Analyzing United Kingdom’s Decision to Withdraw Its Membership from the European Union (EU) (2007 - 2016)
By MUHAMMAD HAEKAL UMRI ID No. 016201400106
A thesis presented to the Faculty of Humanities President University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for Bachelor Degree in International Relations Concentration in Diplomacy
2018 THESIS ADVISER RECOMMENDATION LETTER
This thesis entitled “Analyzing United Kingdom’s Decision to Withdraw Its Membership from the European Union (EU) (2007- 2016)” prepared and submitted by Muhammad Haekal Umri in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor Degree in the Faculty of Humanities has been reviewed and found to have satisfied the requirements for a thesis fit to be examined. I therefore recommend this thesis for Oral Defense.
Cikarang, Indonesia, 29th March 2018
Drs. Teuku Rezasyah, MA., Ph.D.
i DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
I declare that this thesis, entitled “Analyzing United Kingdom’s Decision to Withdraw Its Membership from the European Union (EU) (2007-2016)” is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, an original piece of work that has not been submitted, either in whole or in part, to another university to obtain a degree.
Cikarang, Indonesia, 29th March 2018
Muhammad Haekal Umri
ii PANEL OF EXAMINER APPROVAL SHEET
iii ABSTRACT
Title : Analyzing United Kingdom’s Decision to Withdraw Its Membership from the European Union (EU) (2007-2016) Writer : Muhammad Haekal Umri
Gordon Brown and David Cameron are Eurosceptic UK leaders during his premiership. However, Gordon Brown and David Cameron have a different focus of foreign policy during their premiership. In Gordon Brown premiership, he believed on the idea of the Euro-cooperation. Meanwhile, David Cameron focused on the idea of promoting the UK interests. Concerning this gap between Gordon Brown and David Cameron, it refers to the problem identification of this thesis. The events happened during Gordon Brown and David Cameron premiership; global financial crisis, Eurozone crisis, and the rising number of immigrants, are going to be the other factors for this analysis. This research uses qualitative methods, so the data would be from the official statement of Gordon Brown and David Cameron from their speeches, books, journals, official reports, and official news. This research is going to use Harnisch perception on Role theory, referred to the changing foreign policy between Gordon Brown and David Cameron in their premiership. It includes behavior, political ideology, and the events that happened during Gordon Brown and David Cameron premiership. Thus, it is going to be the explanation of the changing foreign policy, which in accordance with the Brexit referendum.
Keywords: Foreign Policy, Gordon Brown, David Cameron, European Union
iv ABSTRAK
Judul : Analisa Keputusan Inggris untuk Menarik Keanggotaannya dari Uni Eropa (UE) Penulis : Muhammad Haekal Umri
Gordon Brown dan David Cameron adalah pemimpin Inggris yang Eurosceptic selama masa kepemimpinannya. Namun, Gordon Brown dan David Cameron memiliki fokus kebijakan luar negeri yang berbeda selama masa kepemimpinannya. Dalam pemerintahan Gordon Brown, dia percaya pada gagasan kerjasama Euro. Sementara itu, David Cameron fokus pada gagasan mempromosikan kepentingan Inggris. Mengenai kesenjangan antara Gordon Brown dan David Cameron, ini mengacu pada identifikasi masalah tesis ini. Peristiwa itu terjadi selama masa kepemimpinan Gordon Brown dan David Cameron; krisis keuangan global, krisis zona euro, dan meningkatnya jumlah imigran, akan menjadi faktor lain untuk analisis ini. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif, sehingga data akan berasal dari pernyataan resmi Gordon Brown dan David Cameron dari pidato, buku, jurnal, laporan resmi, dan berita resmi. Penelitian ini akan menggunakan persepsi Harnisch tentang teori Peran, mengacu pada kebijakan luar negeri yang berubah antara Gordon Brown dan David Cameron di pemerintahan mereka. Ini termasuk perilaku, ideologi politik, dan peristiwa yang terjadi selama masa kepemimpinan Gordon Brown dan David Cameron. Dengan demikian, ini akan menjadi penjelasan dari kebijakan luar negeri yang berubah, yang sesuai dengan referendum Brexit.
Kata kunci: Kebijakan Luar Negeri, Gordon Brown, David Cameron, Uni Eropa
v ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This thesis would not be finished without prayers, faith, supports, assistance, and eagerness. In this opportunity, I would like to express my gratitude to everyone who helped me during this thesis writing, from the beginning of the process until the very end. First of all, I would like to thank Allah SWT for always giving me blessings and guidance in every step I take. I would like to appreciate the presence and support from all of these people that I will mention. I would like to thank my family, Father (Mr. Syaiful Umri), Mother (Mrs. Budiany Salfira), sister (Shirin Syailandira Umri), and two brothers (M. Ibnu Abbas Umri and M. Rifqy Syahdani Umri), and last no least brother in law (Fahmi Azhari Bashar). My highest gratitude for my parents who always motivatting me in writing this thesis. Thank you Mr. Teuku Rezasyah as my first thesis advisor and also as the Dean of Faculty of Humanities. I could not thank you enough for all of the suggestions, critics, and comments during the thesis writing, and thank you for encouraged me to finish the thesis as soon as possible. I would like to express my gratitude to Mr. I Gusti Bagus Darma Agastia. I could not thank you enough for the support, knowledge, and advises during this thesis writing, and thank you for guiding me in writing this thesis. And also, I would like to express my gratitude for having Mr. Hendra Manurung as the Head of International Relations study program, Ms. Natasya Kusumawardani as my lecturer as well as my sister since the very first year during my university time, and could not thank you enough for other lecturers for their knowledge and experiences that they shared. Indonesia Australia Business Council (IABC), thank you for giving me an amazing internship experience, and especially Muhammad Al-Ikhlas Lahaya for listening my story during my internship and thesis writing. Without them, I could not be able to write this thesis. Dhianaswa Zhafira Mahanani (Sasa), thank you for always listening, always understanding every story that I have, and helping me with this thesis. Istighfarrany Sugiarto and Arief Akbar Hariawan, thank you for
vi the stories and support yet judgment. Thank you for Sekarsari, for helping me with this thesis writing and early this year problem. Nisrini Khairani, Wilma Putri Hellena, Nisa Nabila, Novia Sinta, Akila Paravathi, Hevi Rahmania, Ivena Ersandi, Afni Damanik, Sirot Fadhlurahman, Widya Dwi Rachmawati, Carolina Marthe, Cici Tobing, Syifa Afiah, Tania Amanda, Meidi Bustani, Aditya Rahman, Elsari Primadini, M. Mirzal Dipa, Mita Listya, Siti Hendryani Putri, Amelia Hikmatahati, Jessica Astriyanti, Joseph Tertia, Anky Dirgantara, Abu Rijal Eljihadi, Anthony Nicolas, Novy Sartika Putri Sari Dewi, Satyaningrat, Maria Frangconna, Feronika Desy, Andi Lulu Purnamasari, Bintang Azizu, Prananda Jalu, Annisa Widya Prastuti, Alika Rizki, Syenna Sheila Edliza, Fajri De Chandra, I could not thank you enough for your support toward this thesis writing.
March 2018 Writer,
Muhammad Haekal Umri
vii Table of Contents THESIS ADVISER RECOMMENDATION LETTER ...... i DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY ...... ii PANEL OF EXAMINER APPROVAL SHEET ...... iii ABSTRACT ...... iv ABSTRAK ...... v ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...... vi LIST OF TABLES ...... xi LIST OF FIGURES ...... xii LIST OF ACRONYMS ...... xiii CHAPTER I ...... 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 I.1. Background of Study ...... 1 I.2. Problems Identification ...... 5 I.3. Statement of the Problem ...... 6 I.4. Research Objectives ...... 6 I.5. Significance of the Study ...... 7 I.6. Theoretical Framework ...... 7 I.6.1 Role Theory ...... 7 I.6.2 Foreign Policy Analysis ...... 9 I.7. Scope and Limitations of the Study ...... 13 I.8. Definition of Terms ...... 13 I.8.1 Foreign Policy ...... 13 I.8.2 The Conservative Party ...... 14 I.8.3 The Liberal Democrat Party ...... 14 I.8.4 The Labor Party ...... 15 I.8.5 Brexit ...... 15 I.8.6 EU Single Market ...... 15 I.8.7 Immigrant ...... 16 I.8.8 Euroscepticism ...... 17 I.8.9 Lisbon Treaty ...... 17 I.9. Thesis Structure ...... 18 I.9.1 Chapter I ...... 18 I.9.2 Chapter II ...... 18 I.9.3 Chapter III ...... 19 I.9.4 Chapter IV ...... 19 I.9.5 Chapter V ...... 19 I.9.6 Chapter VI ...... 19 CHAPTER II ...... 20 LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 20 II.1. Background of the Literature Review ...... 20 II.2. Review of Books ...... 21 II.2.1 The Scientific Study of Foreign Policy ...... 21
viii II.2.2 Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction ...... 22 II.2.3 Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making ...... 23 II.2.4 Role Theory in International Relations ...... 25 II.3. Review of Journals ...... 26 II.3.1 Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy, and Theories of International Relations .. 26 II.3.2 Brexit and the Impact of Immigration on the UK ...... 27 II.3.3 The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis, and Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions: A 26-nation Exploratory Study ...... 27 II.4. The Chapter Summary ...... 29 CHAPTER III ...... 30 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...... 30 III.1. Research Methodology ...... 30 III.2. Research Instrument ...... 31 CHAPTER IV ...... 33 DOMESTIC POLITICS UNDER GORDON BROWN AND DAVID CAMERON PREMIERSHIP ...... 33 IV.1. Domestic Politics of Gordon Brown during His Premiership ...... 34 IV.1.1 The Labor Party Ideology ...... 34 IV.1.2 Gordon Brown Cognitive Style ...... 35 IV.2. Domestic Politics of David Cameron during His Premiership ...... 39 IV.2.1 The Conservative Party Ideology ...... 39 IV.2.2 The Liberal Democrats Party Ideology ...... 40 IV.2.3 David Cameron Cognitive Style ...... 41 IV.3. Article 50 of Lisbon Treaty ...... 44 IV.4. The Chapter Summary ...... 45 CHAPTER V ...... 47 ANALYZING THE UNITED KINGDOM DECISION TO WITHDRAW ITS MEMBERSHIP IN THE EUROPEAN UNION (EU) (2007 – 2016) ...... 47 V.1. Role Theory ...... 47 V.1.1 Gordon Brown ...... 47 V.1.2 David Cameron ...... 48 V.2. Events: In Gordon Brown and David Cameron Premiership ...... 49 V.2.1 Global Financial Crisis ...... 49 V.2.2 Eurozone Crisis ...... 51 V.2.3 The Rising Number of Immigrants in the UK ...... 53 V.2.3 United Kingdom Withdrawal from European Union (EU) or Brexit ...... 56 V.3. The Involvement of Events to the Role theory ...... 58 V.3.1 Gordon Brown ...... 58 V.3.2 David Cameron ...... 59 V.4. UK Foreign Policy (2007 – 2016) ...... 62 V.4.1 Gordon Brown Foreign Policy ...... 62 V.4.2 David Cameron Foreign Policy ...... 65 V.5 Chapter Summary ...... 67 CHAPTER VI ...... 70 CONCLUSION ...... 70 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 72
ix APENDICES ...... 80 1. Gordon Brown Lord Mayor’s Banquet Speech - 12 November 2007 ...... 81 Read the speech ...... 81 2. Gordon Brown Beyond The Reform Treaty: Business Priorities For A 'Global Europe'...... 87 3. David Cameron Speech to Lord Mayor's Banquet ...... 92 4. David Cameron's EU speech - full text ...... 96
x LIST OF TABLES
Table V.1. Education and Immigrant Status (Working Age Population) in 2015………………………………………………………………56 Table V.2. Employment, Unemployment, Students, and Inactively Economic by Immigrants Status (Working Age Population) in 2015………56 Table V.3. UK Trade with the EU, 1999 – 2017...... ………………………65 Table V.4. The Comparison between Gordon Brown and David Cameron…69
xi LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I.1. Mead Model of Role Theory by Sebastian Harnisch...…………....8 Figure I.2. Research Frameworks…………………………………………....12 Figure IV.1. The changes in the party system in England, from June 2015 to May 2017……...... 41 Figure V.1. The UK Unemployment Rate within the UK (2000 - 2017)…….50 Figure V.2. The Budget Deficit of Greece Government……………………...52 Figure V.3. Net Immigration to UK…………………………………………..54 Figure V.4. Share of EU Nationals by Country Origin, 2015………………...55 Figure V.5. The Brexit Referendum Voting Result……………...…………...57 Figure V.6. Referred to Mead Model of Gordon Brown………….………….59 Figure V.7. Referred to Mead Model of David Cameron…………………….60 Figure V.8. The Spectrum of Gordon Brown and David Cameron towards the UK Membership in EU………………………………………..…68
xii LIST OF ACRONYMS
ECSC European Coal and Steel Community EEC European Economic Community EU European Union FPA Foreign Policy Analysis FPDM Foreign Policy Decision-Making IMF International Monetary Fund NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization SDP Social Democratic Party SNP Scottish National Party UKIP United Kingdom Independence Party UN United Nations UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization WEF World Economic Forum
xiii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
I.1. Background of Study As the modern-parliamentary yet democratic country, the United Kingdom (UK) has a significant role in the international realm. The UK country included into the 5th countries that positively influencing the world affairs in 20161 According to the World Economic Forum (WEF) that have been taking by the Ipsos Online Panel System monthly, showed 57% of the total positive within the global affairs.2 Moreover, according to Statista data, the UK GDP in 2016 was more than 1 million (USD).3 Besides that, UK culture is also giving impacts to the society, which clearly shown from the case of Paul McCartney, one of the UK vocalists from the Beatles, concert at Red Square, Moscow in 2003. Before the concert, he met a lot of people, from the civilian and even the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin. They were excited and gave gratitude to the existence of McCartney in this country. The President wanted to come however due to his security issue, he could not make it. During the concert, he played Let It Be by the Beatles, which dedicated to the President of Russia.4 The influence of UK might be able to be felt all over the world, this also can be seen from its involvement in European Union (EU). The exact effect of UK involvement in EU is on the EU budget. The UK contributed a massive number of EU budget, which it will directly contribute to other EU member
1 "These Countries Have the Most Positive Influence on the World," World Economic Forum, accessed March 29, 2018, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/07/these-countries-have-the- most-positive-influence-on-the-world/. 2 2 Global Market and Opinion Research Specialist | Ipsos, accessed March 29, 2018, https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/2017-06/G%40%20Dangerous%20World-Report-2017- 06-13_0.pdf. 3 "UK: GDP in Pounds 2000-2016," Statista, accessed March 29, 2018, https://www. statista.com/statistics/281744/gdp-of-the-united-kingdom-uk-since-2000/. 4 Luke Bainbridge, "An Account of Paul McCartney Performing in Russia," The Guardian, last modified May 31, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/music/2003/dec/14/popandrock.paulmccartney.
1 countries. According to full fact data, UK had paid around 18,4 million (USD) to the EU budget, excluded the rebate that has been giving the EU to the UK. 5 Besides that, the joining of UK in EU can bring advantages to the UK in accordance to the three pillars of EU, European Communities, Common Foreign and Security Policy, and Cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs. Focusing on third pillar, Cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs, it discussed the freedom of movement, in terms of goods, services, and people.6 In which, it clearly impacts to their free movement in the goods that referred to the European single market.7 Back to the year of 1946, the British former-conservative Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, argued regarding his supports toward the idea of Council of Europe in Zurich.8 The Council of Europe is about to recreate the European into a form of family, which it might be called as the United States of Europe. He believed that it could create peace, safety, and freedom among European Countries.9 Afterward, the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) emerged in 1951. It aimed to help the coal and steel industries in Western Europe at that time. In which, the barrier was almost removed and those countries could trade coal, steel, coke, and other steel products that the Western Europe countries have.10 However, Churchill did not support the emergence of this organization, which he rejected the invitation as the founder of this organization.11 He tended to create a partnership, which relates to the family form of partnership. In accordance with London Treaty, which has the total member 47 member
5 "The UK's EU Membership Fee," Full Fact, last modified 2017, https://fullfact.org/europe/our- eu-membership-fee-55-million/. 6 "Euro 410: EU Today," University of Oregon | University of Oregon, accessed March 29, 2018, http://pages.uoregon.edu/euro410/eutoday/organizations.php?menu. 7 "The European Single Market - European Commission," Growth, last modified 2, 2018, "The European Single Market - European Commission," Growth, last modified 3, 2018, https://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market_en. 8 "Prime Ministers' Speeches on Europe," BBC News, last modified January 17, 2013, http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-21030153. 9 "Winston Churchill," Europe's Human Rights Watchdog, accessed March 29, 2018, http://www.europewatchdog.info/en/council-of-europe/united-europe/winston-churchill/. 10 "European Coal and Steel Community | European Organization," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 29, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/European-Coal-and-Steel-Community. 11 "Prime Ministers' Speeches on Europe," BBC News, last modified January 17, 2013, http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-21030153.
2 countries, it could ensure the human rights led to peace among those members.12 After Churchill finished his premiership in 1955, Prime Minister Edward Hearth served the parliament, the next fifth prime minister after Churchill, in 1970. He recognized the idea of the European Economic Community (EEC). He believed with this opportunity, it could improve the diplomatic relations with other EEC member countries.13 Thereafter, the UK is known as the most skeptical member in EU toward the European, in another word Eurosceptic. In the very first time, the UK did not want to join the EU due to the Eurosceptic perception of UK people.14 However, within some prime minister premiership, they agreed with the idea of the EU single market, which it could boost up the economic welfare of the country. In which, finally they joined the EU in regard to single market and one identity as European in 1973.15 Thus, within this motive, it occurred the UK foreign policy toward the EU in order to maximize the ties between UK and EU. After the premiership of Edward Heath, Tony Blair (1997 – 2007) declared the intention to have stronger ties with EU. He believed that Britain was at the heart of Europe and if the UK did not join the EU, it would dissipate the historical role in the international realm.16 Moreover, The concern has shifted in the premiership of Gordon Brown (2007 – 2010).17 Under the Labor Party, he tended to continue what Tony Blair did in the previous premiership. However, Gordon Brown did not continue all manifesto of Blair, for instance, the Iraq invasion. Moreover, he was more into tighten the ties with the US due to both
12 "European Coal and Steel Community | European Organization," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 29, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/European-Coal-and-Steel-Community. 13 "History of Sir Edward Heath - GOV.UK," Welcome to GOV.UK, accessed March 29, 2018, https://www.gov.uk/government/history/past-prime-ministers/edward-heath. 14 "Why Britain is So Eurosceptic," The Economist, last modified March 3, 2014, "Why Britain is So Eurosceptic," The Economist, last modified March 3, 2014, https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/03/economist-explains-1. 15 "Prime Ministers' Speeches on Europe," BBC News, last modified January 17, 2013, http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-21030153. 16 Ibid 17 "Lord Mayor’s Banquet Speech - 12 November 2007 | Number10.gov.uk," UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives, accessed March 29, 2018, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.number10.gov.uk/Page13736.
3 countries had the same economic crisis at that time. In which, he believed it could help and prevent further economic crisis within the country. 18 However, there is a distinct concern between Gordon Brown and David Cameron Premiership. David Cameron had trusted by the UK citizen to become Prime Minister for 2 premierships. First, his premiership was in the year of 2010 to 2015 under the coalition of Conservative Party and Liberal Democrats. Second, it was in 2015 to 2016 under fully the Conservative Party. According to the David Cameron Foreign Secretary (2012), the vision of UK foreign policy is to promote their national interest while arising the freedom, fairness, and responsibility within its country. Moreover, the premiership will use the country diplomacy in order to secure the prosperity, strengthened the bilateral and multilateral relations of the country, and utilize its culture and heritage to share the values, including the human rights. 19 Afterward, in his second premiership, Brexit referendum occurred in accordance with his speech in 2010. In his speech, Cameron stated that he would renegotiate the UK position in EU. In which, followed with his proposal of five principles that could fit with the new 21st EU systematical. Those are competitiveness, flexibility, and the power that should be back to those member countries, democratic accountability, and fairness.20 Brexit is one of the crucial events, which happened in the UK history. The Brexit referendum was the withdrawal of UK from EU.21 It held on 23rd June 2016.22 The result from the current referendum of British Exit was 52% vote “Yes” and 48% vote “No”. About more than 17.4 million people in the UK decided to leave and 16.1 Million decided UK stay in EU. The cons-EU block
18 By Philip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor, "Brown's Manifesto for Britishness," Telegraph.co.uk, last modified January 13, 2007, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1539369/Browns- manifesto-for-Britishness.html. 19 Review of the Balance of competences between the united kingdom and the European union, pg. 13, 20 "David Cameron's EU Speech - Full Text," The Guardian, last modified February 14, 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/23/david-cameron-eu-speech-referendum. 21 "Definition of Brexit | What is Brexit ? Brexit Meaning," The Economic Times, accessed March 29, 2018, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/Brexit. 22 Alice Foster, "EU Referendum 2016 Aftermath: All the Key Dates: When Will Britain Leave the EU?," Express.co.uk, last modified June 23, 2017, https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/644178/EU-referendum-dates-European-Union-Brexit- David-Cameron-Brussels.
4 believed that staying in EU would have some kind of disadvantages for the UK.23 The problems, which make them leave the EU, are the economy, immigration, and sovereignty. Those issues rate has been increasing for the last ten years.24 Therefore, as he pledged to the British toward his speech, David Cameron resigned from his position if he could not solve this problem. 25 After his resignation, Theresia May took over his position and do what the things that should be done after the withdrawal in accordance with the article 50 of Lisbon Treaty. For instance, the country should notify the European Council regarding the withdrawal from EU and negotiate about the future ties between its country and the EU. The process of leaving would be taken 2 years long unless the European Council decides to extend the discussion period.26 Thus, the issue that happened internally and externally might shape country foreign policy.
I.2. Problems Identification In accordance with David Cameron speech in 2010, he pledged that he would do a renegotiation with EU regarding the UK position within the organization.27 Following the current issues that he addressed in the speech, he pledged to the UK citizen, to conduct a referendum regarding the withdrawal of UK from EU.28 However, in the premiership of Gordon Brown, he did not even mention about the withdrawal of the country from EU. He tended to have more
23 Steven Erlanger, "Britain Votes to Leave E.U.; Cameron Plans to Step Down," The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia, last modified June 23, 2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/25/world/europe/britain-brexit-european-union- referendum.html. 24 "David Cameron on Immigration: Full Text of the Speech," The Guardian, last modified November 26, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/apr/14/david-cameron-immigration-speech-full-text. 25 "David Cameron's EU Speech - Full Text," The Guardian, last modified February 14, 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/23/david-cameron-eu-speech-referendum. 26 "Article 50," Home, accessed March 29, 2018, http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon- treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html. 27 "David Cameron's EU Speech - Full Text," The Guardian, last modified February 14, 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/23/david-cameron-eu-speech-referendum. 28 "In Full: David Cameron's EU Speech," BBC News, last modified November 28, 2014, http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-30250299.
5 cooperation between the UK and the EU in many terms, free market especially.29 Furthermore, these both prime ministers know as Eurosceptic leaders during their premiership. Although these prime ministers are Eurosceptic, the decisions among their options are different. The path is also different, Brown did not even mention about the withdrawal, different from Cameron. Thus, this gap between Gordon Brown and David Cameron decision toward the UK relationship with the EU through the country foreign policy would be the main problem, which the author tries to discover.
I.3. Statement of the Problem The research question of this thesis is: Why did United Kingdom decide to withdraw its membership from the European Union (EU) (2007 - 2016)?
I.4. Research Objectives The objectives of this research are: • To explain individual identity of Gordon Brown and David Cameron during their premiership • To explain UK foreign policy toward EU under Gordon Brown and David Cameron premiership • To explain the foreign policy changing led by David Cameron premiership
29 "Lord Mayor’s Banquet Speech - 12 November 2007 | Number10.gov.uk," UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives, accessed March 29, 2018, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.number10.gov.uk/Page13736.
