DOCSLIB.ORG

The Future of the European Union: UK Government Policy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Future of the European Union: UK Government Policy House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee The future of the European Union: UK Government policy First Report of Session 2013–14 Volume II Volume II: Oral and Written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 21 May 2013 HC 87-II [Incorporating HC 115-i-iv, from Session 2012-13 Published on 11 June 2013 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £22.00 The Foreign Affairs Committee The Foreign Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and its associated agencies. Current membership Richard Ottaway (Conservative, Croydon South) (Chair) Rt Hon Bob Ainsworth (Labour, Coventry North East) Mr John Baron (Conservative, Basildon and Billericay) Rt Hon Sir Menzies Campbell (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife) Rt Hon Ann Clwyd (Labour, Cynon Valley) Mike Gapes (Labour/Co-op, Ilford South) Mark Hendrick (Labour/Co-op, Preston Sandra Osborne (Labour, Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock) Andrew Rosindell (Conservative, Romford) Mr Frank Roy (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw) Rt Hon Sir John Stanley (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling) Rory Stewart (Conservative, Penrith and The Border) The following Members were also members of the Committee during the parliament: Rt Hon Bob Ainsworth (Labour, Coventry North East) Emma Reynolds (Labour, Wolverhampton North East) Mr Dave Watts (Labour, St Helens North) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including news items) are on the internet at www.parliament.uk/facom. A list of Reports of the Committee in the present Parliament is at the front of this volume. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Kenneth Fox (Clerk), Peter McGrath (Second Clerk), Zoe Oliver-Watts (Senior Committee Specialist), Dr Brigid Fowler (Committee Specialist), Louise Glen (Senior Committee Assistant), Vanessa Hallinan (Committee Assistant), and Alex Paterson (Media Officer). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Foreign Affairs Committee, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6105; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]. The future of the European Union: UK Government policy Witnesses Tuesday 26 June 2012 Page Sir Howard Davies, Professor of Practice, Paris Institute of Political Studies Ev 1 Tuesday 10 July 2012 Charles Grant, Director, Centre for European Reform Ev 10 Mats Persson, Director, Open Europe Ev 15 Michiel van Hulten, Independent consultant and former MEP Ev 20 Tuesday 11 September 2012 Professor Patrick Minford CBE, Professor of Applied Economics, Cardiff Business School Ev 26 Wednesday 6 February 2013 Rt Hon William Hague MP, First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Simon Manley CMG, Director, Europe, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and Sir Jon Cunliffe CB, UK Permanent Representative to the EU Ev 34 The future of the European Union: UK Government policy List of written evidence 1 Dr Jóhanna Jónsdóttir, European Free Trade Association (EFTA) Secretariat Ev 51 2 Mrs Anne Palmer, JP (retired) Ev 55 3 Dr Martyn Bond, Royal Holloway University of London Ev 57 4 Sir Colin Budd KCMG Ev 60 5 Jean-Claude Piris Ev 63 6 Sir Michael Franklin KCB, CMG Ev 66 7 The Church of England, The Archbishops’ Council Ev 67 8 Professor Clive H. Church, Dr Paolo Dardanelli and Sean Mueller, Centre for Swiss Politics, University of Kent Ev 70 9 Civitatis International Ev 74 10 Graham Avery CMG Ev 77 11 Foreign and Commonwealth Office Ev 79; 83; 85 12 Nigel Farage MEP on behalf of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) Ev 99 13 Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) Ev 103 14 Liberal Democrat European Parliamentary Party Ev 107 15 Professor Michael Dougan and Dr Michael Gordon, Liverpool Law School, University of Liverpool Ev 110; 113 16 Open Europe Ev 114 17 Ruth Lea, Arbuthnot Banking Group Ev 120 18 TheCityUK Ev 123 19 Professor Richard G. Whitman, University of Kent and Chatham House, and Thomas Raines, Chatham House Ev 126 20 Professor René Schwok and Cenni Najy, University of Geneva Ev 128 21 Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Party Committee on International Affairs Ev 135 22 Professor Richard Rose FBA, University of Strathclyde and European University Institute Ev 143 23 Professor David Phinnemore, Queen’s University Belfast Ev 147 24 Dr Robin Niblett, Director, Chatham House Ev 150 25 Brendan Donnelly, Director, Federal Trust Ev 154 26 European Movement Ev 156 27 Maurice Fraser, European Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and Chatham House Ev 157 28 Nucleus Ev 161 29 Sir Peter Marshall KCMG, CVO Ev 165; 170 30 Professor Pauline Schnapper, Sorbonne Nouvelle University, Paris Ev 172 31 Business for New Europe (BNE) Ev 173 32 Lord Howell of Guildford Ev 177 33 Frank