The UK and Europe
Part Two: from 1957 till today
The European Economic
Community (1957-1993)
• The revolutionary aspect of the Common Market was not
just about suppressing tariffs but also about ensuring the
free circulation of goods, services and people barely
twelve years after the end of the Second World War and
in the midst of the Cold War.
• From 1958 onwards, French President Charles de
Gaulle worked to put the Franco-German axis at the
centre of the EEC, taking advantage of his good
relationships with West German Chancellor Konrad
Adenauer, a Christian-Democrat from Cologne. FrancoGerman reconciliation became official with the signing of
the Elysée Treaty in 1963.
More than just an economic union
• The European Economic Community – which became
the European Union (EU) in 1993 – was not simply an
economic and commercial organisation since its
architecture was based on a reinforced version of three
institutions which had been created at the time of the
ECSC in 1952:
• an executive body (The European Commission)
• a parliamentary body (The European Parliament, which
had got only a consultative role)
• and a judicial body (The Court of Justice of the
European Communities).
The basic tension
• The creation of European institutions shows that the
‘founding fathers’ of the ECSC already had a political
Europe in mind.
• From the start, the EEC represented a compromise
between those who favoured supranationalism (that is
to say a federal Europe) and those who preferred
intergovernmentalism: some domains allowed the use
of qualified majority voting while matters involving
national sovereignty demanded unanimity. This
constituted in itself the promise of future clashes
between pro-Europeans and Eurosceptics. Europhiles
supported political integration (transfers of sovereignty
to superior institutions) while Eurosceptics were only in
favour of cooperation between sovereign countries.
That opposition seems less valid
today
• Even though the opposition between supranationalism
and intergovernmentalism may have been perfectly valid
in the fifties and sixties, it has become largely debatable
considering the hybrid character of the European
Union. Today the distinction between ‘soft power’ and
‘hard power’ seems more acceptable.
• Policies are coordinated at the EU level and at the state
level to obtain maximum efficiency and the best possible
fundings.
The British position
• At the end of the fifties and at the beginning of the
sixties, the Conservatives – who were in power – were
more enthusiastic than Labour politicians about joining
the Common Market.
• While Conservative politicians under Prime Minister
Harold Macmillan (1957-1963) were enticed by what
they perceived as being a way of promoting free trade
and capitalism in Europe, Labour politicians were put off
by the fact that joining the EEC would have meant giving
up favourable commercial ties with Commonwealth
countries.
• Indeed, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) meant
that British consumers would have to pay more for
European – especially French – products because their
prices were guaranteed.
A change in some Labourites’
attitude
• However, when Harold Wilson came to power in October
1964, he chose not to oppose Britain’s possible future
membership of the EEC.
• However, Charles de Gaulle refused to let the United
Kingdom enter the EEC twice, in 1963 and in 1967,
because he feared it would act as a ‘Trojan horse’ of
the United States.
• Fortunately for the British, his successor – Georges
Pompidou – was better disposed towards them and he
was greatly helped by the personality of Wilson’s
Conservative successor, Edward Heath (1970-1974),
who was a staunch pro-European.
Britain’s entry into the EEC (1973)
• In 1972 Pompidou organised a referendum and the
French approved the United Kingdom’s admission into
the EEC (alongside The Republic of Ireland and
Denmark), which became effective on January 1st,
1973.
• At that time, it was considered that British public opinion
was rather pro-European, but that changed with
Margaret Thatcher’s ascension to the post of Leader of
the Conservative Party in 1975, then to that of Prime
Minister in 1979.
The Thatcher Years (1979-1990)
• At first, Margaret Thatcher was very hostile towards the
EEC because she believed more in the transatlantic
relationship and believed European integration was
dangerous for British national sovereignty. This was a
problem in matters which required unanimity.
• However, she came to realise that being part of the EEC
was beneficial for the UK and represented a good way to
fight against Communism and, in 1986, she signed the
Single European Act (SEA), which transformed the
Common Market into a Single Market and made the
unity of Western Europe even stronger.
What Margaret Thatcher refused
• Yet she did not approve of other, more political elements
favoured by most European leaders at the time:
• In particular the Schengen Agreement, signed in 1985
and completed by a very important protocol in 1990,
which created a free-circulation area within the EEC and
then the EU. She thought that it was necessary for the
UK to be able to control its own borders.
• She was also hostile towards the transformation of the
virtual European Currency Unit (ECU) into a single
currency.
The beginning of the 1990s: a time of great
progress for the EEC, then the EU
• Margaret Thatcher was ousted from power in November
1990, too early to reject the Treaty of Maastricht, which
was negociated in December 1991 and signed in
February 1992 and which introduced the principle of that
single currency. In December 1995 it was decided that
the single currency would be called the euro.
• Her successor, John Major, who was Prime Minister
from November 1990 until May 1997, managed to get
the Treaty of Maastricht ratified in Parliament in July
1993 after having made sure the UK would not have to
adopt the single currency. After him, Tony Blair (Labour,
PM 1997-2007) led quite similar policies with a lot of
caution.
The EU today
• After the fall of communism in 1989, the USA realised
that the EEC had become an economic rival instead of
a mere protégé.
• Now, with the creation of a strong euro and the
phenomenon of industrial concentration within the EU,
America’s predominance in the Western world appears
to be somewhat challenged, and this proves to be a
strong dilemma for the United Kingdom which has
always tried to be a bridge between Europe and
America.
• However, the fall of the Iron Curtain has not had
consequences in the economic field only, but also in the
diplomatic and military fields since it has encouraged
governments and institutions to take charge in Europe.