6 I.5. Significance of the Study The significance of study, which will be provided in this thesis, are: • The explanation of Gordon Brown behavior, domestic politics (party) and events during his premiership regarding the foreign policy toward the EU (2007 – 2010) • The explanation of David Cameron behavior, domestic politics (party) and events during his premiership regarding the foreign policy toward the EU (2010 - 2016)
I.6. Theoretical Framework In order to deliver a clear deliberation toward the topic and issue, the author would try to use some theories. In which make the author able to answer the research question of this thesis comprehensively. Those theories that will be used in this thesis are:
I.6.1 Role Theory Role theory existed on the surface of Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA) in the 1970s. Ever since then, the role theory has reformed to widely social roles. The definition of the role itself is a social position that based on ego and expectation in regards to achieving the goals of an actor in an organized group. In another word, Role theory is a theory that consisting of its actor ego and the actor surrounding expectation that leads to the way of the actor rules the political.30 Moreover, through this theory, the hierarchy of its political system in a country could be seen clearly. From the parties that leader involves on, through its ideology, which it does in line with actors, leader, and party, so on and so forth.
30 Sebastian Harnisch, Cornelia Frank, and Hanns W. Maull, Role Theory in International Relations (New York: Taylor & Francis, 2011), 7.
7 Sebastian Harnisch (2011) argued that with the existence of George Herbert Mead’s model regarding examine people behavior, it might be useful for Foreign Policy Role Analysis (FPRA). He argued that Mead’s model contributed with the three core premises of the social constructivist approach toward FPRA. Those are “the co-constitutive nature of the agent-society relationship, the importance of shifts in state behavior through role taking and making, and the sources of role change in increasingly complex societies.” Moreover, he claimed that through this Mead’s model understanding, it offers critical analyses within the role and IR scholars.31
Figure I.1 Mead Model in Role Theory by Sebastian Harnisch32
In Mead model of role theory, the “self” model consists of two aspects, which are “I” and “Me”. “I” aspects include the identity and behavior of the actor. Meanwhile, with the existing of the second aspect, “Me”, the first aspect shifts to become an object of the research.33 Harnish argued that “The generalized other is a (theoretical) starting point only, because the generalized other cannot be met in person. It can only be imagined as an abstract reference point for the “I” to recognize itself as belonging to a special type (identity) or social category (e.g. human being).”34
31 Ibid., p. 36. 32 Sebastian Harnisch, Cornelia Frank, and Hanns W. Maull, Role Theory in International Relations (New York: Taylor & Francis, 2011), 11. 33 Ibid., p. 11. 34 Ibid., p. 11.
8 It means that generalized-other referred to the behavior of others could be the abstract of “I” in order to recognize the individual identity.35 Therefore, with the dependency between these two aspects of Mead model, the researcher is going to use Harnisch perception with Mead’s model within in order to have a critical analysis of Gordon Brown and David Cameron behavior and foreign policy under their premiership. A leader creates a policy in order to achieve the great vision for the country and to create more prosper life for his or her society and country. In Foreign Policy analysis, the decision-making process is the main concern of its analysis in order to understand its policy. Toward this role theory, it creates a better understanding of the foreign policy analysis, which helps the analyses to create a better understanding of the leader pattern of behavior through his or her decision.
I.6.2 Foreign Policy Analysis Foreign policy analysis is a theory, which encourages the reader to be more criticizing toward the foreign policymaker within their policies. Within the foreign policy analysis, the process of its analysis divided into several stages. Those are choice, decision, and behavior from the policymaker.36 The choice is the options that occurred within the process of the policymaker observe the event or issue, in which the policymaker can be the best way to encounter or prevent the event or issue. Afterward, the policymaker might choose one or some of the best option. Domestic factors can be the measurement of the policymaker to create the foreign policy. Moreover, after achieved the decision, it effects to the policy behavior. It consists the actions behavior, which influences the external behavior from the policymakers in order to secure the benefit or national interest from the policymaker. In the foreign policy behavior, some might misunderstand with the aims of the policy maker. Thus, it leads into the last phase, which is an outcome.
35 Ibid., p. 11. 36 Marijke Breuning, Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008).
9 It should understand the foreign policy decision and behavior of not just one country but of two or more countries in interaction.37 In the foreign policy analysis, there is three level of analysis. Those are the individual, the state, and the international. Each level has their focus toward the foreign policy level analysis. Those are the individual link to the options or decision, the state link with the behavior, and the international system link with the outcomes. In individual, it focuses on the leaders or decision makers in an effort to explain the foreign policy. Moreover, it concerns on the leader or policymaker personality through their perception of the decision maker. It leads to the study of personality traits, beliefs, and values the factors that explain foreign policy decision. Furthermore, it also leads to the study of the perceptions and how these influence foreign policy decision-making.38 In the state level, it concerns on how the internal factors affect the state foreign policy behavior in the international realm. It occurred the relative power among states. Furthermore, it guided by their relative capabilities, which are power and health. In which create a possibility for the state action and for success on the global stage. Thus, it gains the decision maker power. Otherwise, it will lead to the loss of power instead. Moreover, between the individual and the state level of analysis, there is two-level game analysis. In this analysis theory, the foreign policy decision makers try to satisfy the people, in which occurred several policies within the effort. Furthermore, in regards to occurring several policies, it creates a balancing act within the process.39 In this concept, the level of analysis could be focused on the political condition within the country. Domestic and international politics are the levels of this focus. It will establish the foreign policy that the causal relationship between international and domestic politics becomes the consideration of the foreign policy establishment.40 Domestic politics somehow forces a country to create a
37 Ibid., 11 38 Marijke Breuning, Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), 12. 39 Ibid., p.13. 40 Elisabetta Brighi, Foreign Policy, Domestic Politics and International Relations: The Case of Italy (Routledge, 2013), PDF, 13.
10 foreign policy.41 In which the domestic politics interaction affects the final decision of a country foreign policy. Moreover, domestic politics cannot be separated with the existence of political parties. According to Fearon (1998) argued that state is not an uniter actor that it cannot rule the government by itself. However, there are representatives that might have an interaction between them, which creates a dynamics of domestic politics.42 Within those deliberations, the researcher uses the concept of foreign policy analysis, focuses in the individual and state level. Moreover, the researcher looks on within state politic condition. In regards to politics condition, the researcher uses the domestic politics level as an additional factor regarding the analyzing of these UK prime ministers toward their foreign policy. Therefore, the domestic level is going to be at the state level regarding this research (figure I.2).
41 James D. Fearon, "DOMESTIC POLITICS, FOREIGN POLICY, AND THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS," Annual Review of Political Science 1, no. 1 (1998): 290, doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.1.1.289. 42 Ibid., p. 291.
11 Analyzing United Kingdom’s Decision to Withdraw Its Membership from the European Union (EU) (2007 - 2016)
Figure I.2 Research Frameworks In this research framework, the researcher is trying to connect the variables taken in order to give the reader a snapshot of how the research is related to every aspect that researcher trying to examine. This research will talk about the two prime minister within their premierships. This research is discussing the two prime ministers within UK premierships concern on their Foreign Policy. It focuses on the individual level, which Gordon Brown (2007 – 2010) and David Cameron (2010 – 2016) become the main actor. The researcher uses the role theory in order to explain the utilizing of political behavior in foreign policy decision-making process of Gordon Brown and David Cameron during their premiership. Afterward, the researcher leads this research to the comparison between these two UK prime ministers regarding the Brexit, which happens in 2016.
12 I.7. Scope and Limitations of the Study In order to ensure the focus of the thesis, the researcher limit the scope of this study as follows: 1. This research is limited to the discussion on Gordon Brown (2007 – 2010) and David Cameron (2010 – 2016) foreign policy during their premiership as UK Prime Minister regarding European Union (EU). 2. This research focuses on the behavior of Gordon Brown and David Cameron, which referred to the individual level of analysis in Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA). 3. Related to previous point, this research also explains about the supporting factors of the foreign policy decision-making process, which are domestic politics (political party) and events during Gordon Brown and David Cameron premiership.
I.8. Definition of Terms This research has several terms that often use. Those are:
I.8.1 Foreign Policy Foreign policy is a plan of action that adopted by a nation regarding the nation diplomatic dealings with other countries. It coins as an efficient way to deal with the issue, which may arise with other countries. According to George Modelski, foreign policy can be defined as the system of activities evolved by communities for changing the behavior of other states and for adjusting their own activities to the international environment. 43 Moreover, Padelford and Lincoln define foreign policy as the key element in the process by which a state translates its broadly conceived goals and interests into concrete courses of action to attain these objectives and pressure its interests. Meanwhile, C.C. Rodee believed that “foreign policy involves the formulation and implementation of a group of principles, which shape the behavior pattern of a state while
43 Shodhganga : a Reservoir of Indian Theses @ INFLIBNET, accessed March 29, 2018, http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/27735/5/05_chapter-1.pdf.
13 negotiating with (contacting) other states to protect or further its vital interests.”44 Thus, the author can define the foreign policy as an element of a state in order to either maintain or expand the diplomatic relation, which includes the national interest within the policy.
I.8.2 The Conservative Party This party formed in 1770, which uphold the idea of the traditionalist of the country. Although this party upholds the idea of traditionalist, they support the new opportunities, which occurred by the industrial revolution and commercial expansion. However, during the 19th century, this right-wing party was separated into the traditionalist and reformers. And Benjamin Disraeli (1874 – 1880) was the great leader of this party who became the Prime Minister of Britain. In the 20th century, after the party got separated, this party got into more separated due to the country position in EU. Some of the MPs would like to remain. Some prefer to withdraw from the country membership in EU. In 2016, most of the MPs of this party were in favor to remain in EU and the rest preferred to withdraw. After David Cameron resigned from his position as the Prime Minister as well as the leader of this party, the Conservative MPs tend to be more supported in the withdrawal from EU. 45
I.8.3 The Liberal Democrat Party The Liberal Democrat Party, a center party in the UK, which established in 1988. This party got incorporation with the Liberal Party and Social Democratic Party (SPD). This party is the most pro-European party among other Britain parties, which in the 2015 premiership under David Cameron, this party coalition with the Conservative Party. Beforehand, in 2010, a lot of the Lib-Dem MPs did not agree with the idea of the coalition between this party and the Conservative, which they lost most of their MPs.46
44 Ibid 45 "Political Parties in Britain - a Short Guide," About-Britain.com a Thematic Guide to Britain, last modified January 1, 2014, https://about-britain.com/institutions/political-parties.htm. 46 "Political Parties in Britain - a Short Guide," About-Britain.com a Thematic Guide to Britain, last modified January 1, 2014, https://about-britain.com/institutions/political-parties.htm.
14
I.8.4 The Labor Party This party position is in the left wing of the UK party position. During the Tony Blair premiership, the New Labor dominated its premiership. The party is supported and funded by the British trade unions. Even though it got support from them, it is not significantly controlled by the British trade union. In 2016 regarding the Brexit referendum, the latest leader of this party, Jeremy Corbyn, gave a half-hearted support for his party position toward the issue, which was in favor to remain in EU. Moreover, eleven of its MPs resigned, in which those were not interlinked with the position of this party position. Furthermore, regarding the fact of half-hearted support from Corbyn, he was re-elected as the leader.47
I.8.5 Brexit Brexit, or British Exit, was an event, which referred to the withdrawal by the UK toward the membership in EU. This referendum was held under Prime Minister David Cameron, which happened on June 23, 2016.48 Beforehand, David Cameron pledged in his speech that he would conduct the referendum after he renegotiates the UK position in EU. The leaving vote won with the number of voting around 52 percent, while the remaining vote resulted in the number around 48 percent.49 Thus, within the fact that the referendum happened in the David Cameron premiership, it becomes the measurement of this research, which compare to the Gordon Brown premiership.
I.8.6 EU Single Market The single market refers to the free flow or movement of goods, service, and investment inside EU territory among the EU member countries, transcending
47 Ibid 48 "Definition of Brexit | What is Brexit ? Brexit Meaning," The Economic Times, accessed February 27, 2018, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/Brexit. 49 David Floyd, "Brexit," Investopedia, last modified March 20, 2018, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/brexit.asp.
15 borders without any barriers.50 The EU single market is one of the EU work plans. It aims to support the economic development of EU member countries. Besides free movement of goods and services, the capital and labor among its member countries are included in the work plan. Furthermore, it abolishes the tariffs and diminishes the cost and administrative burden within the regional trading area.51
I.8.7 Immigrant The immigrant comes from the word of “migrant”. According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), migrant can be defined as a person who lives temporarily or permanently in a country, which is not originally born in that country.52 Meanwhile, the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights defines migrant as if,
53
50 "The European Single Market - European Commission," Growth, last modified 2, 2018, https://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market_en. 51 "Why Should We Care About Leaving the EU Single Market?," The Independent, last modified March 13, 2017, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/single-market-brexit-eu-trade- deals-what-is-uk-leave-european-union-why-a7627061.html. 52 "Migrant | United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization," UNESCO | Building Peace in the Minds of Men and Women, accessed February 27, 2018, http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/international- migration/glossary/migrant/. 53 "Migrant | United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization," UNESCO | Building Peace in the Minds of Men and Women, accessed February 27, 2018, http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/international- migration/glossary/migrant/.
16 It divided into internal migration and international migration. Internal migration tends to move or migrate within the same country or region; meanwhile, International migration tends to move from one country to another country.54
I.8.8 Euroscepticism The term of Euroscepticism consists the word of “Euro”, “Sceptic”, and “ism”. The word of Euro refers to European Union. Meanwhile, the word of “sceptic” refers to the situation when someone doubts the idea or opinion. And “ism” refers to the word of ideology. Therefore, the Euroscepticism is the ideology of some actor who doubts toward the European integration. Generally, this ideology is referring to the political ideology that denies or disagrees the European Union policies. The people who believe in this ideology called as Eurosceptic.55
I.8.9 Lisbon Treaty The treaty of Lisbon is one of the EU treaties, which happened on December 13, 2007. Before the prime ministers and foreign ministers of 27 EU member countries signed it, it was called as the reform treaty.56 It is expected to reform the function of its international organization, which followed with the enlargement of the member countries from 15 to 27. It aims to increase the consistency and coherence of the EU external actions. It occurred “High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy”, which has the responsibility in the Council for the EU’s common foreign and defense policies.57 Moreover, it has several changes in the EU’s external policies. It has
54 "BBC - GCSE Bitesize: What is Migration?," BBC - Home, last modified September 15, 2006, http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/geography/migration/migration_trends_rev1.shtml. 55 Ornek Serdar and Ultam O. Mehlika, "Euroscepticism as an Ideology," EUROSCEPTICISM IN THE EUROPEAN UNION 4, no. 2 (2015): 50, doi:10.2472/SS.2015.4.2.006. 56 EUABC A Dictionary on Words Related to the EU, accessed February 27, 2018, http://en.euabc.com/upload/books/lisbon-treaty-3edition.pdf. 57 "The Lisbon Treaty," Home, accessed February 27, 2018, http://www.lisbon- treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/.
17 delivered regarding the EU’s development cooperation policy and added humanitarian assistance as a specific commission.58
I.9. Thesis Structure
I.9.1 Chapter I In this chapter, the researcher would like to give a brief explanation regarding the topic of this thesis. The explanation consists of the UK Foreign Policy, Prime Minister Gordon Brown and David Cameron Foreign Policy, and the emergence of Brexit referendum under David Cameron Premiership. Moreover, the author will also point out the problem identification and set out a question for this research, which the author should be answered in the last chapter of this research. Besides that, it delivers about the research objectives and theories, which the author will be used in this research. Those things will be delivered in this chapter through several sub-chapters, which are: a) Background of study, b) Problem identification, c) Statement of problem, d) Research objectives, e) Significance of the study, f) Theoretical framework, g) Scope and limitation of the study, h) Research methodology, i) Definition of terms, j) Thesis structure. This chapter aims to make the reader understands the brief topic of this thesis and what question that is expected to be answered through this research in the following chapters.
I.9.2 Chapter II This chapter will elaborate the case studies that are already written within this academic research by providing several ideas and arguments from experts in the forms of books and journals, which are related to the phenomenon. These literatures provide the ideas that have been and have not been established for the author to further study the case.
58 Ibid
18 I.9.3 Chapter III This chapter covers methodology of research that is going to be used for thesis writing process. The chapter will provide the details explanation of the research process and how the methodology is actually related to the topic that is being examined. The discussion in the chapter is structured start from the research method, and also the research instruments. The objective of this chapter is to inform the reader how the research was conducted.
I.9.4 Chapter IV In this chapter, the author would explain the overview of this research topic. In which it would explain the party-political ideology from these two prime ministers. Furthermore, it explains about the prime minister cognitive style, which concerns on Gordon Brown and David Cameron political ideology and affected to their policy decision-making process.
I.9.5 Chapter V This chapter will give the reader clear analysis of the topic of this research. It shows the dynamic changes of foreign policy by these two prime ministers. In which it leads to the answer to this question that arisen by the researcher. Moreover, it delivers the final decision of these two prime ministers, their foreign policy toward EU. Therefore, it gives a clear and understandable analysis of this research topic.
I.9.6 Chapter VI This chapter will be the conclusion of the research of this thesis. A summary of the topic of this thesis, as well as the answer of the given research question, will be answered clearly in this chapter.
19 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
II.1. Background of the Literature Review In order to clearly explain the topic issue in this research, the author is utilizing the literature review in order to deeply elaborate the basic understanding of the study, which can support the arguments. The literature review is the foundation for the researcher that will provide a comprehensive guidance like the main resource for the author that will provide a comprehensive guidance like the primary data collection that has been made by the previous research or scholars. In this thesis, the author will use several literatures towards the research such as: Books: 1. The Scientific Study of Foreign Policy, written by James N. Rosenau. 1971. 2. Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction, written by Marijke Breuning. Palgrave Macmillan. 2007. 3. Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making, written by Alex Mintz and Karl DeRouen. 2010 4. Role Theory in International Relations, written by Sebastian Harnisch, Cornelia Frank, and Hanns W. Maull, 1999 Journals: 1. Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy, and Theories of International Relations, written by James D. Fearon. 1998 2. Brexit and the Impact of Immigration on the UK, written by Jonathan Wadsworth, Swasti Dhingra, Gianmarco Ottaviano and John Van Reenen. 2016 3. The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis, and Cross-border Mergers and Acquisitions: A 26-nation Exploratory Study, written by Kotapati Srinivasa Reddy, Vinay Kumar Nangia, and Rajat Agrawal. 2014
20 II.2. Review of Books In this section, the research is trying to review four books as the author mentioned earlier in a simple and clear way. The aim of this review is to deliver a vision of the topic related to the research that has been probably created or discussed by the experts to support the continuation of this thesis.
II.2.1 The Scientific Study of Foreign Policy The first literature that the researcher reviewed is a book titled “The Scientific Study of Foreign Policy” written by James N. Rosenau.59 Within the deliberation of foreign policy analysis, which referred to the first concept of this research, it created an understanding of the concept. This literature discussed the birth political science. Then followed with the dimension of foreign policy research, the basic concepts of international politics and foreign policy, the international context and domestic context toward foreign policy study. Moreover, Rosenau (1971) defined foreign policy, as “thexonlyxfield relatesxthexbehaviorxofxaxnationalxactorxbothxitsxenvironmentxandxtoxits own functioningxbutxthexpricexofxsuchxaxfocusxisxthatxthexboundariesxofxthe field doxnotxcorrespondxtoxthosexofxanyxempiricalxpoliticalxsystem.60 He also argued that the emergence of foreign policy has a causal relationship between the internal and external factors, which affects the policymaker behavior.61 Moreover, the internal needs, such as identity, prestige, charismatic leader, and so on are the things that shaped the society, which affected to the country foreign policy. He explained about several points in the study of foreign policy, such as first, the stages of behavior analysis in foreign policy. Those are initiatory, implementive and responsive. 62 After that, the dependent and independent variables that might arise in analysis foreign policy from the country is included as the highlight point by the researcher. These two variables divided into two concerns, which are internal and external variables.63 Moreover, these two distinct
59 N. Rosenau, James. The Scientific Study of Foreign Policy, 1971. 60 Ibid., p. 91. 61 Ibid., p. 100. 62 Ibid., p. 80. 63 Ibid., p.80.
21 variables will affect when the policymaker creating and establishing the foreign policy. Thus, this variable could help the focusing of variables in this research.
II.2.2 Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction Another book that the researcher would like to review, which can help this research, is a book titled “Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction”. Marijke.64 This literature has another understanding of the first concept of this research, which is Foreign Policy Analysis. It explained the reason for study foreign policy. It also mentioned about the actors of foreign policymakers that shaped the foreign policy. After that, it talks about the interference of advisors and bureaucracies of the country toward the foreign policymaking. And followed with the internal and domestic context and the determination of the foreign policy. Marijke Breuning (1957) defined Foreign Policy as “thextotalityxof a country’sxpoliciesxtowardxandxinteractionsxwithxthexenvironment beyond its borders.” She emphasized on two important concepts within the foreign policy analysis, which are rationality and good foreign policy. Rationality can be defined as a concept where the leader asks those decision makers to have some rational purpose toward the decision-making process, which establishes several choices in order to obtain his or her leader interest. However, the foreign policy might not have an enviable outcome as what the leader thought before. Meanwhile, a good foreign policy, which created by the actors, might be a good policy to be run for the country. However, it did not guarantee the desired outcomes for the society. It might be either desirable or destructive policy toward to prevent or achieve the country interest.65 Through this literature, the researcher received several points that might help to write this research. Those are first, the field of foreign policy intention. Those are the security, economic, environmental, human rights, population growth and migration, food and energy policies, foreign aid and bilateral
64 Breuning, Marijke. Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction. First. 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010 and Houndmills, basingstoke, Hampshire, England RG21 6XS.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. 65 Ibid., p.3, 5.
22 relations.66 Besides that, the steps of the foreign policy decision making by the actor, unlike the previous literature, it called a choice and decision, behavior, and outcomes. Afterward, this literature explained about the level of analysis in study foreign policy, which are individual level, state level, and international system level. Each level has a different way of making the policy. Unlike the individual, which it is obviously a single actor that might create the steps of policy making, the state level invites other actors toward the policy-making process. In international system, it is inviting the countries to react to the policy that has been made by the policy maker of the country. Between the individual and state level, it emerges the Two-Level game. 67 Therefore, within those points, the researcher thinks that it will be useful for the writing of this research. In which, the researcher will create a strong analysis of the concept explanation that argued in this literature.
II.2.3 Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making The third literature that the researcher would like to review is the book titled “Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making” written by Alex Mintz and Karl DeRouen.68 Within 204 pages of this book, it still relates to the Foreign Policy Analysis. This literature talks about the reason to study foreign policy from those decision-maker perspective, the types of decision and levels of its analyses, the biases that might arise along the decision-making process, the rational actor model of foreign policy, the alternatives, the psychological factors that affect the decision-maker process, the international, domestic and cultural context that can influence foreign policy, the shaping toward foreign policy decision making through media, marketing, and framing and close with the conclusion afterward. Alex Mintz and Karl DeRouen (2010) have developed the concept, which they wrote about types of decision. It consists of one-shot (single decision),
66 Breuning, Marijke. Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction. First. 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010 and Houndmills, basingstoke, Hampshire, England RG21 6XS.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007, 5. 67 Ibid., p. 24, 25. 68 Mintz, Alex, and Karl DeRouen. Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making. Cambridge University Press, 2010.
23 interactive decision, sequential decision-making, sequence-interactive decisions and group decision-making.69 Moreover, they mentioned about the information search patterns in the Foreign Policy Decision-Making (FPDM). There are several patterns, which are holistic versus non-holistic, order sensitive versus order insensitive, the alternative based versus dimension based, maximizing versus satisficing, and compensatory versus non-compensatory. Moreover, the researcher is using the compensatory versus non-compensatory search patterns regarding the actor decision of their foreign policy. As Mintz and DeRouen mention in this book, the compensatory versus non-compensatory focuses on the idea of dimension score among others toward an issue. The compensatory explained that if one dimension has a low score toward an issue, however this dimension might be a compensated, which creates the bigger impact in other dimension. For instance if a state decided to use forces, and using forces in political dimension acknowledged as a low score, in other word do not in line with the game-play of political dimension. However, with the using of forces, it might have a great score in military dimension, which the military has fully supported of using the forces way besides the political dimension. On the other hand, the non- compensatory explained that if the alternative only has a low score, there is no other dimension that might have a better score or better resolving toward an issue.70 With the understanding this literature regarding the information search pattern, which emphasizes on the compensatory versus non-compensatory, it is going to help the researcher toward this research. As we see how Gordon Brown and David Cameron was solving the issue that happened during their premiership, referred to Global Financial Crisis, Eurozone Crisis, and the rising of immigrants number within the UK. Thus, this information search pattern may also help the examination of role theory within this research in order to achieve the objectives of this research.
