direct law-making powers in twenty areas including health and education. See the BBC's site for more information and for what it might mean for the future of the Welsh Assembly.

Zac Goldsmith - An Insider's View

One of Nonsuch HP's correspondents recently attended a meeting between Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith and his local constituents. The meeting raised some fascinating issues, with his attitude towards referendums and the use of Parliament being of particular interest to AS Politics students. Many thanks for BM for providing this - here is her report...

Zac Goldsmith, Tory MP for Richmond Park & North Kingston, speaks about flaws in the UK’s democratic system.
On Thursday 3rd February, Zac Goldsmith came to talk to his constituents at a local church. I along with around 30 others attended to pose questions and hear the MP discuss with us important issues that affected our lives. Much of the hour long meeting was taken up discussing local issues such as the Kingston bingo hall being turned into a night club, and the new crime map system which shows levels of crime around the constituency. However as well as this, several important national issues were brought up. The privatisation of forests is a very conscientious issue, which many conservatives and liberal democrats in general discussion seemed opposed to. However when the time came for the vote, only 6 LibDem/Tory MPs voted against, Zac Goldsmith being one of them.
This led onto the point which he admirably raised about the dysfunctional nature of parliament, where MPs have lost the ability to think for themselves, being voted in and then being ‘lobotomised’ to follow the orders of those above them. As well as this, amendments offered by backbenchers are seen as being an act of hostility, leading to them generally being ignored. Zac considers Labour under Ed Miliband as being an ineffective opposition as they do not appear to be making relevant points that may actually achieve something and as a result the government is not being held to account. The fact that parliament is no longer effectively doing this has caused it in many ways to be ‘broken’.
Zac Goldsmith also discussed with us the referendum on AV, deeming it to be a waste of time, and a distraction from what the government should really be focussing on. He claims that AV would just cause a reshuffle of seats here and there, but nothing major would come from it. And what the government should instead be pushing is the idea of recalling MPs, which at the beginning seemed to be a key policy, but has appeared to have lost some vigour. This, in Zac’s view would be much more beneficial to the people, as some of the power would be given back to them. Zac also agrees that more people need to participate in elections, and this could be done through the use of referendums, creating a more direct democracy. Countries such as Switzerland are criticised for using them too much, but at least the people are having their say. This would engage people in politics as they would feel involved, as just having one vote every five or so years is not substantial.
The talk then moved to finances, with bankers and the richest of the countries being criticized for their cunning methods of paying as little tax as possible. In Goldsmith’s view, the figures that are being thrown around in the media are largely guesses and wild assumptions, and there is no real way of knowing how big the issue is. As well as this he raises the important issue that if the taxes are raised too high for the rich, it would encourage this behaviour of using offshore banks to store money, or alternatively, the rich person in question could just up and leave to another country where the tax is far lower. There is a fine line, and the government have to be very careful not to cross this line, the lower the tax, the more likely that the more elite of society are to pay it.

PS: For further Goldsmith updates, here is a link to his blog.

Brief History of Referendums

Here is a helpful 2 minute video from the BBC on Britain's previous referendums since 1973. Ed Milliband, Peter Bottomley and Simon Hughes then debate the implications and mechanics of the proposed referendum on AV here.

PS: Here is more from Nick Clegg on his proposals for Constitutional Reform

Referendum on AV

For all those concerned that they missed out voting this year and may not get another opportunity to vote in a national election before 2015, along comes another possibility - the referendum on AV! May 2010 is the most likely date at the moment but it still has to get through Parliament first.
Important in producing the coalition government, the referendum is a risk for both Cameron and Clegg, much to the potential Labour leaders' delight. An article in the Guardian analyses its risks for Clegg, the BBC looks at an overview of the issue and the Electoral Reform Society gives a good definition. What do you think? Will this be a victory for Clegg or Cameron or the Labour party? Will it actually make any difference to the fairness of the electoral system?

PS: Here is a video debate on AV by a Conservative and Lib Dem MP

The Irish decide

Today is the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. The fate of 26 other countries, all who have now ratified the Treaty, depend on Ireland's decision. Have a look at the Irish Times site here for news, background to the Treaty and comment.