Vibert, Department of Government, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) Ev 180 34 Dr Simon Usherwood, School of Politics, University of Surrey Ev 184 35 Erna Hjaltested, European Free Trade Association (EFTA) Secretariat Ev 185 36 Dr Richard Corbett, Member of the Cabinet of Herman Van Rompuy, President of the European Council Ev 185 The future of the European Union: UK Government policy 37 HE Laetitia van den Assum, Ambassador of the Kingdom of the Netherlands Ev 189 38 VoteWatch Europe Ev 189 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SO] Processed: [06-06-2013 12:22] Job: 022929 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/022929/022929_o001_th_HC 115-i - Sir Howard Davies - Corrected TEMPLATE 26-06-12.xml Foreign Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 1 Oral evidence Taken before the Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday 26 June 2012 Members present: Richard Ottaway (Chair) Bob Ainsworth Mark Hendrick Mr John Baron Andrew Rosindell Sir Menzies Campbell Mr Frank Roy Ann Clwyd Sir John Stanley Mike Gapes Rory Stewart ________________ Examination of Witness Witness: Sir Howard Davies, Professor of Practice, Paris Institute of Political Studies, gave evidence. Q1 Chair: Sir Howard, welcome. Thank you very involves some complicated balancing acts, and it will much for coming along, it is very much appreciated. require the Government to be prepared to facilitate Members of the public, we are now switching from moves by the rest of the eurozone that we might not our report on the Commonwealth to our first evidence wish to be engaged in. So it will require us to be session for the inquiry into the future of the UK constructive in helping them to solve their problems, Government’s European Union policy. The witness is in return for remaining as associated as we can be Sir Howard Davies, who has huge experience in UK with the single market. economic policy and the international financial sector. Sir Howard, may I start proceedings with a fairly Q2 Chair: Thank you. You remember that all this broad question? What do you think should happen, in arose out of the December 2011 summit and the so far as the Government’s relations with the EU are exercise of the veto, because Britain was not offered concerned, and what do you think will happen? the safeguards that it requested from the EU. What is Sir Howard Davies: Gosh, I thought I was talking the significance of these safeguards to Britain? about the Commonwealth. I had better change tack! Exactly how important are they to us? Is there any I begin, Chair, by thanking you for the invitation to room for manoeuvre? come and by getting any statements of conflict of Sir Howard Davies: If I might question slightly your interest out of the way. I am advertised as Professor premise, Chair, I am not sure that all this did arise of Sciences Po, which is exactly what I do, and I teach because of what happened at the December summit courses on financial regulation and central banking. I actually. This is a long-running problem of a flawed am also a non-executive director of the Prudential and structure of the eurozone that is being worked out. of Morgan Stanley in New York, and I am an adviser When the eurozone was constructed, it was thought to the Government of Singapore Investment that a monetary union could be established, with a Corporation and to the Chinese banking and securities single currency and a single central bank, but with regulators—but I do not speak for any of them, of only a light-touch fiscal union in the form of the course. stability and growth pact. For a while, in benign As far as what I think should happen, my view— economic and financial conditions, that appeared to coming at this from the perspective of someone who be working. But, when stresses emerged—arising not has been involved primarily in the financial sector in originally from the eurozone—it became clear that recent years—is, I hope, that we can remain a full there was a flaw at the heart of the single currency member of the single market, because that is in our zone in that there was no ability to transfer resources national interest. I fear that if we were not, we could from the centre to the periphery and peripheral see quite a lot of businesses choose to put themselves governments and their banks, which are locked in a somewhere else. However, I do not think that if we loveless embrace to try to support each other without are not in the euro we should take part in what is the ability to draw on resources elsewhere.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • (Amendment) Bill
    Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) (Amendment) Bill EXPLANATORY NOTES Explanatory notes to the Bill, prepared by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport with the agreement of Theresa Villiers, are published separately as Bill 182—EN. Bill 182 57/1 Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) (Amendment) Bill CONTENTS 1 Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009: repeal of sunset provision 2 Extent, commencement and short title Bill 182 57/1 Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) (Amendment) Bill 1 A BILL TO Prevent the Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009 from expiring on 11 November 2019. E IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present BParliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:— 1 Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009: repeal of sunset provision In section 4 of the Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009— (a) in the heading, for “, commencement and sunset” substitute “and commencement”, and (b) omit subsection (7) (which provides for the Act to expire after 10 years). 5 2 Extent, commencement and short title (1) This Act extends to— (a) England and Wales, and (b) Scotland. (2) This Act comes into force on the day on which it is passed. 10 (3) This Act may be cited as the Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) (Amendment) Act 2018. Bill 182 57/1 Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) (Amendment) Bill A BILL To prevent the Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009 from expiring on 11 November 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Reports of Cases
    Report s of C ases OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL JÄÄSKINEN 1 delivered on 13 September 2012 Case C-547/10 P Swiss Confederation v European Commission (Appeal — Actions for annulment — Swiss Confederation — Admissibility — Locus standi — Examination of the Court’s own motion — EC-Switzerland Agreement on Air Transport — Objectives of the agreement — Exchange of traffic rights — Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 — Access of Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes — Articles 8 and 9 — Scope — Commission’s powers of review — Exercise of traffic rights — Decision 2004/12/EC — German measures relating to the approaches to Zurich Airport — Principles inherent in the freedom to provide services — Principle of non-discrimination — Proportionality) I – Introduction 1. The appeal brought by the Swiss Confederation seeks to have set aside the judgment of the General 2 Court of the European Union of 9 September 2010 (‘the judgment under appeal’). The General Court 3 dismissed the action brought by the Swiss Confederation for the annulment of Decision 2004/12/EC on a procedure relating to the application of Article 18(2), first sentence, of the Agreement between 4 the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (‘the Air Transport 5 Agreement’) and Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 . By that decision, the Commission found that the Federal Republic of Germany could continue to apply the national measures which were the subject of the decision at issue, which aimed to establish procedures for landings and take-offs at Zurich Airport (Switzerland). 1 — Original language: French. 2 — Case T-319/05 [2010] ECR II-4265. 3 — Commission Decision of 5 December 2003 on a procedure relating to the application of Article 18(2), first sentence, of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on air transport and Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 (OJ 2004 L 4, p.
    [Show full text]
  • EU Renegotiation: Fighting for a Flexible Union How to Renegotiate the Terms of the UK’S Membership of the EU
    EU Renegotiation: Fighting for a Flexible Union How to renegotiate the terms of the UK’s Membership of the EU (Quotation in title taken from President Glyn Gaskarth September 2013 ii © Civitas 2013 55 Tufton Street London SW1P 3QL Civitas is a registered charity (no. 1085494) and a company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales (no. 04023541) email: [email protected] Independence: Civitas: Institute for the Study of Civil Society is a registered educational charity (No. 1085494) and a company limited by guarantee (No. 04023541). Civitas is financed from a variety of private sources to avoid over-reliance on any single or small group of donors. All the Institute’s publications seek to further its objective of promoting the advancement of learning. The views expressed are those of the authors, not of the Institute. i Contents Acknowledgements ii Foreword, David Green iii Executive Summary iv Background 1 Introduction 3 Chapter One – Trade 9 Chapter Two – City Regulation 18 Chapter Three – Options for Britain 26 Chapter Four – Common Fisheries Policy 42 Chapter Five – National Borders and Immigration 49 Chapter Six – Foreign & Security Policy 58 Chapter Seven – European Arrest Warrant (EAW) 68 Conclusion 80 Bibliography 81 ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank Tamara Chehayeb Makarem and Susan Gaskarth for their support during the compilation of this paper and Dr David Green and Jonathan Lindsell of Civitas for their comments on the text. iii Foreword Our main aim should be the full return of our powers of self-government, but that can’t happen before the referendum promised for 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit Era
