British Politics Review Newsletter of the British Politics Society, Norway Volume 3, No. 1 Winter 2008 A different cup of tea: The European Union has become an inevitable part of British politics, yet it is a topic treated more as a necessary evil than a source of lively debate. © European Community, 2008 Still the awkward partner? 35 years of British EU membership unbound Jan Petersen: The case for Europe: lessons to learn Ian Bache: Below the radar: the quiet Europeanisation of British politics Bjørn Høyland: The Conservative Party in Europe: an open marriage Kristin M. Haugevik: The Europeanisation of British security and defence policy British Politics Society, Norway, established in June 2006, is politically neutral and has no collective agenda apart from raising the interest and knowledge of British politics among the informed Norwegian public. Board Members: Øivind Bratberg (President), Kristin M. Haugevik (Vice President), Atle L. Wold (Scholarly Responsible), John-Ivar S. Olsen (Secretary) Postal address: P.O. Box 6 Blindern, N-0313 Oslo, Norway ▪ E-mail: [email protected] ▪ Website: www.britishpoliticssociety.no. British Politics Review A different partnership? Volume 3, No. 1 Winter 2008 Thirty-fi ve years after Britain’s entry into the then European ISSN 1890-4505 Communities (EC), the relationship looks different from both sides of British Politics Review is a quarterly the Channel - yet some of the essential qualities of that relationship newsletter issued by the British Politics remain. This gives rise to rather different accounts of Britain in Europe Society, Norway. With contributions depending on the perspective of the observer. The present issue of British from academic and journalistic sour- ces, the British Politics Review is aimed Politics Review celebrates the anniversary of British membership at everyone with a general interest in and draws on a range of thematic contributions to illustrate the many political developments in Britain. contradictions of Britain in Europe. Contents Ian Bache’s article on the quiet Europeanisation of British politics gives The case for Europe: lessons to learn some key factors to an understanding to how British public policy has Jan Petersen p. 3 become more Europeanised while the British public remains staunchly The rationale for opposing Norwegian Euro-sceptical. Atle Wold’s account of the ”Metric Martyr” points membership in the EU neatly at some of the remaining rationale for opposing Europe and ”the Dag Seierstad p. 4 continent” with its excessive bureaucracy and attempts to rule over The long delay: Britain and Europe British common sense. 1973-2008 Victor Rothwell pp. 5 From the Norwegian side, Jan Petersen and Dag Seierstad give two Below the radar: the quiet Europeanisa- tion of British politics sharply contrasting accounts of Norway’s position relative to the EU Ian Bache pp. 6-7 and the way in which debates over EU in Norway can take lessons from The Europeanisation of British secu- Britain, and vice versa. While Petersen emphasises the importance of rity and defence policy Europe as a supportive family, of relevance also to security, Seierstad Kristin M. Haugevik p. 8 points at the virture of democracy grounded at the local and national The Conservative Party in Europe: an levels, a message that should be just as pertinent to Britain. open marriage Bjørn Høyland p. 9 Among other contributions to our Review is a summary article by Could Labour contribute to a progres- Victor Rothwell on the many twists and turns on Britain’s European sive agenda in Europe? Øivind Bratberg pp. 10-11 road from 1973 to the present. Kristin M. Haugevik accounts for the paradigmatic shift towards Europe in Britain’s security and defence The Metric Martyr and the awkward dimension of Britain’s membership policy over the last decade: fi nally, Øivind Bratberg and Bjørn Atle L. Wold pp. 12-13 Høyland discuss two different challenges facing British political parties in Europe. Does Labour contribute to a common European left? And, to British Politics Society, Norway - 2007 in retrospect p. 13 point out differences from their continental colleagues, is it wise for the Conservative Party to formally go alone in the European Parliament? Seminar invitation: Britain in Europe 1973-2008 p. 14 Two prime ministers, and two European speeches “We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, Almost seventeen years later, another signifi cant British prime only to see them re-imposed at a European level minister addressed an EU audience with with a European super-state exercising a new a presentation of British priorities. On dominance from Brussels.” The statement, 23 June 2005 Tony Blair’s speech to the taken from Margaret Thatcher’s speech European Parliament came prior to the to the College of Europe in Bruges, 20 British presidency and in the wake of failed September 1988, is remembered by many as constitutional