69 Mintz, Alex, and Karl DeRouen. Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making. Cambridge University Press, 2010, 15. 70 Ibid., p. 32, 35.
24 II.2.4 Role Theory in International Relations The fourth literature that the researcher uses and review in this research is titled “Role Theory in International Relations” written by Sebastian Harnisch, Cornelia Frank, and Hanns W. Maull.71 These 322 pages literature delivers about collectives of role theory that can be applied in the International Relations approach toward the issue. It divides into several parts, which are theories, roles and institution, US hegemony, and conclusion. Moreover, the theories of role theory had written in this book by several experts, which have a background in foreign policy. Barnett (1993) defined the theory that concern on how an actor, individual or states, participates in a society with their own identity, which it can change to the appropriate behavior within the society. And Jonsson (1984) argued that in order to create a greater and lesser impact, the actor should emphasize on the co- constitutive character of its people (society), the state, and international society. Harnisch (1999) argued that the concept share common expectations. In his believes, the role arises through an interaction among nations, and the role combines individual identity and expectation from the surrounding, which emerges the hierarchy in international politics. Moreover, this theory shows that the behavior of politics, somehow, is the expectation from the society. In which the leader might role the nations either fulfill or not fulfill the surrounding expectations.72 The researcher uses this theory in order to have a better understanding on these two prime ministers ruling behavior. Both prime ministers have a Eurosceptic perception toward EU. Nonetheless, these prime ministers have a different way of thinking toward their foreign policy. Therefore, this gap would be the reason for this research for using this Role theory by Harnisch.
71 Harnisch, Sebastian, Cornelia Frank, and Hanns W. Maull. Role Theory in International Relations: Approaches and Analyses. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2011. 72 Ibid., p. 38.
25 II.3. Review of Journals
II.3.1 Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy, and Theories of International Relations The first journal that the researcher would like to review is titled “Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy, and Theories of International Relations” written by James D. Fearon.73 As it mentioned in the previous chapter, the researcher uses the domestic politics level as one of this research level of analysis toward FPA. Thus, this journal tells much about the concept of Domestic Politics that can explain the foreign policy of a country. According to Fearon (1998), he argued that domestic politics could coerce a country to create their foreign policy toward their country interest. In another word, the domestic politics might affect the final decision of the decision-maker actor toward the country foreign policy. Moreover, he argued that the domestic politics could not be separated from those political elites. Since he argued that as a non-uniter actor, the country needs another actor, representative actor, which creates an interaction between each other.74 Thus, it will create the dynamics of domestic politics. This concept got affected by the elite institution, such as legislative, so on and so on. That helps the country to fulfill a states interest, which aims to accommodate people expectation, which adjusted with the current situation and condition within domestic politics. Due to that deliberation, the researcher uses this concept in order to clearly guide the analysis of this research. Referred to the level of analysis, which the researcher had told before in the previous section. Moreover, it will leads into the individual and event that happened during each prime ministers premiership. Thus, it concludes the analysis, which might answer the research question in a proper and exact yet critic explanation.
73 James D. Fearon, "DOMESTIC POLITICS, FOREIGN POLICY, AND THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS," Annual Review of Political Science 1, no. 1 (1998): 290, doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.1.1.289. 74 Ibid., p. 291
26 II.3.2 Brexit and the Impact of Immigration on the UK The next journal that the researcher would like to review is a literature titled “Brexit and the Impact of Immigration on the UK” written by Jonathan Wadsworth, Swati Dhingra, Gianmarco Ottaviano and John Van Reenan.75 As it stated in the background part of this research, the rising number of immigration in the UK got an attention by the British citizen and also the UK government. However thus, this literature showed the research about a clear explanation of the immigrant number from 1995 to 2015. They argued that the increase happened after the “A8” joined EU in 2004. Moreover, they argued that the fear of British citizen regarding the job competition with the immigration in their country is one of the reasons that the UK proposed to exit from EU. Those immigrants tend to be more skills that can help the productivity within the UK business. Moreover, those immigrants tend to pay tax and with the background mostly they are younger and better educated, they did not use public services very often. In which it helps the budget of the country to maintain the country facilities. However, they argued that it actually is the matter of how the government spent the budget very wisely.76 Therefore, this literature might help the researcher in the writing process. It helps with providing the data of the event, the rising number of immigrant, in David Cameron premiership. Moreover, it could help the researcher to compare of the event that happened between Gordon Brown and David Cameron during their premiership.
II.3.3 The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis, and Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions: A 26-nation Exploratory Study Another literature that the researcher uses is titled “The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis, and Cross-border Mergers and Acquisitions: A 26-nation Exploratory Study” written by Kotapati Srinivasa Reddy, Vinay Kumar Nangia,
75 Wadsworth, Jonathan, Swati Dhingra, and John Van Reenen. “Brexit and Impact of Immigrationn on the UK.” The London School of Economics and Political Science, May 2016. 76 Ibid., p.5.
27 and Rajat Agrawal.77 It explains about the 2007-2008 global crisis. The reason for the crisis, corporate governance and firm value, macroeconomics performance and others, are shown in this literature. In which, the event happens during the Gordon Brown premiership that affecte the UK economic situation, which occurred a crisis globally, as well as within the UK. Within this journal, the cause of the crisis that affected globally was due to the fiasco of its economic policy within the developed country, Petri and Plummer argued. In which, they conclude to have a new financial institution and reformation toward the financial policy.78 Furthermore, Taylor (2009) took a conclusion that “loose monetary policies or incentives were the roots of the crisis”. Reddy, Nangia, and Agrawal (2014) argued that the existence of this crisis happened within two stages. Firstly, it caused by the global macroeconomics liquidity policies. Secondly, the incapability of the existing framework that focuses on the regulations and government standards. Moreover, the crisis was started since the US mortgage market collapsed. And the further impact, nearly the crisis began, was “the asset market collapsed, then real housing prices plunged by an average 35 percent over six years, while equity prices tumbled sharply, an average downturn of 55 percent over about three and half years.” Ever since that, the crises were widespread impacted to other countries, including the UK.79 The researcher uses this literature in order to create supporting factors in regard to Gordon Brown premiership. Within the domestic politics level approach, it encourages the researcher to find the factors in order to create a strong analysis. Therefore, the data and the cause of crisis could be beneficial for the writing of this research.
77 Reddy, Kotapati S., Vinay K. Nagia, and Rajat Agrawal. “The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis, and Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions: A 26-Nation Exploratory Study,” September 2014. 78 Ibid., p. 257 79 Ibid., p. 257 – 261.
28 II.4. The Chapter Summary From all the literature that the researcher reviewed, it brought into a researcher perception to what this research should be like. However, it is still in line with those experts perception within the theory and concept that used for this research. It defines foreign policy as a state policy, which aims to attain the state interest within the diplomatic ties with another country. Moreover, in order to understand the foreign policy, there are levels that the researcher should be understood before going further to the research. Individual, state, and international system are the level of analysis in FPA. Meanwhile, as it stated above, the domestic and international politics might affect the decision of Foreign Policy Decision Making process. Thus, within the decision-making process, domestic and international politics are the factors in its decision-making process. Besides that, in order to understand the actor of FPDM, the using of role theory is advantageous for this research. Identity and people expectation is the elements that the researcher could use in order to identify the foreign policy of each prime ministers of UK. And with the existence of data crisis that happened during these prime ministers premiership, Gordon Brown and David Cameron, it can be the supporting factors for analyzing each person. In which the changing of foreign policy would be clearly showed within this research.
29 CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
III.1. Research Methodology The researcher is confidence in writing this research, as he was always been interested in the foreign policy-making process and outcomes of it. In which, the author was conducting his thesis program from December 2017 until March 2018 and therefore has been deeply understanding the UK foreign policy toward the EU. Throughout the research process, the author has analyzed and compared between the latest prime ministers premierships before the Brexit referendum occurred, which are Gordon Brown and David Cameron. The writing process of this thesis is using data collection approach. Moreover, the chosen approach is influenced by the data collection strategy, the type of variable, measuring the accuracy, as well as the collection point. As the topic has been answered with the research question upon the research, the author believes that he can learn from these two prime minister making the foreign policy, which focuses on the relationship with EU. Thus, it will help the author academic skill in terms of understanding the foreign policy issue better than before. This research used the qualitative approach in order to answer the research question instead using the form of number collective research, quantitative approach. Qualitative research is a naturalistic, interpretative approach concerned with understanding the meanings of certain observed phenomena or actions. As remarked by Cresswell (1994), the qualitative approach is as an inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem, based on building a complex, holistic picture, formed with words, reporting detailed views of informants, and conducted in a natural setting.80 In another word, it is a scientific research, which includes investigation within the research.81 Moreover, Cresswell stated about five main
80 "The Qualitative Paradigm," School of Computing, accessed March 31, 2018, http://www.computing.dcu.ie/~hruskin/RM2.htm. 81 Natasha Mack Family Health International and Cynthia Woodsong, Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector's Field Guide (North Carolina: FLI, 2005).
30 qualitative research types, which are (1) The Biography, (2) Phenomenology, (3) Grounded Theory, (4) Ethnography, (5) Case Study.82 Besides that, the data collection in qualitative research is (1) observation, (2) In-Depths interviews, (3) group interviews, (4) the collection of relevant documents, (5) photographs and videotapes.83 Therefore, besides the author will be led this research into the case study, observation, the collection of relevant documents and photographs and videotapes, will be the source in order to support the arguments and answer the research question within the research.
III.2. Research Instrument Internet: Technology is a common thing, which becomes a priority of life. Within the advancing its technology, it can bring a lot of advantages in this globalization era. And within the utilization of Internet, the author uses it as one of the research instrument toward this research. Moreover, it can help the author to access the source and data in order to support the author arguments toward the topic in this research. Through this instrument, the researcher is going to limit the data searching only for foreign policy of Gordon Brown and David Cameron, the understanding about the concept of this research theory and concept, so on and so forth. Thus, the author utilizes the development of technology quite well as in the globalization priority life. Journals and Reports: During the research process, the author used many journals and reports. The aims beside provide important and valuable information through this research, but it also provides influential thoughts during the process of this research. Furthermore, it helps the author in the literature review chapter. And through this instrument, the limit is going to be on the Lisbon Treaty, reports of states GDP, the migrant statistic reports, so on and so forth. Media Articles: In this thesis process, the author would like to use around 50 media articles in order to analyze of both prime ministers foreign policy toward EU. Since their foreign policy did not clearly state in the official journal or
82 "The Qualitative Paradigm," School of Computing, accessed March 31, 2018, http://www.computing.dcu.ie/~hruskin/RM2.htm. 83 Ibid
31 book, which the author should use media articles as one of the research instrument in order to support and clearly picture both policies. Thus, this research question will be answered with the help of those media articles. The media that became the source of this research are BBC, the Guardian, Politico, Britpolitics, Independent, Economist, CNN, and the New York Times.
32 CHAPTER IV DOMESTIC POLITICS UNDER GORDON BROWN AND DAVID CAMERON PREMIERSHIP
Unlike the United States parties, UK had only with two major parties, which were Conservative in the right wing and Liberal in the left wing.84 The left party got replaced in the 20th century, with the same aim, however different concern of rights, which is labor party. It followed with the coin of other huge parties, such as Liberal Democratic, UK Independence Party (UKIP), and Green Party. Furthermore, the emergence of other parties that based on their identity background has arisen, such as Scottish National Party (SNP), Sinn Fein, Social Democratic, and Labor party, so on and so forth.85 With the existence of these parties, according to Harnisch (1999), besides identity of the leader itself, the people expectation could affect the final decision of the leader foreign policy. In which, it got affected by the values that might share by the people expectation.86 The researcher is focusing the analyzing in the level states. Moreover, the domestic politics is going to be the supporting arguments within this analysis. The domestic politic does not only focus on the political situation of the country, however, the economy and social culture might be considered as the factors within the domestic politics. Therefore, as if stated by the researcher, this chapter is going to show the political ideology, consist of party ideology and leadership style of each prime ministers. The researcher uses role theory in order to analyze this topic.
84 "Whig and Tory | Historical Political Party, England," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Whig-Party-England. 85 "Political Parties in Parliament," UK Parliament, accessed March 31, 2018, http://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/parties/. 86 Harnisch, Sebastian, Cornelia Frank, and Hanns W. Maull. Role Theory in International Relations: Approaches and Analyses. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2011, 42.
33 IV.1. Domestic Politics of Gordon Brown during His Premiership In this section, the researcher will differentiate to his party ideology and his leader ideology.
IV.1.1 The Labor Party Ideology It formed in 1929, which it replaced the liberal party as the opposite alternative to the conservative besides Liberal Democrats nowadays. As a center- left party, it has the same idea like the Whigs party in the 1600s which is the modernization of British Parliament.87 Unlike other parties, this party has emerged for people.88 It formed in order to give the people opportunity to shout their voice to seek power in order to have a prosper life. Therefore, this party upholds the ideology of Social democracy and Democratic socialism.89 Beforehand, with those political ideologies, this party had been announced in the leader manifesto, Michael Foot, to withdraw UK membership in the EU in 1983. However, the Labor party lost in the election due to Foot manifesto. Ever since that, the successor, Neil Kinnock, tried to re-create the party credibility with reevaluation policies within the party and eliminated the extremist within MP of this party. Furthermore, the party ideology had been increasingly changing after Tony Blair served as leader party and won the election, which made him as UK Prime Minister.90 In Tony Blair premiership, he introduced a new form of Labor Party for the future. 91 He introduced the Third Way for a new labor party, which could fit in the 21st century world order.92 Third Way is a political ideology that utilizes the left wing and right wing ideology at the same time.93 In this context, the left wing ideology uses in the terms of social democracy within the government. Meanwhile, the right-wing
87 "Political Parties in Britain - a Short Guide," About-Britain.com a Thematic Guide to Britain, last modified January 1, 2014, https://about-britain.com/institutions/political-parties.htm. 88 "Labour's Legacy," The Labour Party, accessed March 31, 2018, https://labour.org.uk/about/labours-legacy/. 89 "Labour Party | History, Facts, Policies, & Leaders," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Labour-Party-political-party. 90 Ibid 91 "Labour's Legacy," The Labour Party, accessed March 31, 2018, https://labour.org.uk/about/labours-legacy/. 92 "Third Way | History & Features," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/third-way. 93 Ibid
34 ideology uses for showing the neoliberalism within the country. As it stated above, Tony Blair introduced his party with this ideology, Third Way. In which he believed it would fit with the 21st century world political order. And according to Anthony Giddens, this political ideology shows something that also fits the globalization and economic dependency nowadays. He argued that first, his ideology could be able to raise a radical movement, between left and right, due to the wings ideology that this party used. Second, it introduced the idea of “new democratic state”. This idea encourages the country to be more open to international politics. Third, this ideology tends to be more actively engaged with the society. Fourth, it promotes the idea of “democratic family”, which it supports the “Coperanting”, gender equality, and lifelong parental contracts. Fifth, “new mixed economy” is introduced through this ideology. In which, the government encourages the people to have a public-private partnership, private incentivization of consumer-friendly public service provision. Afterward, the equality of inclusion has been introducing with Blair. It maximizes the individual opportunities, instead focuses on the outcomes.94
IV.1.2 Gordon Brown Cognitive Style James Gordon Brown or most common people know him, as Gordon Brown was a British Labor Party Prime Minister from 2007 to 2010. He was born in Scotland, February 20 in 1951. Beforehand, he used to be Tony Blair Exchequer chancellor, which concerned in UK domestic economy-related policies. Moreover, he also joined in Blair campaign. With the total of nomination around 308, while the other candidates, John McDonnel (29 nominations) and Michael Meacher (withdrew), Gordon Brown elected as the leader of Labor party, which also nominated as the representative for being prime minister candidate from his party.95 After the election had conducted, he won and chosen as prime
94 "Third Way | History & Features," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/third-way. 95 Neil Johnston and Lucinda Maer, "Leadership Elections: Labour Party," House of Commons Library, last modified September 26, 2016,
35 minister right after Blair resigned from his position in 2007. 96 During his premiership, he argued that poverty and debt in the country would be third world diseases.97 As a Eurosceptic prime minister, he still believes in the idea of European Cooperation. He argues that through that European Cooperation, it can pursue his international interest. In which, to strengthen the bilateral ties with the US president at that time, George W. Bush, was one of his international interest that had been implemented by his predecessor, Tony Blair.98 Moreover, in terms of his cognitive style toward his political behavior, Gordon Brown upholds the idea of Liberalism, which has a different, believed with his political party, the Labor party. As it mentioned in Kevin Theakston, a Leeds University professor, journal about Gordon Brown leadership style, he argued that Gordon Brown was not a good figure to become the UK prime minister. He stated, “his speech-making style described as monotone and relentless, involving a barrage of lists facts and achievements or firing out machine-gum pusillades of statistics.”99 If we refer to his past experience, when he served as Tony Blair chancellor, he concerned in the domestic economic affairs within the country. Thus, it affected the way of his speech and ruling the party. Besides that, he believed the “common ground” idea of Keith Joseph, which it relates to the political agenda that adopt the moral and material benefits of the market order and a politics that based on the hierarchy of “values, aspiration, understanding, and policies”. Moreover, the common ground was the territory that filled by those politicians whose aims to transform the expectation of government in chasing the prosperity, less crime, less dependency, housing
96 "Gordon Brown Biography," The Biography.com website, accessed March 14, 2018, https://www.biography.com/people/gordon-brown-39841. 97 The Economist, Britain: Welcome to the world; Gordon Brown and foreign affairs, June 2007, doi:00130613. 98 Ibid., p. 2. 99 The American College of Greece, accessed March 31, 2018, http://www.acg.edu/ckeditor_assets/attachments/1426/ideal-prime-minister.pdf.
36 choice, decent education, private profit and investment, and freedom within the law to run our own lives.100 Brown cited the work of the American conservative philosopher, James Q. Wilson regarding the “Moral Sense”. In Wilson perception, the purpose of this moral sense was to ease people recover the confidence once spoke about virtue and morality. In Gordon Brown moral sense, it refers to the Scottish Enlightenment moral sense, which are human nature, family experience, gender and culture. Moreover, in Wilson moral sense, he argued that there are four aspects in the moral sense, such as fairness, self-control, sympathy and duty. And with these values upon his believes, he tried to implement those values into the UK politics. Furthermore, during his speech to the Labor Party Annual Conference in Brighton, which talked about “Politics as a moral duty”, his values set by his parents. In which he should be able “to do my best and to work hard but to treat everyone equally, to respect others, to tell the truth, to take responsibility but also to understand that for every opportunity there was an obligation, for every demand a duty, for every chance given a contribution to be made.” Afterward, he identified his party moral sense, which is “that every child has the best start in life, that no on is left behind. A vision that defines us as a community and as a country inspires a new sense of mission.” Thus, within those values, it implemented for the continuing project of national renewal and with his redefinition of his country.101 During his premiership, besides the common ground by Keith Joseph, Professor Iain McLean of Oxford University argued that Gordon Brown has a resembling ideology, which is Sympathetic Liberalism. McLean stated that Adam Smith and Gordon Brown are alike in terms of their philosophy and political economy, for instance in their understanding of market failure, which is the situation of the demands of the consumer does not equal with the quantity from the suppliers of goods.102
100 Simon Lee, Best for Britain?: The Politics and Legacy of Gordon Brown (Oxford: Oneworld, 2008), 221. 101 Ibid., p.45. 102 Ibid., p.47.
37 Moreover, it refers to the human moral sentiment of Adam Smith, which “it is our capacity for sympathetic insight into others that allows us to take up the role of impartial spectator towards ourselves.” Besides, we consider ourselves from the faults, but also we have the capability to identify the other people condition and offer them help if it is needed.103 He argued that within six main arguments of this understanding, which are: “First, both oppose rent-seeking by vested interests. For Brown, this means that producer interests should not be treated as being synonymous with the public interest. Second, both reject selfishness as the sole motive of human life, reflected in Brown’s exploration of the moral limits of markets. Third, both Smith and Brown understand market failure and fourth, have identified the role that the state has to play in correcting it but, fifth, recognise that the state does not have to provide public goods itself. Sixth, Brown shares Smith’s four maxims of taxation, announcing that he had them at his side when preparing his 2002 Budget.”104 Thus, according to McLean understanding, the researcher could argue that Gordon Brown, besides the historical moral sense that he brought from his parents, he also upholds the idea of Liberalism. Within this understanding, it can be related to the Harnisch perception on Role theory, which he used the Mead model to interpret the Gordon Brown perception toward his foreign policy. In which refers to the Global Europe foreign policy toward the EU (chapter five).
103 Simon Lee, Best for Britain?: The Politics and Legacy of Gordon Brown (Oxford: Oneworld, 2008), 48 104 Ibid., p. 48.
38 IV.2. Domestic Politics of David Cameron during His Premiership In this section, it will be separated into Conservative Party ideology, Liberal Democrats Party ideology, and David Cameron leadership ideology. Thus, it will make the reader understand the overview of those fields.
IV.2.1 The Conservative Party Ideology The Conservative party was a successor party of Tories. It emerges in the year of 1834 up until now. It aims to maintain the optimum tradition of UK. However, this party also believes in the idea of international cooperation, which started during the industrial revolution. This center-right wing party has become the major party in today UK politic with the opposite, Labor party. Benjamin Disraeli was a conservative prime minister, which became the greatest reformer in the 19th century.105 Conservatives party under David Cameron as a leader party upholds the ideology of One Nation and Liberal Conservative.106 “One Nation” ideology is an ideology that shows the state as an active actor to be the key to fixing the social problems. 107 One nation bloc concerns on economic intervention and social harmony.108 Liberal conservative is an ideology that referred to the freedom of an individual. And there are three reasons from David Cameron in using this ideology to the conservative party. First, he argued that it gives an identity to the certain looks of the party. Second, it demonstrates that Cameron leadership within the party is right wing ideology instead left wing although he was known as Eurosceptic UK prime minister. Finally, it is to suggest and examine the liberty of individual within the country.109
105 "Political Parties in Britain - a Short Guide," About-Britain.com a Thematic Guide to Britain, last modified January 1, 2014, https://about-britain.com/institutions/political-parties.htm. 106 Matt Beech and Simon Lee, The Conservatives Under David Cameron: Built to Last? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 19. 107 Ibid., p. 21. 108 "Conservative Party | History, Facts, Policy, & Structure," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Conservative-Party-political-party-United-Kingdom. 109 Ibid., p. 26.
39 In the first premiership of Cameron, the conservative had cooperated with the Liberal Democrats party to rule the government. Nevertheless, it had been changing in the next premiership of Cameron, which the Conservative fully won the election. However, since during the campaign, Cameron was under the Liberal Democrats party, the Liberal Democrats demanded to create an action toward the Eurosceptic idea. In which, Cameron pledged to run a withdrawal referendum from the EU.