    Island Studies Journal, 15(1), 2020, 151-168 The sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit era Maria Mut Bosque School of Law, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Spain MINECO DER 2017-86138, Ministry of Economic Affairs & Digital Transformation, Spain Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London, UK [email protected] (corresponding author) Abstract: This paper focuses on an analysis of the sovereignty of two territorial entities that have unique relations with the United Kingdom: the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories (BOTs). Each of these entities includes very different territories, with different legal statuses and varying forms of self-administration and constitutional linkages with the UK. However, they also share similarities and challenges that enable an analysis of these territories as a complete set. The incomplete sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and BOTs has entailed that all these territories (except Gibraltar) have not been allowed to participate in the 2016 Brexit referendum or in the withdrawal negotiations with the EU. Moreover, it is reasonable to assume that Brexit is not an exceptional situation. In the future there will be more and more relevant international issues for these territories which will remain outside of their direct control, but will have a direct impact on them. Thus, if no adjustments are made to their statuses, these territories will have to keep trusting that the UK will be able to represent their interests at the same level as its own interests. Keywords: Brexit, British Overseas Territories (BOTs), constitutional status, Crown Dependencies, sovereignty https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.114 • Received June 2019, accepted March 2020 © 2020—Institute of Island Studies, University of Prince Edward Island, Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • OPENING PANDORA's BOX David Cameron's Referendum Gamble On
    OPENING PANDORA’S BOX David Cameron’s Referendum Gamble on EU Membership Credit: The Economist. By Christina Hull Yale University Department of Political Science Adviser: Jolyon Howorth April 21, 2014 Abstract This essay examines the driving factors behind UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s decision to call a referendum if the Conservative Party is re-elected in 2015. It addresses the persistence of Euroskepticism in the United Kingdom and the tendency of Euroskeptics to generate intra-party conflict that often has dire consequences for Prime Ministers. Through an analysis of the relative impact of political strategy, the power of the media, and British public opinion, the essay argues that addressing party management and electoral concerns has been the primary influence on David Cameron’s decision and contends that Cameron has unwittingly unleashed a Pandora’s box that could pave the way for a British exit from the European Union. Acknowledgments First, I would like to thank the Bates Summer Research Fellowship, without which I would not have had the opportunity to complete my research in London. To Professor Peter Swenson and the members of The Senior Colloquium, Gabe Botelho, Josh Kalla, Gabe Levine, Mary Shi, and Joel Sircus, who provided excellent advice and criticism. To Professor David Cameron, without whom I never would have discovered my interest in European politics. To David Fayngor, who flew halfway across the world to keep me company during my summer research. To my mom for her unwavering support and my dad for his careful proofreading. And finally, to my adviser Professor Jolyon Howorth, who worked with me on this project for over a year and a half.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit Interview: Raoul Ruparel
    Raoul Ruparel Special Advisor to the Prime Minister on Europe August 2018 – July 2019 Special Advisor to the Secretary of State for the Department for Exiting the EU October 2016 – July 2018 Co-Director, Open Europe May 2015 – October 2016 11 August 2020 The renegotiation and the referendum UK in a Changing Europe (UKICE): How influential, do you think, Open Europe was in shaping David Cameron’s approach to the Bloomberg speech and the renegotiation? Raoul Ruparel (RR): I think we were fairly influential. Our chairman at the time, Lord Leach, who sadly passed away, was quite close to Cameron, especially on EU issues, and so had quite a lot of say in some of the parts of the Bloomberg speech. Obviously, Mats Persson also had some input to the speech and then went to work for Cameron on the reform agenda. That being said, before Mats got into Number 10 under Cameron, I think a lot of it was already set. The ambition was already set relatively low in terms of the type of reform Cameron was going to aim for. So I think there was some influence. Certainly, I think Open Europe had an impact in trying to bridge that path between the Eurosceptics and those who wanted to see Brexit, and were in that camp from quite early on, and the wider Page 1/30 public feeling of concern over immigration and other aspects. Yes, there certainly was something there in terms of pushing the Cameron Government in the direction of reform. I don’t think it’s something that Open Europe necessarily created, I think they were looking for something in that space and we were there to fill it.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Library-Activity Report 1999