referenda in France and the the essence of Thatcher’s stormy relationship Netherlands as well as a bitter dispute over with Europe during the 1980s. The values the EU budget (where Britain was indeed of market, entrepreneuship and free trade accused of national greed and lack of were as important to Thatcher abroad as European attachment). Blair’s message to the at it was to her domestic agenda. On this Enterprise and parliamentarians was clear: ”The issue is not basis she could endorse the Single European patriotism. Margaret about the idea of the European Union. It is about Charm and common Act (1986), introducing a single European Thatcher, prime modernisation. It is about policy. It is not a debate sense. Tony Blair, market, despite her consistent scepticism to minister 1979-90. about how to abandon Europe but how to make it do prime minister 1997- 2007. tighter integration. When harmonisation of © wikipedia/public domain what it was set up to do: improve the lives of people. © wikipedia/public domain policies followed which had little to do with And right now, they aren’t convinced.” openness of trade but instead refl ected the ambition of a united Europe, her Conservative government went into disarray, leading While refraining from the more explicitly nationalist jargon ultimately to Thatcher’s own downfall. of Thatcher, Blair expressed a number of the same concerns for openness, competition, enterprise and growth - stating, for Thatcher’s message in Bruges was one of refusing supranational example, that the EU and WTO should share the same ambition of integration but supporting enterprise and competition. Interestingly, assisting development and growth, and that the EU should widen her speech harked back to the traditional British role of balancing the its membership to Turkey. Europeanness was made a matter of continental powers so that national autonomy was protected and no common sense. As was often the case with Blair, his message in single nation attained superiority. The speech refl ected Thatcher’s Strasbourg was masterly designed to catch the middle ground, unscrupulous pursuit of both national and ideological interest. leading him to downplay both national and ideological concerns. 2 The case for Europe: lessons to learn By British Politics Review Guest Writer Jan Petersen, Member of the Norwegian Parliament from the perspective of the Alliance we covers a broad range of non-military, yet are supposed to have enough national security-related challenges. Jan Petersen resources to resolve local challenges, just has been a as the expectation was during the Cold Norway can hardly provide leadership Member of Par- War. Russian bombers fl ying along the alone on the international arena, and liament since Norwegian coast should always be met here we differ profoundly from Britain. 1981. Party lea- by Norwegian fi ghters – this is something Consequently, we must seek partnership der of Høyre, we can not expect our allies to take care and cooperation. If the solution is not of. about military alliances – then what? The the Norwegian obvious answer is EU and the strengh a Conservative This was the point the Chief of Defence unifi ed entity of half a billion people will Party, from wanted to make. Following his line of bring to its member countries – members 1994 to 2004, thought turns our attention toward Europe, which are committed to supporting each he also served where a different, and broader, anchoring other on the full repertoire of policy as foreign minister in the centre- of national security has emerged. This domains. right coalition government from does not only concern the EU’s common 2001 to 2005. Petersen’s political foreign and security policy, but also the There is another dimension as well: We career has been characterised by attachment to a family think the High North is a wide range of interests besides which participation in the of utmost importance, a consistent emphasis on foreign EU entails. Some of our ”EU sceptics in Britain equally so to Europe, in challenges and possible light of energy policy, affairs. At present he acts as often refer to Norway confl icts are such that as a shining example fi sheries, border security chair of the standing committee NATO has never been and so on. We have yet to on defence. the solution. Those are of exceptionalism, persuade others that it is not about war and peace, of self-suffi ciency... I so. A membership will Thorbjørn Jagland, President of the territory or military would warn against put the High North more Norwegian Parliament, Stortinget, and presence. They are about transferring such fi rmly on the European one of the most committed supporters of jurisdiction, resources, lessons about the virtue agenda, to the mutual Norwegian membership in the EU, has environment, economic of European detachment benefi t of Norway and reportedly come to the conclusion that interests – and in these the EU.