IV.2.2 The Liberal Democrats Party Ideology Liberal Democrats Party was formed in 1989. It was a reformation of Liberal Party. Moreover, this center party was a merger with Social Democratic Party, which established a name of Liberal Democrats party.110 Nick Clegg was a representative of this party in the 2010 general election. However, the election won by David Cameron, which is the Conservative Party. Although this party lost the election, the coalition between Liberal Democrats and Conservatives had successfully been made.111 Liberal Democrats party upholds the ideology of classical liberalism, social liberalism, and Pro-Europeanism. 112 The idea of Classical Liberalism known as Economic Liberalism in the media world argued by Grayson (2010).113 This ideology is more into removing the barriers, which leads to the free economic competition. Besides that, it aims to give an individual liberty of UK citizen. Afterward, social liberalism ideology of this party focuses on the freedom. In which, this party tries to provide social justice that favors individual to maximize their potential through freedom.114 In accordance to figure IV.1, it shows that the in the election of 2015, the Liberal Democrats tended to be in the center - right party. And in that occasion, the coalition between the conservative and liberal democrats had separated, which
110 "Political Parties in Britain - a Short Guide," About-Britain.com a Thematic Guide to Britain, last modified January 1, 2014, https://about-britain.com/institutions/political-parties.htm. 111 "United Kingdom | History, Geography, Facts, & Points of Interest - Thatcherism (1979?90)," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/place/United- Kingdom/Thatcherism-1979-90#ref978039. 112 Alistair Clark, "The Liberal Democrats," in Political Parties in the UK(2014), 86. 113 Ibid., p. 87 114 Ibid., p. 87
40 like aforementioned statement, that in the second premiership of David Cameron, his ruling was fully under the Conservative Party. Thus, the position explained the UK party ideology.
Figure IV.1. The changes in the party system in England, from June 2015 to May 2017
Source: Democratic Audit UK, How democratic are the UK’s political parties and party system?, February 8, 2016.115
IV.2.3 David Cameron Cognitive Style David Cameron, the successor of Gordon Brown, was born in London, October 9 in 1966.116 He was a Conservative prime minister since 2010 until 2016. Before he got chosen as the UK prime minister, with the number of votes around 134 while the opposition, David Davis, was around 64 votes, he got elected as a party leader in Conservative in 2005.117 Within his campaign for conservative leader party, he promised to thrive the party, which he believed if it
115 "How Democratic Are the UK’s Political Parties and Party System?," Democratic Audit UK, last modified April 19, 2018, http://www.democraticaudit.com/2016/02/08/how-democratic-uks- political-parties-party-system/. 116 "David Cameron Biography," The Biography.com website, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.biography.com/people/david-cameron-39203. 117 Matthew Tempest, "Tories Crown Cameron Their New Leader," The Guardian, last modified June 9, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/dec/06/toryleadership2005.conservatives
41 would not happen, the party would become a fringe group.118 Afterward, he got chosen as Prime Minister.119 Unlike his predecessor, Brown, with his Eurosceptic ideology, Cameron was trying to remain the UK membership in EU, which refers to the conservatism. It is not because of the cooperation, however, he would try to ask the rights of UK membership in EU instead leave without effort. Moreover, he does not even like the EU parliament and its flag, which he argued that the UK has its best.120 Besides Eurosceptic, David Cameron also upholds the ideology of One Nation Conservatism, New Right/Thatcherite, and Liberal Conservatism.121 One nation emerged in the post-war era, which created an active state approach toward the government and examines the state as the key player in solving social problems within the country. This ideology is more represented the Conservative voters, which refers to how the European Union as one union might solve the problem among other members. In which in this case, the union act as the key player upon the issue.122 For the second ideology is the New Right/Thatcherite. The New Rights refers to the new reaction, which established due to the interpretation of conservatism. Furthermore, it is trying to connect the free market liberalism with social conservatism and advocate the tradition of social order and public morality to the politics of conservative in regard to the emergence of the permissive society. Thus, in the New Right, it included the classical liberal ideas regarding the economy, taxation, the size and shipping between states, an anti- egalitarianism, so on and so forth to the age of they were living. And the famous UK actors, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, upheld this New Right.123
118 "BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Contender: David Cameron," Home - BBC News, last modified September 29, 2005, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4651553.stm. 119 "David Cameron Biography," The Biography.com website, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.biography.com/people/david-cameron-39203. 120 Charlie Bayliss, "'I Didn't Like the EU Flag' Cameron Hints He Was Eurosceptic DURING Referendum Campaign," Express.co.uk, last modified March 30, 2017, https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/785649/nicola-sturgeon-slapped-down-poll-john-curtice- research-scotland-brexit. 121 Matt Beech and Simon Lee, The Conservatives Under David Cameron: Built to Last? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 19. 122 Ibid., p. 19. 123 Ibid., p. 21.
42 Furthermore, the ideology of Thatcher New Right was referring to against the ideology of Conservative opponents, which are the Labor Party, so on and so forth. For upholding the Thatcherism, the actor is going to support the Margaret Thatcher policies and respect her during her premiership as Prime Minister in 1980s. Moreover, in this context, Matt Beech and Simon Lee argued that Cameron upholds this ideology, as it refers to his free-marketer. In doing so, he decided to have a less state intervention in the economy and in UK citizen welfare. Thus, it can be called as a neo-liberal in his political economy.124 Besides one nation and new right/Thatcherism, he does believe in the ideology of Liberal Conservative. As it declared in his speech on Liberal Consensus 2007, that he is Liberal due to the individual liberty in order to pursue happiness with the minimum of interference from the government and believe about the possibilities of future. Meanwhile, the conservative refers to the historical memories, past, present, and the future generation, that might have benefited from understanding those moments. As it mentioned in his speech “Conservatives believe in continuity and belonging; we believe in the traditions of our country, which are embedded in our institutions. Liberal and Conservative, indivudal freedom and social responsibility.”125 Moreover, he used the ideology of Liberal with the following three reasons. First of all, Liberal Conservative gives identity to certain outlooks, which coined a different perception with his party past. Second of all, he wanted to prove that he is not a Tory right wing for the Conservative party. Third of all, it refers to the individual liberty of UK citizen.126 Thus, within those reasons, he uses this ideology to become his cognitive style toward his political career and his foreign policy under his premiership, which Promoting the Country Interest (in Chapter five).
124 Matt Beech and Simon Lee, The Conservatives Under David Cameron: Built to Last? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 24. 125 "David Cameron – 2007 Speech on Liberal Consensus," UKPOL, last modified December 31, 2015, http://www.ukpol.co.uk/david-cameron-2007-speech-on-liberal-consensus/. 126 Matt Beech and Simon Lee, The Conservatives Under David Cameron: Built to Last? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 26 - 27.
43 IV.3. Article 50 of Lisbon Treaty In regards to respect the UK citizen decision to withdraw from the EU, it refers to the Lisbon Treaty, article 50. In which the country should notify the European Council regarding the withdrawal from the EU. According to Chris Bickerton, a lecturer at Cambridge University and author of The European Union: A Citizen’s Guide, he argued that this article 50 in Lisbon treaty would not even be used by the EU member countries, which it makes the withdrawal country difficult to withdraw. Hence, the history has been made. The UK decided to withdraw the membership from the EU.127 The article 50 of Lisbon treaty stated that the EU member countries might decide to withdraw from the Union. Afterward, the country should notify the European Council, like the aforementioned statement in the previous paragraph. In this phase, there is a negotiation, which according to the article 218 (3) regarding the future ties between the EU and withdrawn country ahead. Furthermore, the process of the withdrawn takes two years since the date of proposing the withdrawal of the country. However, it can be extended if the European Council request to do so. In the meantime, the withdrawn country representative in the Union cannot participate in any the European Council decision-making. Afterward, if the country has withdrawn already, the proposal that has been discussed by the Union and the withdrawn country, it should be put into 27 member countries systems as European.128 After the Brexit coined and the UK citizens agreed to withdraw the membership, it proceeded to the article 50 by Theresa May. She notified the European Council and had a negotiation between the Union and the UK. In her speech in the negotiation with the European Union, and President Donald Tusk was there, the article 50 is now underway and in line with the wishes of UK citizen, regarding Brexit.129 Although there is a chance for the withdrawn country
127 "Why Article 50 is Deliberately Vague?," The Independent, last modified March 13, 2017, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/article-50-brexit-what-is-it-how-does-it-work- works-trigger-bill-eu-leave-lisbon-treaty-theresa-may-a7626956.html. 128 "Article 50," Home, accessed May 10, 2018, http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon- treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html. 129 "'No Turning Back' on Brexit - May," BBC News, last modified March 30, 2017, http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39431428.
44 to rejoin the Union, however, she stated that there is no turning back on this, which the UK should withdraw its membership from the Union.
IV.4. The Chapter Summary As it stated above, this chapter is about the overview of Gordon Brown and David Cameron during his premiership. Gordon Brown party, Labor party, upholds the ideology of social democracy and democratic socialist.130 After Tony Blair premiership, labor party has a new political ideology, which is Third- Way. 131 Gordon Brown is also using that ideology during his premiership. Although he is a Eurosceptic prime minister, however, he believes in the European cooperation, which refers to Liberalism. 132 Moreover, he also uses the moral sense, which he brought by his parents when he was a kid. Those are giving the best effort in any kind of activity and tell no lies. And always see the great opportunity among his decision. Besides that, he has a similar perception with Adam Smith, which the researcher aforementioned in his parts.133 In another hand, David Cameron party, the conservative, upholds the ideology of one nation, Thatcherite conservative, and liberal conservative.134 Meanwhile, his coalition of the party, the Liberal Democrats, upholds the ideology of liberalism, social liberalism, and Pro-Europeanism.135 Moreover, as a Eurosceptic leader, he also upholds the conservatism ideology.136 He used the idea of Thatcher into his ideology also, which he would be as radical as Thatcher
130 "Labour Party | History, Facts, Policies, & Leaders," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Labour-Party-political-party. 131 "Third Way | History & Features," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/third-way. 132 The Economist, Britain: Welcome to the world; Gordon Brown and foreign affairs, June 2007, doi:00130613. 133 Simon Lee, Best for Britain?: The Politics and Legacy of Gordon Brown (Oxford: Oneworld, 2008), 48 134 Matt Beech and Simon Lee, The Conservatives Under David Cameron: Built to Last? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009). 135 The American College of Greece, accessed March 31, 2018, http://www.acg.edu/ckeditor_assets/attachments/1426/ideal-prime-minister.pdf. 136 "David Cameron, the Accidental European," POLITICO, last modified May 20, 2016, https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-accidental-european-brexit-referendum- conservative-tory-euroskeptic/.
45 was. 137 Further aspects have been mentioned above, which it gives an understanding for the researcher. Afterward, with the issue of Brexit that happened during David Cameron premiership, it led to the article 50 in Lisbon Treaty. In which discussed the withdrawal of member country of EU. It stated that after the proposal, it would have 2 years of discussion regarding the rights of each actor, the withdrawal country and the EU. In the meantime, the country cannot be joined in any decision that happens within the Union regarding the issue. And if a country had successfully withdrawn from the Union, they have another chance to rejoin to the Union. Unlike the UK under Theresa May, she stated that there is no turning back to the decision of UK citizen.138
137 "Conservative Conference: David Cameron's Speech in Full," The Guardian, last modified June 9, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/oct/01/davidcameron.toryconference1. 138 "Article 50," Home, accessed May 10, 2018, http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon- treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html.
46 CHAPTER V ANALYZING THE UNITED KINGDOM DECISION TO WITHDRAW ITS MEMBERSHIP IN THE EUROPEAN UNION (EU) (2007 – 2016)
This chapter is going to be the analyzing of this research. It started with the brief explanation of the behavior and party ideology, which used role theory as the main base of explanation, of Gordon Brown and David Cameron. Followed with the current event that happens during the premiership of both prime ministers. It started with the global financial crisis, Eurozone crisis, and the rising number of immigrants within the UK (figure V.1). Afterward, the researcher is going to analyze with the data of Gordon Brown and David Cameron role in the government and the events that happen during their premiership, to the foreign policy decision of Gordon Brown and David Cameron. Moreover, it followed with the comparison between Gordon Brown and David Cameron, which concern on how their foreign policy changed regarding Brexit. Therefore, with those parts, the researcher is going to answer the research question in the understandable yet critical way.
V.1. Role Theory This section will determine the Mead model of role theory. It started with the Gordon Brown-Mead model and followed with David Cameron-Mead model.
V.1.1 Gordon Brown In accordance with Mead model, the previous chapter has mentioned the aspects of role theory, which are “I” and “Me”. As it stated above, the “I” referred to individual identity and behavior. Gordon Brown has it all. Gordon Brown is a Eurosceptic UK Prime Ministers, which served the country since 2007 to 2010.139
139 Charlie Bayliss, "'I Didn't Like the EU Flag' Cameron Hints He Was Eurosceptic DURING Referendum Campaign," Express.co.uk, last modified March 30, 2017,
47 And referred to Greenstein model of leadership style, he is bad communication in the public. Moreover, his speech was monotone and heartless. Besides that, he chosen his cautious and slow in terms of solving the problem, he is the brain of Labor party during his leadership. He was the “consummate strategist” within the party. As Blair introduced the “Third Way” of new Labor Party, Brown agreed and used this ideology as his political ideology. However, it changed into more left-wing ideology instead staying in the third way ideology.140 Referred to Mead model, the second aspect might influence the identity of the “I”, which it changed to be the object of the research. 141 In Brown premiership, the “Me” could refer to the political ideology of his party, which is Labor party. Labor party, as it stated in the previous chapter, upholds the ideology of social democracy, democratic socialism, and Third Way as the new labor party ideology. And the further elements from Mead models, it will be explained further later.
V.1.2 David Cameron After we know about Gordon Brown, the researcher delivers about the other actors of this research, which is David Cameron. Cameron has an identity as a Eurosceptic leader within the UK political history.142 He believes in the idea of “One Nation” toward his political vision. Moreover, as a good emotionally, self- confident and communicator, he is one of the great leaders in regards to what the UK really needs. It is because he is very deliberative, cunning yet clever leader rather than his predecessor. Moreover, as a leader, he has a quick mind toward the
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/785649/nicola-sturgeon-slapped-down-poll-john-curtice- research-scotland-brexit. 140 The American College of Greece, accessed March 31, 2018, http://www.acg.edu/ckeditor_assets/attachments/1426/ideal-prime-minister.pdf. 141 Ibid., p. 39. 142 Charlie Bayliss, "'I Didn't Like the EU Flag' Cameron Hints He Was Eurosceptic DURING Referendum Campaign," Express.co.uk, last modified March 30, 2017, https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/785649/nicola-sturgeon-slapped-down-poll-john-curtice- research-scotland-brexit.
48 issue that happens within the country.143 In which, those are the points that the country need. And in “Me” aspects in Cameron, he included in the Conservative party. As a center-right wing party, the Conservative upholds the ideology of “One Nation”, Thatcherite conservative and the liberal conservative.144 In his first period of governing the UK (2010 – 2015), his party had a coalition with another party, which was the Liberal Democrats. This center-left wing party upholds the ideology of classical liberalism, social liberalism, and Pro-Europeanism.145 And the further elements from Mead models, it will be explained further later.
V.2. Events: In Gordon Brown and David Cameron Premiership
V.2.1 Global Financial Crisis This event had been happening long before Gordon Brown elected as Prime Minister. It started when the largest France bank, BNP Paribas, froze their securitization, which related to the USA highly risk home mortgage in the late of 2007.146 It followed with the collapsed of Lehman Brother on September 2008, the largest investment bank in the USA. As it stated, the crisis was not only affecting France or the USA. However, it also affected the global economic situation. In which, the UK included to the impact of this crisis.147 Regarding the issue, several impacts happened within the UK. The UK business fell, mostly focus on retail business.148 With the falling of the business, it led to the bankruptcy of the company.
143 "Evaluating David Cameron As Prime Minister by Professor Kevin Theakston, University of Leeds," BRIT POLITICS - All About British Politics and History, accessed March 31, 2018, http://www.britpolitics.co.uk/academic-articles-all/evaluating-david-cameron-as-prime-minister. 144 Matt Beech and Simon Lee, The Conservatives Under David Cameron: Built to Last? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 19. 145 Alistair Clark, "The Liberal Democrats," in Political Parties in the UK(2014), 86. 146 Bank Indonesia, "Bab 3: Krisis Ekonomi Global dan Dampaknya Terhadap Perekonomian Indonesia," Outlook Ekonomi Indonesia 2009 - 2014 : Krisis Finansial Global dan Dampaknya terhadap Perekonomian Indonesia (n.d.), 42. 147 University of Liverpool, "The Financial Crisis of 2007/2008 and its Impact on the UK and other economies," Learnhigher, accessed March 28, 2018, http://archive.learnhigher.ac.uk/resources/files/business%20comm%20awareness/The%20Financia l%20Crisis%20and%20its%20Impact%20on%20the%20UK%20and%20other%20Economies.pdf. 148 Ibid
49
Figure V.1. The UK Unemployment Rate (2000-2017)
Source: Statista, 2018
With the companies bankrupted, the unemployment number was rising ever since. According to figure V.2, it shows the rising number of unemployment in the UK. Under Gordon Brown premiership, in 2007, the unemployment rate was 5.3% and increased to 5.7% in 2008 and it kept increasing until 2010 with the unemployment rate of 7.9%. In the beginning of David Cameron premiership, the unemployment rate was still high, it reached to 8.1% in 2011, but it kept decreasing until the end of his premiership with 4.9% unemployment rate. The bankruptcy then affected the UK Gross Domestic Products (GDP).149 In 2006, the rate was 2.8% and it gradually decreased to 2.7%. 150 It was dramatically fell to 0.0% in 2008 and kept decreasing to the point of -4.9% in 2009. With that impact to the country, the UK government tried to overcome the
149 University of Liverpool, "The Financial Crisis of 2007/2008 and its Impact on the UK and other economies," Learnhigher, accessed March 28, 2018, http://archive.learnhigher.ac.uk/resources/files/business%20comm%20awareness/The%20Financia l%20Crisis%20and%20its%20Impact%20on%20the%20UK%20and%20other%20Economies.pdf. 150 Reddy, Kotapati S., Vinay K. Nagia, and Rajat Agrawal. “The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis, and Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions: A 26-Nation Exploratory Study,” September 2014.
50 issue with several ways and one of their ways was to take over the UK property. The UK took over the Bradford and Bingley building society and sold these buildings to the Spanish Grupo Santander Bank on 2008 in order to rescued the Bradford and Bingley assets due to the Spanish banks’ reluctance on taking assets from Bradford and Bingley.151 The government also took over the national bank, such as the Royal Bank of Scotland Group to protect its assets through Asset Protection Scheme (APS).152 UK government also took the 58% share from this bank in 2008 and increased it to 84% in 2009. Moreover, the government also imposed the Halifax Bank of Scotland to merge with the Lloyds TSB Group, which they took around 43.4% stake in the combination of these companies.153 Thus, this event triggered the next event, which is Eurozone Crisis.
V.2.2 Eurozone Crisis Although the global financial crisis had been recovering in 2010, there was a following event afterward, which is Eurozone crisis. Eurozone crisis was noticed when several European countries could not be able to pay back the bailouts, which showed that they had failed to grow their economic situation within the country.154 Those countries that had been failing to pay are Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Spain. In the following events after the Global financial crisis, Eurozone crisis is more likely to be known as the Greece financial crisis.155 The causes of Greece crisis were first, the mismanagement by the government toward the country financial and second was the Greece membership in EU did not align with the country political and financial goals. Subsequently,
151 Julia Kollewe, "Timeline: The Demise of Bradford & Bingley," The Guardian, last modified May 25, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/sep/28/banks1. 152 European Commission | Choose Your Language | Choisir Une Langue | Wählen Sie Eine Sprache, accessed April 21, 2018, http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/233798/233798_1093298_30_2.pdf. 153 Reddy, Kotapati S., Vinay K. Nagia, and Rajat Agrawal. “The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis, and Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions: A 26-Nation Exploratory Study,” September 2014. 154 Thomas Kenny, "A Brief History of the European Debt Crisis," The Balance, last modified October 17, 2011, https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-the-european-debt-crisis-416918. 155 "The Greek Financial Crisis (2009-2016) - Financial Scandals, Scoundrels & Crises," Financial Scandals, Scoundrels & Crises, last modified July 20, 2017, https://www.econcrises.org/2017/07/20/the-greek-financial-crisis-2009-2016/.
51 the accountability of Greece in handling public financial problem affected the crisis.156
Figure V.2. The Budget Deficit of Greece Government
Source: European Commission | Choose Your Language | Choisir Une Langue | Wählen Sie Eine Sprache, accessed April 1, 2018, http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/4187653/6404656/COM_2010_report_greek/c8523cfa- d3c1-4954 -8ea1-64bb11e59b3a.
The crisis was implied further when the growth of country financial had failed within the country, while the budget of the country has a massive number.157 According to figure V.3, the deficit in 2008 was getting higher than the previous year. Moreover, it got fluctuated ever since, with the highest deficit of - 15.2 in 2009 and the lowest deficit was -3.1 in 2016. The former of Greece prime ministers (2009 – 2011) argued that this deficit was because his predecessor had failed to overcome the deficit.158 With the existing debt, Greece country should pay the investor regarding the share, which it added more to the Greece debt. In order to overcome the crisis, as the Eurozone membership, the EU involved in this problem, EU together with International Monetary Fund (IMF) helped through giving bailouts for Greece. There was three bailout phases that has
156 Ibid 157 Thomas Kenny, "A Brief History of the European Debt Crisis," The Balance, last modified October 17, 2011, https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-the-european-debt-crisis-416918. 158 Ibid
52 given to Greece. First, in 2010, it was around $163 billion. Second, it was around $157 billion in 2011. The final bailout was in 2012 with the total amount of around $173 billion.159 Furthermore, in order not to repeat the crisis, the EU established The European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF).160 It aims to provide an urgent financial loan to European countries during their financial crisis.161 Besides the bailouts, the EU had changed the Lisbon treaty, which could either help or avoid further crisis in the future.162 However, David Cameron, UK Prime Minister, did not agree with the new treaty. It stated about the strict budget rules for Eurozone, which applied to all EU countries, including the UK.163 In order to avoid or overcome the further crisis, the EU should be more doing an action, spoke David Cameron spokesman. He insisted to have an action instead of meetings during his speech. 164 Thus, with the disagreement of this treaty, Cameron renegotiated UK membership in EU on February 2016 in Brussels.165
V.2.3 The Rising Number of Immigrants in the UK According to LSE research regarding the Brexit and the impact of immigration on the UK, they argued that through Brexit, the UK could be able to control the overflow of immigrant numbers in the country. And it shows that after joining A8 countries in the EU, the number was increasingly higher than before. Figure V.4 shows the net immigration that happens in the UK. Net immigration is the distinction between the people entering the UK and the people-leaving number. It is showing that after A8 countries, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary,
159 By Kevin Voigt, CNN, "Eurozone Approves New $173B Bailout for Greece," CNN, last modified February 21, 2012, https://edition.cnn.com/2012/02/20/business/greece-bailout/index.html. 160 Thomas Kenny, "A Brief History of the European Debt Crisis," The Balance, last modified October 17, 2011, https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-the-european-debt-crisis-416918. 161 "Before the ESM | European Stability Mechanism," European Stability Mechanism |, accessed April 1, 2018, https://www.esm.europa.eu/efsf-overview. 162 "PM Blocks EU-wide Treaty Changes," BBC News, last modified December 9, 2011, http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-16104275. 163 Ibid 164 Thomas Kenny, "A Brief History of the European Debt Crisis," The Balance, last modified October 17, 2011, https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-the-european-debt-crisis-416918. 165 "What Cameron Wanted from the EU Deal ? and What He Really Got," The Independent, last modified February 20, 2016, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-renegotiation- what-david-cameron-wanted-and-what-he-really-got-a6885761.html.
53 Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia, joined to the EU, the number was rising than previous ten years. In 2015, the immigrants were around 257,000. Meanwhile, the EU nationals that left the UK were around 85,000. In which, the net EU immigration in 2015 was around 172,000. 166
Figure V.3. Net Immigration to UK Source: Office for National Statistics, Net Immigration to UK, April 1, 2018.
The immigration number in 2015 was around 250 thousand and among those 250 thousand, there are the distinctions of nationalities. In which those came from EU member countries. Figure V.5 shows the percentage of their nationalities. As it clearly shown that Poland has the biggest number of percentage, which is 29%. Followed by the 12% of Ireland. And another percentage is spread across other EU countries.
166 Wadsworth, Jonathan, Swati Dhingra, and John Van Reenen. “Brexit and Impact of Immigrationn on the UK.” The London School of Economics and Political Science, May 2016, 2, 3.
54
Figure V.4. Share of EU Nationals by Country Origin, 2015 Retrieved from ONS regarding the EU nationality of the UK immigrants , 2016.