    Rapport 20 pp EN 9/06/00 15:00 Page 16 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Education and Culture Central Library Activity Report 1999 Rapport 20 pp EN 9/06/00 14:57 Page 2 CONTENT Foreword 1.Highlights: Creation of a Documentation Centre Unit 2.The European Commission's Central Library in 1999 - library activities - services to readers - data processing 3.European Documentation Centres (EDC) 4.SCADPlus 5.Programme and outlook for 2000 Annexes - Annexe 1: Mission statement - Documentation Centre Unit - Annexe 2: Main staff responsibilities - Documentation Centre Unit - Annexe 3: Resource fact sheet - Documentation Centre Unit - Annexe 4: Budget resources 1993-2000 - Central Library - Annexe 5: Cataloguing - language distribution 1999 Central Library Activity report 1999 Rapport 20 pp EN 9/06/00 14:57 Page 3 2 Central Library | Activity Report 1999 Rapport 20 pp EN 9/06/00 14:57 Page 4 FOREWORD Without doubt 1999 was a year of great changes for the European Commission : twenty new Commissioners took up their posts in the institution under the authority of President Romano Prodi. The Central Library of the European Commission is now under the authority of Commissioner Viviane Reding, who is responsible for Education and Culture. I became Director General for Education and Culture on 1st January 2000, and therefore am privileged to write this introduction. The citizen is at the heart of the new Commission policy, particularly in the fields of educa- tion, training, respect for culture and language, and access to knowledge generally. It is vital to encourage the development of libraries and the dissemination of information for use by the discerning citizen.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit and the Future of the US–EU and US–UK Relationships
    Special relationships in flux: Brexit and the future of the US–EU and US–UK relationships TIM OLIVER AND MICHAEL JOHN WILLIAMS If the United Kingdom votes to leave the European Union in the referendum of June 2016 then one of the United States’ closest allies, one of the EU’s largest member states and a leading member of NATO will negotiate a withdrawal from the EU, popularly known as ‘Brexit’. While talk of a UK–US ‘special relation- ship’ or of Britain as a ‘transatlantic bridge’ can be overplayed, not least by British prime ministers, the UK is a central player in US–European relations.1 This reflects not only Britain’s close relations with Washington, its role in European security and its membership of the EU; it also reflects America’s role as a European power and Europe’s interests in the United States. A Brexit has the potential to make a significant impact on transatlantic relations. It will change both the UK as a country and Britain’s place in the world.2 It will also change the EU, reshape European geopolitics, affect NATO and change the US–UK and US–EU relationships, both internally and in respect of their place in the world. Such is the potential impact of Brexit on the United States that, in an interview with the BBC’s Jon Sopel in summer 2015, President Obama stated: I will say this, that having the United Kingdom in the European Union gives us much greater confidence about the strength of the transatlantic union and is part of the corner- stone of institutions built after World War II that has made the world safer and more prosperous.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Recommendations on the New Electoral Arrangements for Havering Council
    Draft recommendations on the new electoral arrangements for Havering Council Electoral review July 2020 Translations and other formats: To get this report in another language or in a large-print or Braille version, please contact the Local Government Boundary Commission for England at: Tel: 0330 500 1525 Email: [email protected] Licensing: The mapping in this report is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Keeper of Public Records © Crown copyright and database right. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and database right. Licence Number: GD 100049926 2020 A note on our mapping: The maps shown in this report are for illustrative purposes only. Whilst best efforts have been made by our staff to ensure that the maps included in this report are representative of the boundaries described by the text, there may be slight variations between these maps and the large PDF map that accompanies this report, or the digital mapping supplied on our consultation portal. This is due to the way in which the final mapped products are produced. The reader should therefore refer to either the large PDF supplied with this report or the digital mapping for the true likeness of the boundaries intended. The boundaries as shown on either the large PDF map or the digital mapping should always appear identical. Contents Introduction 1 Who we are and what we do 1 What is an electoral review? 1 Why Havering? 2 Our proposals for Havering 2 How will the recommendations affect you? 2 Have your