Afterward, the age of those immigrants is mostly in between 16 to 64 (table V.1). It shows that the immigrants are mostly above 21 years old, which is in 45%. And below 16 has 19% of the total immigrant population within the country. Regardless their race, those immigrants are more likely to be able to have a job, if we take a look at their age. Furthermore, the ONS shows the status of those immigrants. The status of employment, unemployment, students and unable to have a working life are showing in the data (table V.2).167 According to those data of the immigrants in the UK, it disadvantaged the UK citizen from the working competition. Therefore, from the referendum, the UK citizens include the
167 Wadsworth, Jonathan, Swati Dhingra, and John Van Reenen. “Brexit and Impact of Immigrationn on the UK.” The London School of Economics and Political Science, May 2016, 4, 5.
55 Table 1. Educationxandximmigrantxstatus (workingxagexpopulation) 2015
government voted to leave from EU regarding the disadvantages that those immigrants bring to the country.168
Table V. 1. EducationxandxImmigrantxStatus (workingxagexpopulation) 2015
Source: Wadsworth, Jonathan, Swati Dhingra, and John Van Reenen. “Brexit and Impact of Immigrationn on the UK.” The London School of Economics and Political Science, May 2016, 4.
Table V.2. Employment, unemployment, students and inactively economic by immigrant status (working age population) 2015
Source: Wadsworth, Jonathan, Swati Dhingra, and John Van Reenen. “Brexit and Impact of Immigrationn on the UK.” The London School of Economics and Political Science, May 2016, 5.
V.2.3 United Kingdom Withdrawal from European Union (EU) or Brexit There are several issues that happened under David Cameron premiership. The Brexit referendum is one of them. According to David Cameron speech in 2010, he would renegotiate the UK position in the EU.169 It included the country sovereignty, benefits, and its protection from further Eurozone integration, which he had already renegotiated those demands to the EU on February 2016.170
168 "This is How to Explain Brexit to Your Children," The Independent, last modified September 26, 2017, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-european-union-how-to-explain-to-your- child-theresa-may-article-50-a7968411.html. 169 "What Cameron Wanted from the EU Deal ? and What He Really Got," The Independent, last modified February 20, 2016, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-renegotiation- what-david-cameron-wanted-and-what-he-really-got-a6885761.html. 170 Ibid
56 However, the renegotiation did not show any satisfaction for the UK citizen, which then the referendum had conducted on 23rd June 2016.171
Figure V.5. The Brexit Referendum Voting Result
Source: The UK Electoral Commision, EU Referendum Results, April 1, 2018.
The total of more than 30 million of UK citizens that agreed to leave the EU.172 Figure V.6 shows the voting result from the Brexit Referendum, which the researcher got from the UK Electoral Commission. People who voted to leave the EU were around 51.9%. On the other hand, there are 48.1% who voted UK to remain in EU.173 The UK citizen who voted to leave, they felt disappointment and loss from the membership payment of UK to EU every year. They argued that they did not receive many advantages from the membership, while the payment keeps continuing year after year.174 Moreover, with the membership in EU, it gave
171 "This is How to Explain Brexit to Your Children," The Independent, last modified September 26, 2017, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-european-union-how-to-explain-to-your- child-theresa-may-article-50-a7968411.html. 172 Ibid 173 "Electoral Commission | EU Referendum Results," Electoral Commission | Home, accessed April 1, 2018, https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/find-information-by-subject/elections-and- referendums/past-elections-and-referendums/eu-referendum/electorate-and-count-information. 174 "This is How to Explain Brexit to Your Children," The Independent, last modified September 26, 2017, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-european-union-how-to-explain-to-your- child-theresa-may-article-50-a7968411.html.
57 a free movement of European people without the visa. In which affected to the increase of immigrants number in the UK. However, those who vote to remain felt that with the joining of UK in the EU, it could maintain and increase the economic situation. 175 But seeing the unemployment rate (figure V.2) during David Cameron premiership between 2010 until 2016) the number was decreasing year by year. So, the decision for UK to withdraw its membership from EU gave good result regarding the unemployment issue.
V.3. The Involvement of Events to the Role theory After the researcher had delivered the cognitive style and political party ideology of Gordon Brown and David Cameron under their premiership, this part is going to deliver further analysis within this research. As it mentioned by Harnisch regarding the Role Theory that Mead Model might help the scholars to interpret the behavior of the decision maker. Therefore, Gordon Brown and David Cameron individual and their political party ideology are going to be included in the Mead Model.
V.3.1 Gordon Brown As it shows in figure 9, the event affected to Gordon Brown foreign policy and behavior related to Mead model in accordance to Harnisch perception of Role theory. The event was the Global financial crisis. As it stated above, the UK government saved the global crisis impact within the country with taking over the property by the government.176 Furthermore, according to his interview with the Guardian, he argued that the international investment was the correct way to overcome the crisis, which he would be looking for the international investment. Moreover, he would insist the G20 summit, which held in London, to discussing further whether the issue was one of the world ways to change into protectionism.
175 "This is How to Explain Brexit to Your Children," The Independent, last modified September 26, 2017, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-european-union-how-to-explain-to-your- child-theresa-may-article-50-a7968411.html. 176 University of Liverpool, "The Financial Crisis of 2007/2008 and its Impact on the UK and other economies," Learnhigher, accessed March 28, 2018, http://archive.learnhigher.ac.uk/resources/files/business%20comm%20awareness/The%20Financia l%20Crisis%20and%20its%20Impact%20on%20the%20UK%20and%20other%20Economies.pdf.
58 In which, he thought that could address the issue more and finished the offshore tax and bank furtiveness. And he argued that he had saved the country from the crisis, especially the bank as the main victim of this global financial crisis. Through hold the shares of those properties under government name. 177
Society Expectation
“I” “Me” Language Gordon Labor as a Society Self Brown Party medium The Global Financial Crisis
Figure V.6. Referred to Mead Model of Gordon Brown
As it showed in figure V.7., the global crisis also becomes the factors of the Gordon Brown shifting behavior. Besides the political party of Gordon Brown, which is Labor party, the global financial crisis shaped more of Gordon Brown foreign policy, which is “Global Europe”. And beforehand, the foreign policy had been addressing by him in his speech, which is going to have more deliberation in the next section.
V.3.2 David Cameron Figure V.7. is going to show David Cameron grouping regarding in accordance with Harnisch perception toward Role Theory. In which, in his perception, the Mead model can construe the David Cameron behavior. Besides society expectation, under his premiership, there were several major events that had been going on ever since his predecessor, Gordon Brown. Those are Eurozone crisis and the rising number of immigrants. As it mentioned above regarding the issue, UK had donated to the Eurozone – Greece debt in regard to the UK membership in EU. Since the EU had been trying to help the Greece debt with
177 Nicholas Watt, "Gordon Brown: I Should Have Done More to Prevent Bank Crisis," The Guardian, last modified November 26, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/mar/17/gordon-brown-recession-banking-regulation.
59 giving them a bailout. And it had been happening for three times.178 After the last bailouts, the EU had changed the Lisbon treaty, which referred to avoid another further crisis of Eurozone financial. And it stated about the budget to avoid the crisis, however, the UK did not agree to the agreement. On behalf of David Cameron, his spokesman delivered the message from Cameron the financial crisis does need action instead of the meeting.179
Society Expectation
“I” “Me” Language David Conservative as a Society Self Liberal Democrats Cameron medium Eurozone Crisis, The Rising Number of Immigrants
Figure V.7. Referred to Mead Model of David Cameron
Besides the Eurozone crisis, the rising number of immigrants was happening in his premiership. The dramatically rising happened over the last 10 years, according to figure V.3. Although the rising emerged within the country, the UK citizen felt solicitudes within those immigrants. Besides the fears from the UK citizen, the MP also triggered the disadvantages within the country membership in EU, which the parliament forces David Cameron to create a referendum. In which, the referendum focuses on the Brexit idea. Therefore, in order to response the request by the MP and its citizen, during his speech, he would create a referendum. However, he wanted to renegotiate first before the referendum. After the renegotiation successfully conducts, he would open the referendum as his pledged in his speech. During his renegotiation, he proposed several ideas toward the UK position within the EU. Those demands are regarding sovereignty, benefits, and a protection from non-Eurozone. With the following of other EU leaders participation, Cameron started with the first demand, which is Sovereignty. In his
178 By Kevin Voigt, CNN, "Eurozone Approves New $173B Bailout for Greece," CNN, last modified February 21, 2012, https://edition.cnn.com/2012/02/20/business/greece-bailout/index.html. 179 "What Cameron Wanted from the EU Deal ? and What He Really Got," The Independent, last modified February 20, 2016, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-renegotiation- what-david-cameron-wanted-and-what-he-really-got-a6885761.html.
60 debate, he proposed that Britain not should be considered in the EU treaties, which concern in the idea of “Closer Union” among the peoples of Europe. And EU responded with positive confirmation regarding the proposal. In which it will be stated in the next treaty that, “UK does not include to further political integration in the European Union.” 180 Afterward, he proposed regarding the work benefits or allowance within the country. He proposed that the UK would no longer pay work benefits for migrants who are coming to the UK. It followed with the child benefits for migrants. The EU felt that these demands violated the EU principles, which European worker should be paid equally among other member countries. However, Cameron insisted the demands, and finally got accepted by the EU. It is only for the banning of EU worker benefits, not either with the child benefits.181 Final demand from Cameron was the protection. He asked about a new protection from the EU, which able to protect the countries from non-Eurozone actor to against regulation that made within the group. The aim of the demands is to protect the city, which acts as Europe main financial center. And this demands got approved by those EU leaders in the conference. In which it will be stated further in the next EU treaties. Moreover, it will help the UK if the country does not in favor of the idea during some conference within the EU member countries and avoid the feeling of discrimination.182 Therefore, it is clearly explained the Mead model regarding the “I”, “Me”, society expectation and behavior of others in Cameron case. When David Cameron tried to renegotiate to EU regarding the UK position within the organization. From his proposal, which are the sovereignty, benefits and a protection from Euro-zone. It clearly showed with his Eurosceptic ideology however his party was Euro-friendly. He still did something that represents his Eurosceptic perception.
180 "What Cameron Wanted from the EU Deal ? and What He Really Got," The Independent, last modified February 20, 2016, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-renegotiation- what-david-cameron-wanted-and-what-he-really-got-a6885761.html. 181 Ibid 182 Ibid
61 V.4. UK Foreign Policy (2007 – 2016)
V.4.1 Gordon Brown Foreign Policy Robin Cook, the first foreign secretary in Blair premiership, argued that ethic was one of important elements in doing foreign and international policy.183 As a successor of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown has its own political ideology toward his premiership. However, there was some resemblance foreign policy between Gordon Brown and Tony Blair despite their political ideology during their premiership. According to Gordon Brown speech at the Lord Mayor Banquet on 12 November 2007, he mentioned several points of his concerns that become his foreign policy.184 Those are the UK ties to the US, reform the United Nations (UN) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and restructure World Bank and The International Fund Monetary (IMF), Non-proliferation toward the Nuclear weapon, the involving in international development, and the UK ties to EU.185 However, the researcher would like to emphasize to the UK ties to EU policy, which relates to the topic of this research. After he had a speech at the Lord Mayor Banquet, he had an opportunity to have another speech on “Business for a New Europe” conference in 2008. In that occasion, he stated the ties between UK and EU would be a “Global Europe”.186 He argued that the continent that might succeed in this new world order, emphasize on globalization, should be an open continent. It should be a continent that is doing a free trade between each other, instead protectionism. It should be a flexible continent instead stiff. Moreover, the most important point of
183 Gordon Brown and international policy, February 2009, xx, doi:10.1080/01442870802576256. 184 "Lord Mayor’s Banquet Speech - 12 November 2007 | Number10.gov.uk," UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives, accessed March 14, 2018, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.number10.gov.uk/Page13736. 185 Gordon Brown and international policy, February 2009, xx, doi:10.1080/01442870802576256. 186 "Speech on Business Priorities for a 'Global Europe'," UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives, accessed April 1, 2018, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080205151733/www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page1 4251.asp.
62 all, it should be a continent that invests in their potential of people and educates them to be ready to compete in the out world.187 In his vision toward EU, he expects the EU would not be only a single market that might focus on the internal of its members, however, it should be a continent that ready to face the new world of the global market that is changing extremely fast. He stated in his speech that the extremely believe instead discuss to leave EU, it is better to remain in EU. Moreover, he would try to reform the EU and govern by the Pro-European Realism.188 Behind his vision, he argued that the joining of its country to EU helps the UK business.189 He brought several facts, which are “i) Europe accounts for nearly 60 percent of our trade, ii) 700,000 British companies have trading ties to Europe, iii) And 3.5 million British jobs depend upon Europe.”190 It refers to his speech regarding the facts, the UK and the EU had become a great trading partner since 1999, which almost a half of UK income is coming from the EU trading activities (Table V.3). Furthermore, through the single market, the UK got an access to have cheaper products, services, and another opportunity that brought by the EU. Therefore, it relates to the UK main goal, which is to make sure the British stability.191 In regard of the reformation toward the EU, he deeply explained about the reformation in this continent. First of all, EU should improve the capability, which it could adapt to the new global economy. Through the single market principle in EU, it created a freedom to the services and goods movement within its member countries. Furthermore, he added energy, telecoms, and transport to be one of the concerns to be put in the freedom of movement within the EU. Since he argued that it will create a potential income and jobs for the EU countries. Second, he argued that Europe need to more focus on promoting and encouraging the country
187 "Speech on Business Priorities for a 'Global Europe'," UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives, accessed April 1, 2018, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080205151733/www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page1 4251.asp. 188 Ibid 189 Ibid 190 Ibid 191 Ibid
63 businesses, including the enterprise and innovation, and decrease the regulation among the member countries. Beforehand, the EU had emerged a commitment to diminish the administrative bureaucracy on ease of doing business by 2012.
Table V.3. UK trade with the EU, 1999 - 2017
Source: "Exports Trade Goods & Services EU28 SA - Office for National Statistics," Home - Office for National Statistics, accessed May 10, 2018, https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/l84y/pnbp.
With that goal by the EU, we should deliver that from the lower ground of the society, which it will reshape their assumption toward ease of doing business. Moreover, he responded regarding the low carbon economy, which pledged by the EU, he will guarantee that the British people will have the skills and experts toward that opportunity. In which, it will create more job within the UK or the EU itself. Besides that, he stated that Europe should stir them from passive labor market to an active one. Since he argued that instead pay them to be unemployment, it is better to encourage them to actively work, which the
64 government and the organization give them skills that might be needed for them to make the best potential of them.192 Finally, the EU should have more cooperation, which concerns on the environment. As he mentioned in his speech, there is no other way to prevent the environment issue if there is no exact cooperation. And through this occasion, he stated that the EU should be the one who leads the cooperation and address the issue well. In which, the EU can be a united global approach that might decrease the environmental issues, such as carbon emissions.193 Thus, through these three points that he mentioned, it explained more about his vision to EU about “global Europe”. As it mentioned before by the researcher, with the cognitive identity of Gordon Brown have, and also his party ideology, it coined this foreign policy during his premiership. And in order to interpret all of this, the researcher had given the mead model, which refers to Harnisch perception on Role theory. With the ideology of Liberalism that Gordon Brown upholds and other values since he was a kid, it shaped his perception in his political career. Thus, Gordon Brown tended to have more European cooperation in his premiership.
V.4.2 David Cameron Foreign Policy In David Cameron premiership, his foreign policy tends to be more focus on promoting the UK national interests.194 During his official speech at the Lord Mayor Banquet in 2011, he delivered more deliberation toward his foreign policy idea in his premiership.195 Those policies in his premiership are the intervention in Libya war, the withdrawal of British troops in Afghanistan, responding on Somalia threat, the UK aid for international development, the UK ties toward EU,
192 "Speech on Business Priorities for a 'Global Europe'," UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives, accessed April 1, 2018, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080205151733/www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page1 4251.asp. 193 Ibid 194 "Speech to Lord Mayor's Banquet - GOV.UK," Welcome to GOV.UK, accessed April 1, 2018, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/speech-to-lord-mayors-banquet. 195 "Prime Minister's Speech at the Lord Mayor's Banquet - GOV.UK," Welcome to GOV.UK, accessed April 1, 2018, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-at-the- lord-mayors-banquet.
65 and the UK ties to Russian Federation. Thus, he believed those might be useful for the future of UK development.196 As it emerged in Brown premiership, the UK leader had tried to reform the system in the EU. As it is stated in his speech at Bloomberg on 23rd January 2013, he mentioned about his vision for EU that might fit the new world order, 21st century. Since according to his statement toward EU, unlike the previous condition of this organization, which was an adored place. “The EU is more likely to be a source of alarm and crisis,”197 he said. Which is why he used and tried to implement his vision for the future of EU. Those are competitiveness, flexibility, and the power that should be back to those member countries, democratic accountability, and fairness. Those visions are one of his intentions that might call as the country interest, the UK interest. In his first principle of changes toward EU, which is competitiveness. He stated that “I want completing the single market to be our driving mission. I want us to be at the forefront of transformative trade deals with the US, Japan and India as part of the drive towards global free trade. And I want to be pushing to exempt Europe’s smallest entrepreneurial companies from more EU directives.”198
Moreover, he argued that the single market within EU did not completely fulfill the purposes. It was just a half of complete achievement for doing the single market. Thus, it means that the EU should be less bureaucratic union and no stopping focused on encouraged and help EU member countries. The second principle is flexibility. He argued that EU needs a structure that could resettle and maintain the peace among the diversity that EU members have. He stated that in competitiveness, it needs a flexibility, choice, and openness. Therefore, the diversity among members has affected this principle. The next principle is the given back power to the member countries. Although it is clearly stated in the treaty, however, this is not fully implemented toward the EU membership, he argued. Due to the fact that each member has their own choices toward their interest, one actor cannot decide it without considering the other choices.
196 Ibid 197 "David Cameron's EU Speech - Full Text," The Guardian, last modified February 14, 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/23/david-cameron-eu-speech-referendum. 198 Ibid
66 Therefore, toward this principle, he demanded that the EU would be more implement the principle with the proper way, which it would satisfy its members.199 Afterward, there is democratic accountability principle. It does not come from his idea, however, the parliaments do. It is one of the responses from what happened in Greece lately he stated. Moreover, he argued that it would help the single market of EU. Thus, Cameron argued, “We need to recognize that in the way the EU does business”.200 Last but not least, the fairness principle. He argued that the EU should work in fairly to in or out actors toward EU. With the fact that single currency and single market has the same boundary, this is the concerned by David Cameron. Through this principle, it would help to protect the integrity and fairness among other member countries. In his speech, he argued, “that is why Britain has been so concerned to promote and defend the single market as the Eurozone crisis rewrites the rules on fiscal coordination and banking union.” Therefore, through those principles, he believed those are the right way for EU.201
V.5 Chapter Summary After the researcher is applied the role theory in this topic research, this section is going to show the finalize comparison. In which shows the changing of Gordon Brown and David Cameron foreign policy (table V.3.). Moreover, the researcher delivers about the problem identification of this research visually in order to create an understandable stance of Gordon Brown and David Cameron (figure V.9.).
199 "David Cameron's EU Speech - Full Text," The Guardian, last modified February 14, 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/23/david-cameron-eu-speech-referendum. 200 Ibid 201 Ibid
67 Figure V.8. The Spectrum of Gordon Brown and David Cameron toward the UK Membership in EU Gordon Brown
David Cameron BREXIT REMAIN
As it seen in figure V.9., as a Eurosceptic prime minister, Gordon Brown stance is remaining in the EU. It is because his party upholds the Third-Way, which is center-left ideology (social culture) and center-right ideology (economic)202. Furthermore, during his premiership, the global financial crisis happened. With his ideology, which is Liberalism, he really believed in the idea of international cooperation in order to solve the issue.203 Although he successfully overcomes the crisis within the country with took over the property inside the country,204 however globally, he used the international cooperation to solve or prevent further crisis.205 Therefore, Gordon Brown with his government coined with the foreign policy of Global Europe.206 In another hand, David Cameron tends to be on the center-right spectrum. Although he is a Eurosceptic leader, however he believes in the idea of remaining in the EU, refers to One Nation, the New Right/Thatcherism, and Liberal Conservative.207 Since he thinks that the UK welfare nowadays, it is because of the joining of UK in EU. Moreover, it strengthens his political ideology, which is
202 "Third Way | History & Features," Encyclopedia Britannica, accessed March 31, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/third-way. 203 The Economist, Britain: Welcome to the world; Gordon Brown and foreign affairs, June 2007, xx, doi:00130613. 204The Economist, Britain: Welcome to the world; Gordon Brown and foreign affairs, June 2007, doi:00130613. 205 Nicholas Watt, "Gordon Brown: I Should Have Done More to Prevent Bank Crisis," The Guardian, last modified November 26, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/mar/17/gordon-brown-recession-banking-regulation. 206 "Speech on Business Priorities for a 'Global Europe'," UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives, accessed April 1, 2018, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080205151733/www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page1 4251.asp. 207 "David Cameron, the Accidental European," POLITICO, last modified May 20, 2016, https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-accidental-european-brexit-referendum- conservative-tory-euroskeptic/.
68 Euro-friendly (Conservative) and Pro-Europeanism (Liberal Democrats). 208 However, his stance in center-right is because the events during his premiership. The Eurozone crisis and the rising number of immigrants affected his perception toward EU. With his foreign policy, which is promoting national interest, he tried to renegotiate the UK position within the organization. The EU toward his proposal, however, approved it.209 When he conducted the referendum, it did not work as his expectation. In which, the UK voted withdrawal from the EU.210
Table V.4. The Comparison between Gordon Brown and David Cameron
Prime Individual Political Party Issue Foreign Policy Minister Ideology Ideology Global Gordon The Global Eurosceptic Third-Way Financial Brown Europe Crisis
208 "Political Parties in Britain - a Short Guide," About-Britain.com a Thematic Guide to Britain, last modified January 1, 2014, https://about-britain.com/institutions/political-parties.htm. 209 Ibid 210 "This is How to Explain Brexit to Your Children," The Independent, last modified September 26, 2017, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-european-union-how-to-explain-to-your- child-theresa-may-article-50-a7968411.html.
69 CHAPTER VI CONCLUSION
The reason why the UK decided to withdraw its membership from the EU, is because the Foreign policy that David Cameron has, and also the events that happened and kept growing during his premiership. David Cameron foreign policy is concerned in the promoting of national interest. In his premiership, the event that happened was Eurozone Global Crisis and the rising number of immigrants. Referring these events to the mead model, it shaped the foreign policy of David Cameron. Moreover, he pledged in his speech to do some renegotiation regarding the UK position in the EU. In which it clearly showed his response to the issue that happened during his premiership. Meanwhile, during Gordon Brown premiership, his foreign policy is Global Europe. In which, it concerns on the European cooperation among EU members. The triggered of the foreign policy was beside his political party, the event that happened under his premiership could impact to the foreign policy decision of Gordon Brown, in accordance with Mead model. The event was called as the Global Financial Crisis. Afterward, it coined his foreign policy, which concerns on the European cooperation, in regards to overcome and avoid further crisis within the country. It is also avoiding among EU countries. In another hand, Therefore, the foreign policy between Gordon Brown and David Cameron have a different focus, which Brown tends to remain and have the European Cooperation, while Cameron wanted to remain, however, the result was shown the UK would like to withdraw its membership in EU. Moreover, this researcher also delivered about the political ideology of Gordon Brown and David Cameron. The Labor party under Gordon Brown tends to use social democracy and democratic socialist ideology. While the Conservative party under David Cameron upholds the ideology of “One Nation”, Thatcherite conservative, and the liberal conservative. Therefore with these differences of political ideology, it affected values that these both leaders implement his identity
70 In accordance with Harnisch understanding of Role theory, the Mead Model might help the researcher to have a great analysis of Foreign Policy actor. In which in the Mead model, the event affects the shaping of individual identity. In Gordon Brown premiership, there was Global Financial Crisis. Meanwhile, David Cameron premiership happened The Eurozone Crisis and the rising of the immigrant number within the UK country. Therefore, the decision of each leader foreign policy was different, even though they have the same ideology, which is Eurosceptic.
71 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books Breuning, Marijke. Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction. First. 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010 and Houndmills, basingstoke, Hampshire, England RG21 6XS.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. Brighi, Elisabetta. Foreign Policy, Domestic Politics and International Relations: The Case of Italy. Routledge, 2013. PDF. Clark, Alistair. "The Liberal Democrats." In Political Parties in the UK, 86. 2014. e-book. Family Health International, Natasha Mack, and Cynthia Woodsong. Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector's Field Guide. North Carolina: FLI, 2005. Harnisch, Sebastian, Cornelia Frank, and Hanns W. Maull. Role Theory in International Relations. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2011. Johnston, Neil, and Lucinda Maer. "Leadership Elections: Labour Party." House of Commons Library. Last modified September 26, 2016. Lee, Simon. Best for Britain?: The Politics and Legacy of Gordon Brown. Oxford: Oneworld, 2008. Mintz, Alex, and Karl DeRouen. Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making. Cambridge University Press, 2010. N. Rosenau, James. The Scientific Study of Foreign Policy, 1971. Beech, Matt, and Simon Lee. The Conservatives Under David Cameron: Built to Last?. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
Journals Bank Indonesia. "Bab 3: Krisis Ekonomi Global dan Dampaknya Terhadap Perekonomian Indonesia." Outlook Ekonomi Indonesia 2009 - 2014 : Krisis Finansial Global dan Dampaknya terhadap Perekonomian Indonesia (n.d.), 42. Fearon, James D. "DOMESTIC POLITICS, FOREIGN POLICY, AND THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS." Annual Review of Political Science 1, no. 1 (1998), 289-313. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.1.1.289. Reddy, Kotapati S., Vinay K. Nagia, and Rajat Agrawal. “The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis, and Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions: A 26-Nation Exploratory Study,” September 2014.
72 The American College of Greece. Accessed March 31, 2018. http://www.acg.edu/ckeditor_assets/attachments/1426/ideal-prime- minister.pdf Shodhganga : a Reservoir of Indian Theses @ INFLIBNET. Accessed March 29, 2018. http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/27735/5/05_chapter-1.pdf. Wadsworth, Jonathan, Swati Dhingra, and John Van Reenen. “Brexit and Impact of Immigrationn on the UK.” The London School of Economics and Political Science, May 2016.
Publications and Reports "Article 50." Home. Accessed March 29, 2018. http://www.lisbon- treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and- comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html. "David Cameron – 2007 Speech on Liberal Consensus." UKPOL. Last modified December 31, 2015. http://www.ukpol.co.uk/david-cameron-2007- speech-on-liberal-consensus/. "Electoral Commission | EU Referendum Results." Electoral Commission | Home. Accessed April 1, 2018. https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/find-information-by- subject/elections-and-referendums/past-elections-and-referendums/eu- referendum/electorate-and-count-information. "Euro 410: EU Today." University of Oregon | University of Oregon. Accessed March 29, 2018. http://pages.uoregon.edu/euro410/eutoday/organizations.php?menu. European Commission | Choose Your Language | Choisir Une Langue | Wählen Sie Eine Sprache. Accessed April 21, 2018. http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/233798/233798_1093298 _30_2.pdf. "Exports Trade Goods & Services EU28 SA - Office for National Statistics." Home - Office for National Statistics. Accessed May 10, 2018. https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/ti meseries/l84y/pnbp. "How Democratic Are the UK’s Political Parties and Party System?" Democratic Audit UK. Last modified April 19, 2018. http://www.democraticaudit.com/2016/02/08/how-democratic-uks- political-parties-party-system/. "Migrant | United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization." UNESCO | Building Peace in the Minds of Men and Women. Accessed March 29, 2018. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human- sciences/themes/international-migration/glossary/migrant/.
73 "Migration Statistics Quarterly Report - Office for National Statistics." Home - Office for National Statistics. Accessed April 1, 2018. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandm igration/internationalmigration/bulletins/migrationstatisticsquarterlyreport /february2016#net-migration-to-the-uk. "The Lisbon Treaty." Home. Accessed March 29, 2018. http://www.lisbon- treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/. "The Qualitative Paradigm." School of Computing. Accessed March 31, 2018. http://www.computing.dcu.ie/~hruskin/RM2.htm. "The UK's EU Membership Fee." Full Fact. Last modified 2017. https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/. "UK: GDP in Pounds 2000-2016." Statista. Accessed March 29, 2018. https://www.statista.com/statistics/281744/gdp-of-the-united-kingdom- uk-since-2000/. EUABC A Dictionary on Words Related to the EU. Accessed March 29, 2018. http://en.euabc.com/upload/books/lisbon-treaty-3edition.pdf. University of Liverpool. "The Financial Crisis of 2007/2008 and its Impact on the UK and other economies." Learnhigher. Accessed March 28, 2018. http://archive.learnhigher.ac.uk/resources/files/business%20comm%20aw areness/The%20Financial%20Crisis%20and%20its%20Impact%20on%2 0the%20UK%20and%20other%20Economies.pdf.
News and Websites "BBC - GCSE Bitesize: What is Migration?" BBC - Home. Last modified September 15, 2006. http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/geography/migration/migratio n_trends_rev1.shtml. "BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Contender: David Cameron." Home - BBC News. Last modified September 29, 2005. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4651553.stm. "Before the ESM | European Stability Mechanism." European Stability Mechanism |. Accessed April 1, 2018. https://www.esm.europa.eu/efsf- overview. "Conservative Conference: David Cameron's Speech in Full." The Guardian. Last modified June 9, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/oct/01/davidcameron.torycon ference1. "Conservative Party | History, Facts, Policy, & Structure." Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed March 31, 2018.
74 https://www.britannica.com/topic/Conservative-Party-political-party- United-Kingdom. "David Cameron Biography." The Biography.com website. Accessed March 31, 2018. https://www.biography.com/people/david-cameron- 39203. "David Cameron on Immigration: Full Text of the Speech." The Guardian. Last modified November 26, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/apr/14/david-cameron- immigration-speech-full-text. "David Cameron, the Accidental European." POLITICO. Last modified May 20, 2016. https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-accidental-european- brexit-referendum-conservative-tory-euroskeptic/. "David Cameron's EU Speech - Full Text." The Guardian. Last modified February 14, 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/23/david-cameron-eu- speech-referendum. "Definition of Brexit | What is Brexit ? Brexit Meaning." The Economic Times. Accessed March 29, 2018. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/Brexit. "European Coal and Steel Community | European Organization." Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed March 29, 2018. https://www.britannica.com/topic/European-Coal-and-Steel-Community. "Evaluating David Cameron As Prime Minister by Professor Kevin Theakston, University of Leeds." BRIT POLITICS - All About British Politics and History. Accessed March 31, 2018. http://www.britpolitics.co.uk/academic-articles-all/evaluating-david- cameron-as-prime-minister. "Gordon Brown Biography." The Biography.com website. Accessed March 31, 2018. https://www.biography.com/people/gordon-brown- 39841. "History of Sir Edward Heath - GOV.UK." Welcome to GOV.UK. Accessed March 29, 2018. https://www.gov.uk/government/history/past-prime- ministers/edward-heath. "In Full: David Cameron's EU Speech." BBC News. Last modified November 28, 2014. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-30250299. "Labour Party | History, Facts, Policies, & Leaders." Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed March 31, 2018. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Labour- Party-political-party. "Labour's Legacy." The Labour Party. Accessed March 31, 2018. https://labour.org.uk/about/labours-legacy/.
75 "Leader: Blair's New Third Way." The Guardian. Last modified June 20, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2005/may/08/leaders.labour. "Lord Mayor’s Banquet Speech - 12 November 2007 | Number10.gov.uk." UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives. Accessed March 29, 2018. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.number10.gov.uk/Page 13736. "'No Turning Back' on Brexit - May." BBC News. Last modified March 30, 2017. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39431428. "PM Blocks EU-wide Treaty Changes." BBC News. Last modified December 9, 2011. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-16104275. "Political Parties in Britain - a Short Guide." About-Britain.com a Thematic Guide to Britain. Last modified January 1, 2014. https://about- britain.com/institutions/political-parties.htm. "Political Parties in Parliament." UK Parliament. Accessed March 31, 2018. http://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/parties/. "Prime Minister's Speech at the Lord Mayor's Banquet - GOV.UK." Welcome to GOV.UK. Accessed April 1, 2018. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-at-the- lord-mayors-banquet. "Prime Ministers' Speeches on Europe." BBC News. Last modified January 17, 2013. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-21030153. "Speech on Business Priorities for a 'Global Europe'." UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives. Accessed April 1, 2018. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080205151733/www.numbe r10.gov.uk/output/Page14251.asp. "Speech to Lord Mayor's Banquet - GOV.UK." Welcome to GOV.UK. Accessed April 1, 2018. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/speech-to-lord- mayors-banquet. "Steve Hilton and David Cameron's Turn Away from Radicalism." Financial Times. Last modified May 23, 2016. https://www.ft.com/content/7dbcc62a-20e0-11e6-9d4d-c11776a5124d. "The European Single Market - European Commission." Growth. Last modified 3, 2018. https://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market_en. "The Greek Financial Crisis (2009-2016) - Financial Scandals, Scoundrels & Crises." Financial Scandals, Scoundrels & Crises. Last modified July 20, 2017. https://www.econcrises.org/2017/07/20/the-greek-financial-crisis- 2009-2016/. "These Countries Have the Most Positive Influence on the World." World Economic Forum. Accessed March 29, 2018.
76 https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/07/these-countries-have-the- most-positive-influence-on-the-world/. "Third Way | History & Features." Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed March 31, 2018. https://www.britannica.com/topic/third-way. "This is How to Explain Brexit to Your Children." The Independent. Last modified September 26, 2017. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-european-union-how-to- explain-to-your-child-theresa-may-article-50-a7968411.html. "Unemployment Rate 2000-2017 | UK Statistic." Statista. Accessed March 31, 2018. https://www.statista.com/statistics/279898/unemployment-rate-in-the- united-kingdom-uk/. "United Kingdom | History, Geography, Facts, & Points of Interest - Thatcherism (1979?90)." Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed March 31, 2018. https://www.britannica.com/place/United-Kingdom/Thatcherism-1979- 90#ref978039. "What Cameron Wanted from the EU Deal ? and What He Really Got." The Independent. Last modified February 20, 2016. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-renegotiation-what- david-cameron-wanted-and-what-he-really-got-a6885761.html. "Whig and Tory | Historical Political Party, England." Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed March 31, 2018. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Whig-Party- England. "Why Britain is So Eurosceptic." The Economist. Last modified March 3, 2014. https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist- explains/2014/03/economist-explains-1. "Why Article 50 is Deliberately Vague?" The Independent. Last modified March 13, 2017. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/article-50- brexit-what-is-it-how-does-it-work-works-trigger-bill-eu-leave-lisbon- treaty-theresa-may-a7626956.html. "Why Should We Care About Leaving the EU Single Market?" The Independent. Last modified March 13, 2017. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/single-market-brexit-eu- trade-deals-what-is-uk-leave-european-union-why-a7627061.html. "Winston Churchill." Europe's Human Rights Watchdog. Accessed March 29, 2018. http://www.europewatchdog.info/en/council-of- europe/united-europe/winston-churchill/. "YouGov | Britain's Changing Political Spectrum." YouGov: What the World Thinks. Accessed March 31, 2018. https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/07/23/britains-changing-political- spectrum/.
77 Bainbridge, Luke. "An Account of Paul McCartney Performing in Russia." The Guardian. Last modified May 31, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2003/dec/14/popandrock.paulmccart ney. Bayliss, Charlie. "'I Didn't Like the EU Flag' Cameron Hints He Was Eurosceptic DURING Referendum Campaign." Express.co.uk. Last modified March 30, 2017. https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/785649/nicola-sturgeon- slapped-down-poll-john-curtice-research-scotland-brexit. By Kevin Voigt, CNN. "Eurozone Approves New $173B Bailout for Greece." CNN. Last modified February 21, 2012. https://edition.cnn.com/2012/02/20/business/greece-bailout/index.html. By Philip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor. "Brown's Manifesto for Britishness." Telegraph.co.uk. Last modified January 13, 2007. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1539369/Browns-manifesto- for-Britishness.html. Erlanger, Steven. "Britain Votes to Leave E.U.; Cameron Plans to Step Down." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. Last modified June 23, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/25/world/europe/britain-brexit- european-union-referendum.html. European Commission | Choose Your Language | Choisir Une Langue | Wählen Sie Eine Sprache. Accessed April 1, 2018. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/4187653/6404656/COM_2010_re port_greek/c8523cfa-d3c1-4954-8ea1-64bb11e59b3a. Floyd, David. "Brexit." Investopedia. Last modified March 20, 2018. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/brexit.asp. Global Market and Opinion Research Specialist | Ipsos. Accessed March 29, 2018. https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/2017- 06/G%40%20Dangerous%20World-Report-2017-06-13_0.pdf. Johnston, Neil, and Lucinda Maer. "Leadership Elections: Labour Party." House of Commons Library. Last modified September 26, 2016. Kenny, Thomas. "A Brief History of the European Debt Crisis." The Balance. Last modified October 17, 2011. https://www.thebalance.com/what-is- the-european-debt-crisis-416918. Kollewe, Julia. "Timeline: The Demise of Bradford & Bingley." The Guardian. Last modified May 25, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/sep/28/banks1. Tempest, Matthew. "Tories Crown Cameron Their New Leader." The Guardian. Last modified June 9, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/dec/06/toryleadership2005.co nservatives2.
78 Watt, Nicholas. "Gordon Brown: I Should Have Done More to Prevent Bank Crisis." The Guardian. Last modified November 26, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/mar/17/gordon-brown- recession-banking-regulation.
79
APENDICES
80 1. Gordon Brown Lord Mayor’s Banquet Speech - 12 November 2007
12 November 2007
Gordon Brown spoke at length on Britain’s foreign policy priorities in his first address as PM at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet.
Read the speech
Tonight, I want to speak about Britain’s unique place in the new world. And where, as a result, our responsibilities lie; how our national interest can be best advanced; and what we can achieve by working together internationally and by contributing to building the strongest and broadest sense of common purpose.
The new context
In the 1820s the then Foreign Secretary George Canning said that he had ‘called the new world into existence to redress the balance of the old’. The order of the nineteenth century saw European empires spanning the globe. After World War Two a new international order was defined by the high stakes of the superpower nuclear stand off. Both these world orders shaped by political weight and military power.
In 1989 the old world order dominated by the Cold War came to an end. But how quickly events have disproved those who celebrated the end of the Cold War as ‘the end of history’. From Bosnia to Darfur, Rwanda to Afghanistan we have seen a level of disorder and uncertainty that no-one predicted. And no one foresaw the scale of the dramatic and seismic shifts in economy, culture and communications that are now truly global.
Our international institutions built for just 50 sheltered economies in what became a bipolar world are not fit for purpose in an interdependent world of 200 states where global flows of commerce, people and ideas defy borders. With such transformative change comes a clear obligation, but also a great opportunity, to write a new chapter — to set down for a new era a better 21st century way of delivering peace and prosperity.
Of course the first duty of Government - our abiding obligation - is and will always be the safety of the British people, the protection of the British national interest. And let me affirm our commitment that we will always be vigilant and resolute, never leave ourselves vulnerable, but will at all times support and strengthen our armed forces, our defences and our security. Yet the timeless values that underpin our policies at home - our belief in the liberty of all, in security and justice for all, in economic opportunity andenvironmental protection shared by all - are also ideals that I believe that it is in our national interest to promote abroad. But we do so in a changing world where six new global forces unique to our generation are demonstrating our growing interdependence and pressing the international community to discover common purpose.
First, few expected when the adamantine certainties of the Cold War came to an end, we would have to address the constantly changing uncertainties of violence and instability from failed states and rogue states. The spread of terrorism has destroyed the old assumption that states alone could access destructive weapons. As dramatic in a different way is a third force for change: global flows of capital and global sourcing of goods and services have brought the biggest shift of economic power since the industrial revolution - the rapid emergence of India and China as global powers with legitimate global aspirations. The new frontier is that there is no frontier.
81 The unprecedented impact of climate change transforms the very purpose of government. Once quality of life meant the pursuit of two objectives: economic growth and social cohesion. Now there is a trinity of aims:prosperity, fairness and environmental care. And as energy supplies are under pressure there is a new global competition for natural resources. New global forces at work - from pandemics to worldwide migration - make the task of overcoming the great social evils of hunger, illiteracy, disease, squalor and poverty even more challenging. And if, as Tom Friedman has written, the defining image of the 20th centurywas a wall representing division, the defining image of the 21st is a web championing connections — a world where we can rightly now talk not just of the wealth of nations but the wealth of networks. The web cannot be controlled in the end by any single force or any single leader. And what happens within it cannot be predicted from day to day.
George Orwell was not quite right: the technology revolution he foresaw is not a controlling force enslaving people, but for the most part a liberating force empowering them. In the old order power affected people but could not easily be affected by them. But once powerless people now have the potential to be heard andsee their impact felt in places far away. And because our world is now so connected and sointerdependent it is possible in this century, for the first time in human history, to contemplate and create a global society that empowers people.
Why do I believe this is not only possible but essential? Because we cannot any longer escape the consequences of our interdependence. The old distinction between ‘over there’ and ‘over here’ does not make sense of this interdependent world. For there is no longer an ‘over there’ of terrorism, failed states, poverty, forced migration and environmental degradation and an ‘over here’ that is insulated or immune.Today a nation’s self interest today will be found not in isolation but in cooperation to overcome shared challenges. And so the underlying issue for our country - indeed for every country - is how together in this new interdependent world we renew and strengthen our international rules, institutions and networks.
My approach is hard-headed internationalism: - internationalist because global challenges need global solutions and nations must cooperate across borders - often with hard-headed intervention - to give expression to our shared interests and shared values; - hard-headed because we will not shirk from the difficult long term decisions and because only through reform of our international rules and institutions will we achieve concrete, on-the-ground results.
Building a global society means agreeing that the great interests we share in common are more powerful than the issues that sometimes divide us. It means articulating and acting upon the enduring values that define our common humanity and transcending ideologies of hatred that seek to drive us apart. And critically - and this is the main theme of my remarks this evening - we must bring to life these shared interests and shared values by practical proposals to create the architecture of a new global society.
Britain’s alliances
Through our membership of the European Union - which gives us and 26 other countries the unique opportunity to work together on economic, environmental and security challenges - and the Commonwealth, and through our commitment to NATO and the UN, we have the capacity to work together with all those who share our vision of the future. And I do not see these as partnerships in competition with each other but mutually reinforcing.
It is no secret that I am a life long admirer of America. I have no truck with anti-Americanism in Britain or elsewhere in Europe and I believe that our ties with America - founded on values we share - constitute our most important bilateral relationship. And it is good for Britain, for Europe and for the wider world that today France and Germany and the European Union are building stronger relationships with America.
82 The 20th century showed that when Europe and America are distant from one another, instability is greater; when partners for progress the world is stronger. And in the years ahead - notwithstanding the huge shifts in economic influence underway - I believe that Europe and America have the best chance for many decades to achieve historic progress —-
· working ever more closely together on the project of building a global society;
· and helping bring in all continents, including countries today outside the G8 and the UN Security Council, to give new purpose and direction to our international institutions.
And while no longer the mightiest militarily, or the largest economically, the United Kingdom has an important contribution to make. Just as London has become a global hub linking commerce, ideas and people from all over the world, so too our enduring values and our network of alliances, can help secure the changes we need.
A new framework for security and reconstruction
Today, there is still a gaping hole in our ability to address the illegitimate threats and use of force against innocent peoples. It is to the shame of the whole world that the international community failed to act to prevent genocide in Rwanda. We now rightly recognise our responsibility to protect behind borders where there are crimes against humanity.
But if we are to honour that responsibility to protect we urgently need a new framework to assist reconstruction. With the systematic use of earlier Security Council action, proper funding of peacekeepers, targeted sanctions - and their ratcheting up to include the real threat of international criminal court actions - we must now set in place the first internationally agreed procedures to prevent breakdowns of states and societies.
But where breakdowns occur, the UN - and regional bodies such as the EU and African Union - must now also agree to systematically combine traditional emergency aid and peacekeeping with stabilisation, reconstruction and development.
There are many steps the international community can assist with on the ladder from insecurity and conflict to stability and prosperity. So I propose that, in future, Security Council peacekeeping resolutions and UN Envoys should make stablisation, reconstruction and development an equal priority; that the international community should be ready to act with a standby civilian force including police and judiciary who can be deployed to rebuild civic societies; and that to repair damaged economies we sponsor local economic development agencies —- in each area the international community able to offer a practical route map from failure to stability.
New initiatives in non-proliferation
And just as we will continue to be a leading nation in negotiating nuclear arms reductions, so we must be at the forefront of meeting the challenge of preventing nuclear weapons proliferation. And with more sophisticated after-the-fact detection of the source of nuclear materials there must be a determination to hold to account both active providers and potential users.
I propose internationally agreed access to an enrichment bond or nuclear fuel bank to help non- nuclear states acquire the new sources of energy they need. But this offer should be made only as long as these countries renounce nuclear weapons and meet internationally enforced non- proliferation standards.
The greatest immediate challenge to non-proliferation is Iran’s nuclear ambitions, hidden from the world for many years in breach of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
83 Iran has a choice - confrontation with the international community leading to a tightening of sanctions or, if it changes its approach and ends support for terrorism, a transformed relationship with the world.
Unless positive outcomes flow from Javier Solana’s report and the IAEA, we will lead in seeking tougher sanctions both at the UN and in the European Union, including on oil and gas investment and the financial sector. Iran should be in no doubt about our seriousness of purpose.
Small arms kill every 90 seconds so as we call for an Arms Trade Treaty, Britain is willing to extend export laws to control extra-territorial brokering and trafficking of small arms, and potentially other weapons. And having led the way by taking two types of cluster munitions out of service, we want to work internationally for a ban on the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of those cluster munitions which cause unacceptable harm to civilians.
The renewal of the international institutions
To build not just security but environmental stewardship and prosperity free of global poverty, I want a G8 for the 21st century, a UN for the 21st century, and an IMF and World Bank fit for the 21st century.
And to achieve this I want to play my part in helping the European Union move away from its past preoccupation with inward looking institutional reform and I will work with others to propose a comprehensive agenda for a Global Europe - a Europe that is outward looking, open, internationalist, able to effectively respond both through internal reform and external action to the economic, security and environmental imperatives of globalisation.
I said my approach was hard headed because I am conscious of weaknesses in international institutions that need to be addressed, aware that while resolutions matter results matter even more, determined to judge success not by the number of initiatives in conference halls but by practical action for change, and resolute in my determination that we need fewer rather than more international bureaucracies. Indeed, we need a new network of change-makers - often non- governmental organisations - which deliver concrete action on the ground.
Long term but now also interim options must be examined to reform a UN Security Council - whose permanent members do not include Japan, India, Brazil, Germany, or any African country - to make the Council more representative, more credible and more effective.
The G8 has to increasingly broaden to encompass the influential emerging economies now outside but that account for more than a third of the world’s economic output.
And we need a new coalition of democracies and civic societies joining together as allies for progress, with leaders in politics, economics and civil society all pushing forward reform.
International efforts against terrorism are not a short-term struggle where we get by through ad- hoc improvisation: this is a generational challenge. Global terrorist networks demand a global response. And if there are to be no safe havens for terrorists, and no hiding places for those financing and harbouring terrorism, we should work for a concerted global strengthening of law enforcement, financial supervision and policing and intelligence cooperation.
Financial disruption in one country can now affect all countries. The IMF should be transformed with a renewed mandate that goes far beyond crisis management to crisis prevention - not only responsible in the manner of an independent central bank for the independent surveillance of the world economy but becoming its early warning system.
84 As we move to a post 2012 global climate change agreement, we need a strengthened UN role for environmental protection.
And while we strengthen the World Bank’s focus on poverty reduction, it must also become a bank for the environment. So as its new President Bob Zoellick has argued, it should recognise that the poorest countries are the most vulnerable to climate change - and help them to adapt and to finance low carbon economic growth.
Over the summer in places of turmoil as different as Darfur and Burma - where we will continue to pressure and persuade - the international community has shown how it can come together.