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq: an Initial Assessment of Post- Conflict Operations
    House of Commons Defence Committee Iraq: An Initial Assessment of Post- Conflict Operations Sixth Report of Session 2004–05 Volume II Oral and Written Evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 16 March 2005 HC 65-II [Incorporating HC 721-i-ii, Session 2003–04] Published on 24 March 2005 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £16.50 The Defence Committee The Defence Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Ministry of Defence and its associated public bodies. Current Membership Mr Bruce George MP (Labour, Walsall South) (Chairman) Mr James Cran MP (Conservative, Beverley and Holderness) Mr David Crausby MP (Labour, Bolton North East) Mike Gapes MP (Labour, Ilford South) Mr Mike Hancock CBE MP (Liberal Democrat, Portsmouth South) Mr Dai Havard MP (Labour, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) Mr Kevan Jones MP (Labour, North Durham) Richard Ottaway MP (Conservative, Croydon South) Mr Frank Roy MP (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw) Rachel Squire MP (Labour, Dunfermline West) Mr Peter Viggers MP (Conservative, Gosport) The following Member was also a member of the Committee during the period covered by this report. Mr Crispin Blunt MP (Conservative, Reigate) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Directions for Britain Outside the Eu Ralph Buckle • Tim Hewish • John C
    BREXIT DIRECTIONS FOR BRITAIN OUTSIDE THE EU RALPH BUCKLE • TIM HEWISH • JOHN C. HULSMAN IAIN MANSFIELD • ROBERT OULDS BREXIT: Directions for Britain Outside the EU BREXIT: DIRECTIONS FOR BRITAIN OUTSIDE THE EU RALPH BUCKLE TIM HEWISH JOHN C. HULSMAN IAIN MANSFIELD ROBERT OULDS First published in Great Britain in 2015 by The Institute of Economic Affairs 2 Lord North Street Westminster London SW1P 3LB in association with London Publishing Partnership Ltd www.londonpublishingpartnership.co.uk The mission of the Institute of Economic Affairs is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems. Copyright © The Institute of Economic Affairs 2015 The moral right of the author has been asserted. All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photo- copying, recording or otherwise), without the prior written permission of both the copyright owner and the publisher of this book. A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 978-0-255-36682-3 (interactive PDF) Many IEA publications are translated into languages other than English or are reprinted. Permission to translate or to reprint should be sought from the Director General at the address above. Typeset in Kepler by T&T Productions Ltd www.tandtproductions.com
    [Show full text]
  • Partij Van De Arbeid Inhoud
    ~RTIJ VAN DE ARBEID BE LEl DSVERSLAG OVER DE PERIODE 2005 - 200] e PARTIJ VAN DE ARBEID INHOUD Voorwoord 5 Hoofdstuk 1 De PvdA als democratische ledenpartij 7 6o-JARIG BESTAAN 7 PARTIJBESTUUR 7 CONGRES 8 PRESIDIUM 31 POLITIEK FORUM 32 ADVIESRAAD VERENICINGSZAKEN 33 PARTIJCOMMISSIES J WERKGROEPEN 33 DOELGROEPEN 36 REGIONALE STEUNPUNTEN 36 OPLEIDINGEN 37 HRMJSCOUTING 38 ADVIESTEAM MEDIATIONJKOMMER EN KWEL 39 LEDENWERVING EN LEDENBEHOUD Hoofdstuk 2 De PvdA als volkspartij 42 VERKIEZINGEN VERTEGENWOORDIGENDE LICHAMEN 42 VRIJWILLIGERSBELEID 44 Hoofdstuk 3 De PvdA als ideeënpartij 47 Hoofdstuk 4 De PvdA internationaal 51 PES DELEGATIE 59 Hoofdstuk 5 Financiën In memoriam 65 Tweede Kamerfractie Eerste Kamerfractie 75 PvdA- Eu rodelegatie 77 Jonge Socialisten in de PvdA OVER OE PERIODE 2005 · 2007 3 VooRwooRD Voor u ligt het beleidsverslag van de Partij van de Arbeid over de periode 1 oktober 2005 tot en met 6 oktober 2007. Dit beleidsverslag is een verantwoording van het gevoerde beleid van het partijbestuur. Twee gebeurtenissen waren van grote invloed op de partij zoals die thans (medio april 2008) functio­ neert. Ten eerste de vervroegde Tweede Kamerverkiezingen van november 2006, weliswaar met het zetelver­ lies, maar toch met als resultaat dat de PvdA op 22 februari 2007 zijn rol als oppositiepartij verwissel­ de voor die van regeringspartij. Per genoemde datum vormt de PvdA samen met het CDA en de Christen Unie het kabinet-Balkenende IV. Ten tweede de tussentijdse partijbestuurswisseling. Het in december 2005 gekozen partijbestuur trad in april 2007 vervroegd af. Op voorwerk van een interim-bestuur koos het PvdA-congres op 6 oktober 2007 een nieuw partijbestuur.
    [Show full text]