In Afghanistan we will work with the international community to match our military and security effort with new support for political reform and for economic and social development.
And today and together we call on President Musharraf of Pakistan to restore the constitution and implement the necessary conditions to guarantee free and fair elections on schedule in January; release all political prisoners, including members of the judiciary and human rights activists; to pursue energetically reconciliation with the political opposition; honour his commitment to step down as Chief of Army Staff; and relax restrictions on the media.
Nor will we shirk our obligations to the people and new democracy of Iraq and to the international community. As we move next month from our combat role to ‘Overwatch’ in Basra Province, we will support economic development to give the people of Basra a greater stake in the future.
And with the personal leadership of President Bush and the peace initiative involving all 22 states of the Arab League, there is potentially a window of opportunity to achieve - thanks to the political courage of Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas - the creation of a viable Palestinian state alongside a secure Israel.
For this we need not only a road to Annapolis but a road from Annapolis: the December donors conference in Paris; Tony Blair’s painstaking work for which I thank him; and Britain’s economic road map for reconstruction in the West Bank and Gaza, in support of which the Foreign Secretary and the International Development Secretary will both shortly visit the region.
Whether in the Middle East or across the developing world, indifference to the plight of others is not only wrong, but not in our interests. That is why we continue to do all we can to reach a world trade agreement that will be of most benefit to the poorest.
But the global poverty emergency cannot be solved by one organisation or even a coalition of governments on their own: we now need the concerted efforts of private, public and third sectors working together —— a new public-private alliance founded on promoting trade and growth.
The injustices people inflict on one another are not god-given but man-made and we have it in our power to become the first generation in history to deliver to every child the long overdue basic right to education. And today we also have the science and medicine to be the first generation to eradicate the preventable diseases of TB, polio, diptheria and malaria — and eventually to cure HIV and AIDS.
And with a special UN meeting next year, it is my personal commitment to work with all people of goodwill to achieve these goals.
By history and conviction, we - Britain - are bearers of the indispensable idea of individual dignity and mutual respect. But we act to build a different, better world because we judge that it too is the best defence of our own future. We know that Britain cannot be a safe and prosperous island in a
85 turbulent and divided world. A better world is our best security, our national interest best advanced by shared international endeavour.
So this is our message - to ourselves, our allies, potential adversaries and people who, no matter how distant, are now our neighbours: Our hard-headed internationalism means we will never retreat from our responsibilities. At all times justice in jeopardy, security at risk, suffering that cries out will command our concern.
From the early years of this young century we can already discern what Britain, the first multinational state, has always known: that success requires that people of different races, religions and backgrounds learn to live in harmony with each other.
We have already seen what our values have taught us: that progress depends upon openness, freedom, democracy and fairness. And we are finding that prosperity like peace is indivisible and to be sustained it has to be shared.
And we have learned too that without environmental sustainability, justice and prosperity are both imperilled and that the best route to long-term economic growth lies in action to tackle climate change.
These lessons are not an excuse to relax or rest or be complacent but a summons to act with utmost resolve. For the pressing challenge for Britain and for the international community is to harness these insights in a sustained endeavour to reform and renew our global rules, institutions and networks.
Upon this rests our shared future: a truly global society empowering people everywhere; not yet here, but in this century within our grasp.
86 2. Gordon Brown Beyond The Reform Treaty: Business Priorities For A 'Global Europe'. By: Gordon Brown (14 January 2008)
I am delighted to be here today - in advance of my visit to China and India later this week - to discuss with you: • The priorities for Europe in the coming years; • The potential for European countries to work together with a renewed common purpose to succeed in the decades ahead; • And the reforms we need to put in place to ensure Europe remains a leader and a success story in the new global order. And I would like to thank 'Business for a New Europe', led by Roland Rudd for organizing this event. BNE is a new and important voice making the positive and practical case for a strong but reformed Europe to meet the needs of both business and citizens. You are all here because you know - as I do - that the European Union is key to the success of business in the UK and in some ways the UK can be a significant lever for business success across Europe.
And as we face increasing global economic uncertainty, this is as true today as ever. The countries and continents that will succeed in the new era of globalisation will be those that are open rather than closed, for free trade rather than protectionism, are flexible rather than rigid, and invest in high skills and the potential of their people. My vision of Europe moving forward is global Europe --- not just an internal single market that looks inwards but a driving force of the new fast-changing global market place. An open, outward looking, flexible global Europe competing on and prosperous because of its skills, its innovation and its creative talents. In this way the enlarged Europe moves forward from its original objective of preserving the peace to its future achievement --- widening and deepening opportunity and prosperity not just for some but for all. That is why I am confident that - momentous as the challenges we are currently facing are - we can, by making the right long term decisions, meet and master them. More than perhaps any other twelve month period in recent times, the last year has brought home to all of us just how much the economic world is changing - • Just how big and historic the shift in production and services to Asia now is, with 1 million manufacturing jobs and hundreds of thousands of service jobs moving from America and Europe; • How fast the speed of technological change is, with over a billion people worldwide now connected to the internet and more than 1,500 patents for new inventions issued every day; • Just how much being part of a global economy means we are affected directly and sometimes instantaneously by events in other countries and continents. And the latest financial turbulence has been a wake-up call for every economy in every part of the world --- impacting on all countries including Britain and others in Europe - and testing the stability of our financial systems. So right across the world we know this will be a difficult year. In Britain we are well-placed to withstand this financial turbulence: • Inflation is 2.1 per cent - compared with 3 per cent in the EU and 4 per cent in the us - which has allowed the bank of England to keep interest rates low; • According to the IMF, in 2007 the British economy was the fastest growing in the G8 and is forecast to be the joint fastest in 2008. The economy in Britain has now grown for 61 consecutive quarters - the longest sustained expansion on record. Between 1997 and 2006, the
87 UK economy grew in total by 28 per cent, compared with 10 per cent in Japan, 13 per cent in Italy, 14 per cent in Germany, 21 per cent in France and 31 per cent in the us; • Employment in Britain is at a record high and we have a higher employment rate than any of the major European economies, Japan and even the US; • Our public finances are in a sustainable position and government debt relative to the size of the economy is lower than in the Euro area, the US and Japan. But what is clear is that at this time of global economic uncertainty, we should not be throwing into question -as some would - the stability of our relationship with Europe and even our future membership of the European Union --- risking trade, business and jobs. Indeed, I strongly believe that rather than retreating to the sidelines we must remain fully engaged in Europe so we can push forward the reforms that are essential for Europe's, and Britain's, economic future. The EU is key to the success of business in the UK: • Europe accounts for nearly 60 per cent of our trade; • 700,000 British companies have trading ties to Europe; • And 3.5 million British jobs depend upon Europe. And even in the face of rapid globalisation, our trade with Europe continues to rise, meaning Europe is as important to the future of Britain than ever. So European Union membership is good for Britain and British membership is good for Europe. The European single market gives British businesses access to a market of 500 million people, to cheaper products and services, and to a much wider potential workforce, with a greater range of talents and skills. And EU enlargement - perhaps Europe's greatest achievement - has strengthened our stability and prosperity even further. I am pleased that the European Commission, led by President Barroso, understands the absolute priority of strengthening the competitiveness of the European economy and is providing genuine leadership on issues of deepening liberalisation and economic reform. But if we are to make the most of the opportunities of the new global economy - and strengthen the foundations for economic success in the longer term - we will need to do more to ensure continued stability and to strengthen and deepen economic reform. As the December European Council concluded, the institutional debate inside Europe is now settled for the foreseeable future. So with the completion of the Lisbon treaty - which was necessary to enable an EU of 27 to work together and ends the process of institutional reform for the foreseeable future - we now have an opportunity to move on to address the challenges that matter most to Europe's citizens --- in particular, how we can sustain stability, growth, competitiveness and jobs. Our main priority is to ensure the stability of the British and European economies and to have the strength to take the difficult long-term decisions. People need to know that their governments are doing all they can - both internationally and nationally - to maintain stability and growth. So all countries in the EU must work together to both take the immediate measures necessary and to lead the long term strengthening of international capacity to secure greater financial stability. I will be meeting European G8 leaders later this month to discuss measures for achieving international stability. And my hope is that the EU can lead the way in responding with the reforms that are needed. Primary responsibility for managing risk is, and must remain, with individual financial institutions and investors, but this needs to be backed up by strong national and international regulatory frameworks. We are encouraging the Financial Stability Forum and the International Monetary Fund to look at the international steps we should take including to put in place a better early warning system for financial crises.
88 And we will seek to build consensus on: • Tightening up procedures for dealing with solvency and liquidity issues; • Returning confidence to the markets through transparent and accurate valuation to write offs and losses. The quicker this is done the quicker liquidity will return; • And on assessing the role of credit rating agencies where the growing complexity of instruments had led to greater reliance on rating - and investors themselves need to challenge their own reliance on ratings. We need greater transparency in the system for investors, markets and regulators through improved valuation standards; better risk management; and more public information from institutions about complex products such as structured investment vehicles. All measures that show the importance we attach to taking the tough long-term decisions to ensure the stability of the economy. And we must take the same tough long-term approach when pushing forward wider economic reform in Europe. With china now decoding DNA and Bangalore in India the pre-eminent global centre for software development, competition from Asia is no longer simply in mass production manufacturing based on low skills, low technology and low wages, but increasingly applies right across the value chain. So the new race is not to the bottom but to the top. And because we know that Europe can't compete on low skills or low-grade products but only in high tech, high skill, high value-added goods and services, we need to become even more flexible and competitive. And because the Lisbon strategy was written when the challenge for us was to keep up with the sole economic superpower - America - and preceded the rise of India and china, we now need to move much faster on reform. First, we need a renewed focus on modernising the single market so it enhances the EU's ability to compete in the global economy. Since 1992, the single market has boosted prosperity in Europe by 225 billion euros per year, creating 2.75 million jobs. But we have still a long way to go to secure for business and consumers the full benefits in commercial opportunities and lower prices. Britain is pushing for implementation of the services directive which will make the free movement of services, as well as goods, a reality. And we will continue to work towards further liberalisation in the energy, post, transport and telecoms markets -- where market opening could generate between 75 and 95 billion euros of potential extra economic benefits and create up to 360,000 new jobs. If we are to prove that Europe matters to the issues that affect its citizens, there is no greater test than our ability to make a genuinely single market work in the interests of European business and European consumers. In a period of high and escalating energy prices, for example -- wholesale prices having risen by around 50 per cent since August last year -- we must do all we can to deliver an efficient European market that keeps costs down for consumers. And of course here in Britain we will continue to work with Ofgem to ensure the UK energy market remains genuinely competitive. Second, Europe needs to focus less on regulation and more on promoting enterprise and encouraging innovation. We have now seen a historic commitment from the EU to reduce administrative burdens on business and citizens by 25 per cent by 2012 - but this must now be delivered on the ground so that we replace the old model that assumed everything must be inspected and everyone must fill in forms with a more proportionate risk-based approach.
89 Our aim is to raise European R&D investment closer to 3 per cent of GDP ---- and because we know that there are real benefits in terms of new business and new jobs from the low carbon economy to which Europe is now committed, we will do more to ensure that we have the skills and the expertise for the environmental technologies and industries of the future. To create a prosperous Europe with jobs and opportunities for all, this essential drive for flexibility, dynamism and entrepreneurship must be accompanied by an active and responsive labour market policy. With china and India each year now turning out nearly 2 million more graduates than Europe, there is a premium on upskilling everyone in our economy and we cannot afford to write off any adult or young person. Instead we have to break down all the barriers that hold people's talent back. So it is right that Europe move from what are often called passive labour market policies to active labour market policies - policies which do not simply pay people to stay out of work but which encourage people to move from welfare to work and give them the skills they need to make the most of their potential. And fourth, we must enhance and intensity cooperation on environment. British people know there is no Britain only solution to climate change just as French people know there is no French only solution and German citizens know there is no German only solution. But Europe working together and leading a more united global approach can make a difference. And in the years to come the countries of Europe can show we can work together to cut carbon emissions, promote renewables, lead in environmental technologies and promote inclusive and sustainable development. And I see Europe leading the world in cutting carbon emissions and in working with the international community towards a new post Kyoto agreement. At the heart of a more competitive Europe in the 21st century must be a long-term commitment to a more outward looking relationship with the rest of the world. This is what I mean in practice by 'global Europe' - a Europe that knows it must face outwards if it is to be open for business Day by day the EU is working to help spread peace and stability beyond its borders - from helping to build a better future in Kosovo, to putting pressure on the regime in Burma, to working for a world trade deal that is in the interests of developed and developing countries alike. The EU can now do more to make a positive difference. Europe can lead the way in pressing for reform of our international institutions which - built for just 50 sheltered economies in what became a bipolar world - are not fit for purpose in an interdependent world of 200 states where global flows of commerce, people and ideas defy borders. We need an IMF with a renewed mandate that goes far beyond crisis management to crisis prevention; A World Bank not just for development but for the environment; An enlarged UN Security Council that is more representative, more credible and more engaged. And a new rapid response international commitment to assist rapid reconstruction of post- conflict states. And we should work urgently for a successful outcome in the Doha trade talks. Unlike some people who view the rise of China and India and the next stage of globalisation as an economic threat to the advanced industrial economies, I see it as an opportunity that Europe is well placed to seize - and favour an enhanced dialogue. But it is essential that we respond to change with enhanced flexibility to secure comparative advantage and make globalisation work for us here in Europe. It is through this positive, pro-european but realistic approach that the EU can realise its full potential in the era of globalisation.
90 Pro-European, because it is only through active engagement that we can meet our common goals. Realistic, because we know that Europe cannot ignore the enormous global changes that affect us all. And this can only be done best by business and government working together where there is common cause. So today I want to call for a new partnership with business - to work together making the case for this pro-European realism. Positive about engaging in Europe, leading the case for reform and adaptation to the new world. Together forging a new global Europe that is fit to meet the challenges ahead, and to serve its citizens' interests. Together showing that the success of business and commerce in an outward looking Europe can advance peace, opportunity and a sustainable prosperity in the decades to come. So I look forward to our discussions this morning to show how out of dialogue we can build consensus and a partnership for a Britain working with others and leading the way in the new global Europe.
91 3. David Cameron Speech to Lord Mayor's Banquet A transcript of Prime Minister David Cameron's foreign policy speech to the Lord Mayor's Banquet in London on 15 November 2010.
My Lord Mayor, my late Lord Mayor, your Grace, my Lord Chancellor, Mr Speaker, your Excellencies, my Lords, Aldermen, Sheriffs, Chief Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. Can I first of all thank you, Lord Mayor, for the warmth of that welcome.
I have just come back from visiting two of the fastest-growing economies in the world: China, with average growth of nearly 10% a year for the last three decades, and Korea, which in 1960 had a GDP only twice that of Zambia, but which today has a GDP forty times higher. In Seoul, I was at the G20, bringing together not only the United States and China, but also Brazil, South Africa, India, and Russia. Beijing and Seoul provide good vantage points to reflect on the huge changes sweeping our world: the rise of new great powers, the shifting balance of economic power and the tensions of globalisation. This interconnected world, the world of restless markets, so well represented here in this room tonight, is creating huge new opportunities for the countries that are able to seize them.
But this very same interconnectedness is creating new and more diverse threats to our security. The device that was found on a plane at the East Midlands Airport, which we now know was a viable and dangerous bomb, originated in the Yemen, and was carried to the UAE, to Germany, onto Britain, en route to America. Today, threats originating in one part of the world become threats in all parts of the world. As you are only too aware in the City, the threat from cyber attacks has increased exponentially over the last decade, with the last year alone accounting for more than half of all malicious software threats that have ever been identified. All of this shows how fast our world is changing, how much Britain’s interests depend on the interests of others, and why we need to maintain a global foreign policy, because our national interests are affected more than ever by events well beyond our own shores. Now, our national interest is easily defined. It is to ensure our future prosperity and to keep our country safe in the years ahead. The key question is: how do we best advance this national interest, when the threats and the opportunities are evolving so fast before our eyes?
Now, there are some who say that Britain is embarked on an inevitable path of decline, that the rise of new economic powers is the end of Britain’s influence in the world, that we are in some vast zero-sum game, in which we are bound to lose out. I want to take that argument head on. Britain remains a great economic power. Show me a city in the world with stronger credentials than the City of London. Show me another gathering with the same line-up of financial, legal, accounting, communications and other professional expertise. You know even better than me that Britain is a great trading force in the world. Whenever I meet foreign leaders, they do not see a Britain shuffling apologetically off the world stage. On the contrary, they respect our determination to get our economic house in order so that we can remain masters of our nation’s destiny. They can see the immense advantages of doing business with Britain. We are already ranked first in Europe for the ease of doing business, and we intend to become the first in the world. We are cutting our corporation tax to 24%, the lowest in the G7. We are creating one of the most competitive corporate tax regimes in the G20, cutting the time it takes to set up a new business, and scrapping the needless red tape and excessive regulation that has held us back for too long.
There is no reason why the rise of new economic powers should lead to a loss of British influence in the world, and neither is there any reason why our military power should be diminished. We have the fourth largest defence budget in the world, and remain one of only a handful of countries with the military, technological and logistical means to deploy serious military force around the world. On the day after Remembrance Sunday, I know everyone in this room will want to pay tribute to all those who have served and continue to serve our country. In terms of our role in the world, the truth is that many other countries would envy the cards that we hold: not only the hard
92 power of our military, but our unique inventory of other assets, all of which contribute to our political weight in the world: our global language; the intercontinental reach of our time zone; our world-class universities; the cultural impact around the world of the BBC, the British Council, and our great museums; a civil service and a diplomatic service which are admired the world over for their professionalism and their impartiality. One in ten of our citizens live permanently overseas, reflecting our long tradition as an outward-facing nation, with a history of deep engagement around the world, whose instinct to be self-confident and active well beyond our shores is in our DNA.
We sit at the heart of the world’s most powerful institutions, from the G8 and the G20, to NATO, the Commonwealth, and the UN Security Council. We have a deep and close relationship with America. We are strong and active members of the European Union, the gateway to the world’s largest single market. Few countries on earth have this powerful combination of assets, and even fewer have the ability to make the best use of them. What I have seen in my first six months as Prime Minister is a Britain at the centre of all the big discussions. So, I reject this thesis of decline. I firmly believe that this open, networked world plays to Britain’s strengths, but these vast changes in the world do mean that we do constantly have to adapt. Let me turn to how.
We need to sort out the economy if we are to carry weight in the world. Economic weakness at home translates into political weakness abroad. Economic strength will restore our respect in the world, and our national self-confidence. The faster we can get our domestic house in order, the more substantial and credible our international impact is going to be. But we also have to be strategic and hard headed about how we go about advancing our national interests. In recent years, we have made too many commitments without the resources to back them up, and we have failed to think properly across government about what we were getting ourselves into and how we would see it through to success. So, in Iraq, there was no plan for winning the peace. In Afghanistan, we failed to think through properly the implications of the decision to deploy into Helmand Province in the summer of 2006. As a new government, we should learn the lessons and make changes.
I’m not suggesting that we turn the country’s entire foreign policy on its head. As Leader of the Opposition, I always made clear to foreign leaders that there was a great deal of common ground between the policies of the government and the Opposition. We want an active foreign policy that is staunch in its support for democracy and human rights, as we have been, for example, in arguing for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi and the rights of the Burmese people. Wasn’t it a fantastic sight on our television screens over the weekend to see that wonderful woman free? We want a foreign policy that is vigorous in its efforts to address climate change, which poses such a threat to humanity and which can only be dealt with by nations coming together. We will continue to build on our special relationship with America. It is not just special; it is crucial, because it is based on solid practical foundations such as our cooperation on defence, counter-terrorism and intelligence.
But in other areas, where we believe that Britain’s interests require a change of course, we should lose no time in adjusting the national tiller accordingly. I want to highlight three areas this evening. First, we must link our economy up with the fastest-growing parts of the world, placing our commercial interests at the heart of our foreign policy. Second, we’re taking a more strategic, hard-headed approach to our national security and applying that to our mission in Afghanistan. Third, we must focus more of our aid budget on building security and preventing conflict.
Let me take these in turn. First, a more commercial foreign policy. This is not just about making Britain an attractive place to invest; it’s about selling Britain to the world too. Some people think it is somehow grubby to mix money and diplomacy. I say, when it is harder than ever for this country to earn a living, we need to mobilise all the resources we can. Today we trade more with the Netherlands than with Brazil, Russia, India, China and Turkey combined. We are not making nearly enough of the opportunities out there. That’s why one of the first visits I made as Prime Minister was to India. It’s the second fastest-growing major economy in the world. I have also been to Turkey, which is growing at 11% this year, and just last week I took one of the biggest and most high-powered delegations in our country’s history to China. Next year I plan to visit Brazil
93 and Russia. We are also rebuilding our relationships with the countries in the Gulf. They feel strong links with Britain, but have felt sidelined in recent years. I’m delighted that Her Majesty the Queen will visit the UAE and Oman next week, and I will be making my own visit early next year.
But this isn’t just about what the monarch, ministers or I do. It’s about what our ambassadors, diplomats, our hardworking staff at UKTI, it’s what all of them do day in and day out in every country of the world. I have told them every time anyone representing Britain meets a foreign counterpart for however short a time, I want them walking into that room armed with a list of things they are there to deliver for our country. Others do this; we should too.
When it comes to the European Union, we’ve shown in recent months how we are constructive and firm partners, using our membership of the EU to defend and advance UK interests. I can promise you this: we will stand up, at each and every turn, for our financial services industry and the City of London. London is Europe’s pre-eminent financial centre. With this government, I am determined it will remain so.
Next, bringing a more strategic approach to defending our national security. We set up for the first time a National Security Council which met on the first day of the government, and has weekly ever since. Foreign policy, defence policy, domestic policy, development policy - all the decision- makers not off pursuing disparate missions in different departments, but sitting round a table together asking what is best for Britain and working out how we can gear up the government machine to deliver it for our national security.
Our first priority was to set a clear direction for our military and civilian mission in Afghanistan. The fact remains that we are still the second largest contributor to the NATO-led force, with 10,000 troops there, most of them in the most difficult part of the country. We are not there to build a perfect democracy, still less a model society. We are there to help Afghans take control of their security and ensure that Al Qaeda can never again post a threat to us from Afghan soil. A hard-headed, time-limited approach based squarely on the national interest. In August, we transferred British forces out of Sangin to enable them to concentrate in greater numbers in central Helmand where the bulk of the population lives and to share the burden more sensibly with US forces across the province as a whole. I have said that our combat forces will be out of Afghanistan by 2015.
We’ve also concluded a truly strategic review of all aspects of security and defence. This was long overdue; it has been 12 years and four wars since the last defence review. We started with a detailed audit of our national security. We took a clear view of the risks we faced and set priorities including a new focus on meeting unconventional threats from terrorism and cyber attack. We then took a detailed look at the capabilities we will need to deal with tomorrow’s threats.
Yes, we made some tough choices. [Political reference] But we have ensured that our magnificent armed forces will always have the kit they need for the threats they face, whether today in Afghanistan or in the world of 2020. We will be one of the few countries able to deploy a fully- equipped brigade-sized force anywhere in the world. With the Joint Strike Fighter and Typhoon, the Royal Air Force will have the most capable combat aircraft money can buy, backed by a new fleet of tankers and transport aircraft. The Royal Navy will have a new operational aircraft carrier, new Type 45 destroyers and seven new nuclear-powered hunter-killer submarines, the most advanced in the world. And we will renew Trident, our ultimate insurance policy in an age of uncertainty.
My determination is that Britain will have some of the most modern and flexible armed forces in the world. But our security does not depend on our military forces alone. That’s why we have also given priority to investment in our counter-terrorism capacity and new programmes to improve our resilience against cyber attack, and ensuring that our world-leading intelligence agencies are able to maintain their brilliant work in disrupting threats and keeping our country safe.
94 There’s one more area where, despite the economic pressures we face, this new government has been determined to hold firm: our commitment to spend 0.7% of our GDP on aid by 2013. We will meet that target and we will do so for good reasons. Our aid programme, like the activities of the myriad of charitable aid organisations, literally saves lives. It helps prevent conflict, which is why we have doubled the amount of our aid budget that is spent on security programmes in countries like Pakistan and Somalia. And for millions of people our aid programme is the most visible example of Britain’s global reach. It is a powerful instrument of our foreign policy and profoundly in our national interest.
That theme - pursuit of our national interest - has been at the heart of everything I have said this evening. Our foreign policy is one of hard-headed internationalism. More commercial in enabling Britain to earn its way in the world, more strategic in its focus on meeting the new and emerging threats to our national security, and firmly committed to upholding our values and defending Britain’s moral authority even in the most difficult of circumstances. Above all, our foreign policy is more hard-headed in this respect. It will focus like a laser on defending and advancing Britain’s national interest.
That concept of national interest is of course as old as our nation itself and I am conscious of the many Prime Ministers who have stood here before me and set out Britain’s national interest as they saw it. Many of them have confronted circumstances more perilous than those which face Britain today. But few perhaps will have dealt with a world that is changing so fast. From Beijing to Seoul, from Washington to San Paolo, leaders must work out what it all means for their countries and where their national interests lie. When some people look at the world today, they are quick to prophesy dark times ahead, difficulties for Britain. Our foreign policy runs counter to that pessimism.
We have the resources - commercial, military and cultural - to remain a major player in the world. We have the relationships, with the most established powers and the fastest-growing nations, that can benefit our economy. And we have the values - national values that swept slavery from the seas, that stood up to both fascism and communism and that helped to spread democracy and human rights around the planet - that will drive us to do good around the world.
With these strengths in our armoury we can drive our prosperity, we can increase our security, we can maintain our integrity. We are choosing ambition. Far from shrinking back, Britain is reaching out. And far from looking back starry-eyed on a glorious past, this country can look forward clear-eyed to a great future. Thank you.
95 4. David Cameron's EU speech - full text Full text of the prime minister's speech about his plans for a referendum on British membership of the European Union Wednesday 23 January 2013 08.45 GMT This morning I want to talk about the future of Europe. But first, let us remember the past. Seventy years ago, Europe was being torn apart by its second catastrophic conflict in a generation. A war which saw the streets of European cities strewn with rubble. The skies of London lit by flames night after night. And millions dead across the world in the battle for peace and liberty. As we remember their sacrifice, so we should also remember how the shift in Europe from war to sustained peace came about. It did not happen like a change in the weather. It happened because of determined work over generations. A commitment to friendship and a resolve never to revisit that dark past – a commitment epitomised by the Elysee treaty signed 50 years ago this week. After the Berlin Wall came down I visited that city and I will never forget it. The abandoned checkpoints. The sense of excitement about the future. The knowledge that a great continent was coming together. Healing those wounds of our history is the central story of the European Union. What Churchill described as the twin marauders of war and tyranny have been almost entirely banished from our continent. Today, hundreds of millions dwell in freedom, from the Baltic to the Adriatic, from the Western Approaches to the Aegean.
And while we must never take this for granted, the first purpose of the European Union – to secure peace – has been achieved and we should pay tribute to all those in the EU, alongside Nato, who made that happen. But today the main, overriding purpose of the European Union is different: not to win peace, but to secure prosperity. The challenges come not from within this continent but outside it. From the surging economies in the east and south. Of course a growing world economy benefits us all, but we should be in no doubt that a new global race of nations is under way today. A race for the wealth and jobs of the future. The map of global influence is changing before our eyes. And these changes are already being felt by the entrepreneur in the Netherlands, the worker in Germany, the family in Britain. So I want to speak to you today with urgency and frankness about the European Union and how it must change – both to deliver prosperity and to retain the support of its peoples. But first, I want to set out the spirit in which I approach these issues. I know that the United Kingdom is sometimes seen as an argumentative and rather strong-minded member of the family of European nations. And it's true that our geography has shaped our psychology. We have the character of an island nation: independent, forthright, passionate in defence of our sovereignty. We can no more change this British sensibility than we can drain the English Channel. And because of this sensibility, we come to the European Union with a frame of mind that is more practical than emotional. For us, the European Union is a means to an end – prosperity, stability, the anchor of freedom and democracy both within Europe and beyond her shores – not an end in itself. We insistently ask: how, why, to what end? But all this doesn't make us somehow un-European. The fact is that ours is not just an island story – it is also a continental story. For all our connections to the rest of the world – of which we are rightly proud – we have always been a European power, and we always will be. From Caesar's legions to the Napoleonic wars. From the Reformation, the Enlightenment and the industrial revolution to the defeat of nazism. We have helped to write European history, and Europe has helped write ours. Over the years, Britain has made her own, unique contribution to Europe. We have provided a haven to those fleeing tyranny and persecution. And in Europe's darkest hour, we helped keep the flame of liberty alight. Across the continent, in silent cemeteries, lie the hundreds of thousands of British servicemen who gave their lives for Europe's freedom. In more recent decades, we have played our part in tearing down the iron curtain and championing
96 the entry into the EU of those countries that lost so many years to Communism. And contained in this history is the crucial point about Britain, our national character, our attitude to Europe. Britain is characterised not just by its independence but, above all, by its openness. We have always been a country that reaches out. That turns its face to the world. That leads the charge in the fight for global trade and against protectionism. This is Britain today, as it's always been: independent, yes – but open, too. I never want us to pull up the drawbridge and retreat from the world. I am not a British isolationist. I don't just want a better deal for Britain. I want a better deal for Europe too. So I speak as British prime minister with a positive vision for the future of the European Union. A future in which Britain wants, and should want, to play a committed and active part. Some might then ask: why raise fundamental questions about the future of Europe when Europe is already in the midst of a deep crisis? Why raise questions about Britain's role when support in Britain is already so thin. There are always voices saying: "Don't ask the difficult questions." But it's essential for Europe – and for Britain – that we do because there are three major challenges confronting us today. First, the problems in the eurozone are driving fundamental change in Europe. Second, there is a crisis of European competitiveness, as other nations across the world soar ahead. And third, there is a gap between the EU and its citizens which has grown dramatically in recent years. And which represents a lack of democratic accountability and consent that is – yes – felt particularly acutely in Britain. If we don't address these challenges, the danger is that Europe will fail and the British people will drift towards the exit. I do not want that to happen. I want the European Union to be a success. And I want a relationship between Britain and the EU that keeps us in it. That is why I am here today: to acknowledge the nature of the challenges we face. To set out how I believe the European Union should respond to them. And to explain what I want to achieve for Britain and its place within the European Union. Let me start with the nature of the challenges we face. First, the eurozone. The future shape of Europe is being forged. There are some serious questions that will define the future of the European Union – and the future of every country within it. The union is changing to help fix the currency – and that has profound implications for all of us, whether we are in the single currency or not. Britain is not in the single currency, and we're not going to be. But we all need the eurozone to have the right governance and structures to secure a successful currency for the long term. And those of us outside the eurozone also need certain safeguards to ensure, for example, that our access to the single market is not in any way compromised. And it's right we begin to address these issues now. Second, while there are some countries within the EU which are doing pretty well. Taken as a whole, Europe's share of world output is projected to fall by almost a third in the next two decades. This is the competitiveness challenge – and much of our weakness in meeting it is self-inflicted. Complex rules restricting our labour markets are not some naturally occurring phenomenon. Just as excessive regulation is not some external plague that's been visited on our businesses. These problems have been around too long. And the progress in dealing with them, far too slow. As Chancellor Merkel has said, if Europe today accounts for just over 7% of the world's population, produces around 25% of global GDP and has to finance 50% of global social spending, then it's obvious that it will have to work very hard to maintain its prosperity and way of life. Third, there is a growing frustration that the EU is seen as something that is done to people rather than acting on their behalf. And this is being intensified by the very solutions required to resolve the economic problems. People are increasingly frustrated that decisions taken further and further away from them mean their living standards are slashed through enforced austerity or their taxes are used to bail out governments on the other side of the continent. We are starting to see this in the demonstrations on the streets of Athens, Madrid and Rome. We
97 are seeing it in the parliaments of Berlin, Helsinki and the Hague. And yes, of course, we are seeing this frustration with the EU very dramatically in Britain. Europe's leaders have a duty to hear these concerns. Indeed, we have a duty to act on them. And not just to fix the problems in the eurozone. For just as in any emergency you should plan for the aftermath as well as dealing with the present crisis, so too in the midst of the present challenges we should plan for the future, and what the world will look like when the difficulties in the eurozone have been overcome. The biggest danger to the European Union comes not from those who advocate change, but from those who denounce new thinking as heresy. In its long history Europe has experience of heretics who turned out to have a point. And my point is this. More of the same will not secure a long-term future for the eurozone. More of the same will not see the European Union keeping pace with the new powerhouse economies. More of the same will not bring the European Union any closer to its citizens. More of the same will just produce more of the same: less competitiveness, less growth, fewer jobs. And that will make our countries weaker not stronger. That is why we need fundamental, far-reaching change. So let me set out my vision for a new European Union, fit for the 21st century. It is built on five principles. The first: competitiveness. At the core of the European Union must be, as it is now, the single market. Britain is at the heart of that single market, and must remain so. But when the single market remains incomplete in services, energy and digital – the very sectors that are the engines of a modern economy – it is only half the success it could be. It is nonsense that people shopping online in some parts of Europe are unable to access the best deals because of where they live. I want completing the single market to be our driving mission. I want us to be at the forefront of transformative trade deals with the US, Japan and India as part of the drive towards global free trade. And I want us to be pushing to exempt Europe's smallest entrepreneurial companies from more EU directives. These should be the tasks that get European officials up in the morning – and keep them working late into the night. And so we urgently need to address the sclerotic, ineffective decision-making that is holding us back. That means creating a leaner, less bureaucratic union, relentlessly focused on helping its member countries to compete. In a global race, can we really justify the huge number of expensive peripheral European institutions? Can we justify a commission that gets ever larger? Can we carry on with an organisation that has a multibillion pound budget but not enough focus on controlling spending and shutting down programmes that haven't worked? And I would ask: when the competitiveness of the single market is so important, why is there an environment council, a transport council, an education council but not a single market council? The second principle should be flexibility. We need a structure that can accommodate the diversity of its members – north, south, east, west, large, small, old and new. Some of whom are contemplating much closer economic and political integration. And many others, including Britain, who would never embrace that goal. I accept, of course, that for the single market to function we need a common set of rules and a way of enforcing them. But we also need to be able to respond quickly to the latest developments and trends. Competitiveness demands flexibility, choice and openness – or Europe will fetch up in a no-man's land between the rising economies of Asia and market-driven North America. The EU must be able to act with the speed and flexibility of a network, not the cumbersome rigidity of a bloc. We must not be weighed down by an insistence on a one size fits all approach which implies that all countries want the same level of integration. The fact is that they don't and we shouldn't assert that they do. Some will claim that this offends a central tenet of the EU's founding philosophy. I say it merely reflects the reality of the European Union today. 17 members are part of the eurozone. 10 are not. 26 European countries are members of Schengen – including four outside the European Union – Switzerland, Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland. Two EU countries – Britain and Ireland – have retained their border controls.
98 Some members, like Britain and France, are ready, willing and able to take action in Libya or Mali. Others are uncomfortable with the use of military force. Let's welcome that diversity, instead of trying to snuff it out. Let's stop all this talk of two-speed Europe, of fast lanes and slow lanes, of countries missing trains and buses, and consign the whole weary caravan of metaphors to a permanent siding. Instead, let's start from this proposition: we are a family of democratic nations, all members of one European Union, whose essential foundation is the single market rather than the single currency. Those of us outside the euro recognise that those in it are likely to need to make some big institutional changes. By the same token, the members of the eurozone should accept that we, and indeed all member states, will have changes that we need to safeguard our interests and strengthen democratic legitimacy. And we should be able to make these changes too. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/23/david-cameron-eu-speech-referendum 5/12 11/24/2017 David Cameron's EU speech - full text | Politics | The Guardian Some say this will unravel the principle of the EU – and that you can't pick and choose on the basis of what your nation needs. But far from unravelling the EU, this will in fact bind its members more closely because such flexible, willing co-operation is a much stronger glue than compulsion from the centre. Let me make a further heretical proposition. The European treaty commits the member states to "lay the foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe". This has been consistently interpreted as applying not to the peoples but rather to the states and institutions compounded by a European court of justice that has consistently supported greater centralisation. We understand and respect the right of others to maintain their commitment to this goal. But for Britain – and perhaps for others – it is not the objective. And we would be much more comfortable if the treaty specifically said so, freeing those who want to go further, faster, to do so, without being held back by the others. So to those who say we have no vision for Europe, I say we have. We believe in a flexible union of free member states who share treaties and institutions and pursue together the ideal of co-operation. To represent and promote the values of European civilisation in the world. To advance our shared interests by using our collective power to open markets. And to build a strong economic base across the whole of Europe. And we believe in our nations working together to protect the security and diversity of our energy supplies. To tackle climate change and global poverty. To work together against terrorism and organised crime. And to continue to welcome new countries into the EU. This vision of flexibility and co-operation is not the same as those who want to build an ever closer political union – but it is just as valid. My third principle is that power must be able to flow back to member states, not just away from them. This was promised by European leaders at Laeken a decade ago. It was put in the treaty. But the promise has never really been fulfilled. We need to implement this principle properly. So let us use this moment, as the Dutch prime minister has recently suggested, to examine thoroughly what the EU as a whole should do and should stop doing. In Britain we have already launched our balance of competences review – to give us an informed and objective analysis of where the EU helps and where it hampers. Let us not be misled by the fallacy that a deep and workable single market requires everything to be harmonised, to hanker after some unattainable and infinitely level playing field. Countries are different. They make different choices. We cannot harmonise everything. For example, it is neither right nor necessary to claim that the integrity of the single market, or full membership of the European Union requires the working hours of British hospital doctors to be set in Brussels irrespective of the views of British parliamentarians and practitioners. In the same way we need to examine whether the balance is right in so many areas where the European Union has legislated including on the environment, social affairs and crime. Nothing should be off the table. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/23/david-cameron-eu-speech-referendum 6/12 11/24/2017 David Cameron's EU speech - full text | Politics | The Guardian
99 My fourth principle is democratic accountability: we need to have a bigger and more significant role for national parliaments. There is not, in my view, a single European demos. It is national parliaments, which are, and will remain, the true source of real democratic legitimacy and accountability in the EU. It is to the Bundestag that Angela Merkel has to answer. It is through the Greek parliament that Antonis Samaras has to pass his government's austerity measures. It is to the British parliament that I must account on the EU budget negotiations, or on the safeguarding of our place in the single market. Those are the parliaments which instil proper respect – even fear – into national leaders. We need to recognise that in the way the EU does business. My fifth principle is fairness: whatever new arrangements are enacted for the eurozone, they must work fairly for those inside it and out. That will be of particular importance to Britain. As I have said, we will not join the single currency. But there is no overwhelming economic reason why the single currency and the single market should share the same boundary, any more than the single market and Schengen. Our participation in the single market, and our ability to help set its rules is the principal reason for our membership of the EU. So it is a vital interest for us to protect the integrity and fairness of the single market for all its members. And that is why Britain has been so concerned to promote and defend the single market as the eurozone crisis rewrites the rules on fiscal co-ordination and banking union. These five principles provide what, I believe, is the right approach for the European Union. So now let me turn to what this means for Britain. Today, public disillusionment with the EU is at an all-time high. There are several reasons for this. People feel that the EU is heading in a direction that they never signed up to. They resent the interference in our national life by what they see as unnecessary rules and regulation. And they wonder what the point of it all is. Put simply, many ask "why can't we just have what we voted to join – a common market?" They are angered by some legal judgements made in Europe that impact on life in Britain. Some of this antipathy about Europe in general really relates of course to the European court of human rights, rather than the EU. And Britain is leading European efforts to address this. There is, indeed, much more that needs to be done on this front. But people also feel that the EU is now heading for a level of political integration that is far outside Britain's comfort zone. They see treaty after treaty changing the balance between member states and the EU. And note they were never given a say. They've had referendums promised – but not delivered. They see what has happened to the euro. And they note that many of our political and business leaders urged Britain to join at the time. And they haven't noticed many expressions of contrition. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/23/david-cameron-eu-speech-referendum 7/12 11/24/2017 David Cameron's EU speech - full text | Politics | The Guardian And they look at the steps the eurozone is taking and wonder what deeper integration for the eurozone will mean for a country which is not going to join the euro. The result is that democratic consent for the EU in Britain is now wafer-thin. Some people say that to point this out is irresponsible, creates uncertainty for business and puts a question mark over Britain's place in the European Union. But the question mark is already there and ignoring it won't make it go away. In fact, quite the reverse. Those who refuse to contemplate consulting the British people, would in my view make more likely our eventual exit. Simply asking the British people to carry on accepting a European settlement over which they have had little choice is a path to ensuring that when the question is finally put – and at some stage it will have to be – it is much more likely that the British people will reject the EU. That is why I am in favour of a referendum. I believe in confronting this issue – shaping it, leading the debate. Not simply hoping a difficult situation will go away. Some argue that the solution is therefore to hold a straight in-out referendum now. I understand the impatience of wanting to make that choice immediately. But I don't believe that to make a decision at this moment is the right way forward, either for
100 Britain or for Europe as a whole. A vote today between the status quo and leaving would be an entirely false choice. Now – while the EU is in flux, and when we don't know what the future holds and what sort of EU will emerge from this crisis – is not the right time to make such a momentous decision about the future of our country. It is wrong to ask people whether to stay or go before we have had a chance to put the relationship right. How can we sensibly answer the question "in or out" without being able to answer the most basic question: "What is it exactly that we are choosing to be in or out of?" The European Union that emerges from the eurozone crisis is going to be a very different body. It will be transformed perhaps beyond recognition by the measures needed to save the eurozone. We need to allow some time for that to happen – and help to shape the future of the European Union, so that when the choice comes it will be a real one. A real choice between leaving or being part of a new settlement in which Britain shapes and respects the rules of the single market but is protected by fair safeguards, and free of the spurious regulation which damages Europe's competitiveness. A choice between leaving or being part of a new settlement in which Britain is at the forefront of collective action on issues like foreign policy and trade and where we leave the door firmly open to new members. A new settlement subject to the democratic legitimacy and accountability of national parliaments where member states combine in flexible co-operation, respecting national differences not always trying to eliminate them and in which we have proved that some powers can in fact be returned to member states. In other words, a settlement which would be entirely in keeping with the mission for an updated European Union I have described today. More flexible, more adaptable, more open – fit for the challenges of the modern age. And to those who say a new settlement can't be negotiated, I would say listen to the views of other parties in other European countries arguing for powers to flow back to European states. And look too at what we have achieved already. Ending Britain's obligation to bail out eurozone members. Keeping Britain out of the fiscal compact. Launching a process to return some existing justice and home affairs powers. Securing protections on banking union. And reforming fisheries policy. So we are starting to shape the reforms we need now. Some will not require treaty change. But I agree too with what President Barroso and others have said. At some stage in the next few years the EU will need to agree on treaty change to make the changes needed for the long-term future of the euro and to entrench the diverse, competitive, democratically accountable Europe that we seek. I believe the best way to do this will be in a new treaty so I add my voice to those who are already calling for this. My strong preference is to enact these changes for the entire EU, not just for Britain. But if there is no appetite for a new treaty for us all then of course Britain should be ready to address the changes we need in a negotiation with our European partners. The next Conservative manifesto in 2015 will ask for a mandate from the British people for a Conservative government to negotiate a new settlement with our European partners in the next parliament. It will be a relationship with the single market at its heart. And when we have negotiated that new settlement, we will give the British people a referendum with a very simple in or out choice. To stay in the EU on these new terms, or come out altogether. It will be an in-out referendum. Legislation will be drafted before the next election. And if a Conservative government is elected we will introduce the enabling legislation immediately and pass it by the end of that year. And we will complete this negotiation and hold this referendum within the first half of the next parliament. It is time for the British people to have their say. It is time to settle this European question in British politics. I say to the British people: this will be your decision. And when that choice comes, you will have an important choice to make about our country's destiny. I understand the appeal of going it alone, of charting our own course. But it will be a decision we
101 will have to take with cool heads. Proponents of both sides of the argument will need to avoid exaggerating their claims. Of course Britain could make her own way in the world, outside the EU, if we chose to do so. So could any other member state. But the question we will have to ask ourselves is this: is that the very best future for our country? We will have to weigh carefully where our true national interest lies. Alone, we would be free to take our own decisions, just as we would be freed of our solemn obligation to defend our allies if we left Nato. But we don't leave Nato because it is in our national interest to stay and benefit from its collective defence guarantee. We have more power and influence – whether implementing sanctions against Iran or Syria, or promoting democracy in Burma – if we can act together. If we leave the EU, we cannot of course leave Europe. It will remain for many years our biggest market, and forever our geographical neighbourhood. We are tied by a complex web of legal commitments. Hundreds of thousands of British people now take for granted their right to work, live or retire in any other EU country. Even if we pulled out completely, decisions made in the EU would continue to have a profound effect on our country. But we would have lost all our remaining vetoes and our voice in those decisions. We would need to weigh up very carefully the consequences of no longer being inside the EU and its single market, as a full member. Continued access to the single market is vital for British businesses and British jobs. Since 2004, Britain has been the destination for one in five of all inward investments into Europe. And being part of the single market has been key to that success. There will be plenty of time to test all the arguments thoroughly, in favour and against the arrangement we negotiate. But let me just deal with one point we hear a lot about. There are some who suggest we could turn ourselves into Norway or Switzerland – with access to the single market but outside the EU. But would that really be in our best interests? I admire those countries and they are friends of ours – but they are very different from us. Norway sits on the biggest energy reserves in Europe, and has a sovereign wealth fund of over €500bn. And while Norway is part of the single market – and pays for the principle – it has no say at all in setting its rules. It just has to implement its directives. The Swiss have to negotiate access to the single market sector by sector, accepting EU rules – over which they have no say – or else not getting full access to the single market, including in key sectors like financial services. The fact is that if you join an organisation like the European Union, there are rules. You will not always get what you want. But that does not mean we should leave – not if the benefits of staying and working together are greater. We would have to think carefully too about the impact on our influence at the top table of international affairs. There is no doubt that we are more powerful in Washington, in Beijing, in Delhi because we are a powerful player in the European Union. That matters for British jobs and British security. It matters to our ability to get things done in the world. It matters to the United States and other friends around the world, which is why many tell us very clearly that they want Britain to remain in the EU. We should think very carefully before giving that position up. If we left the European Union, it would be a one-way ticket, not a return. So we will have time for a proper, reasoned debate. At the end of that debate you, the British people, will decide. And I say to our European partners, frustrated as some of them no doubt are by Britain's attitude: work with us on this. Consider the extraordinary steps which the eurozone members are taking to keep the euro together, steps which a year ago would have seemed impossible. It does not seem to me that the steps which would be needed to make Britain – and others – more comfortable in their relationship in the European Union are inherently so outlandish or unreasonable. And just as I believe that Britain should want to remain in the EU so the EU should want us to
102 stay. For an EU without Britain, without one of Europe's strongest powers, a country which in many ways invented the single market, and which brings real heft to Europe's influence on the world stage, which plays by the rules and which is a force for liberal economic reform would be a very different kind of European Union. And it is hard to argue that the EU would not be greatly diminished by Britain's departure. Let me finish today by saying this. I have no illusions about the scale of the task ahead. I know there will be those who say the vision I have outlined will be impossible to achieve. That there is no way our partners will co-operate. That the British people have set themselves on a path to inevitable exit. And that if we aren't comfortable being in the EU after 40 years, we never will be. But I refuse to take such a defeatist attitude – either for Britain or for Europe. Because with courage and conviction I believe we can deliver a more flexible, adaptable and open European Union in which the interests and ambitions of all its members can be met. With courage and conviction I believe we can achieve a new settlement in which Britain can be comfortable and all our countries can thrive. And when the referendum comes let me say now that if we can negotiate such an arrangement, I will campaign for it with all my heart and soul. Because I believe something very deeply. That Britain's national interest is best served in a flexible, adaptable and open European Union and that such a European Union is best with Britain in it. Over the coming weeks, months and years, I will not rest until this debate is won. For the future of my country. For the success of the European Union. And for the prosperity of our peoples for generations to come.
103
NOTE Subject: Draft Decision of the Heads of State or Government, meeting within the European Council, concerning a New Settlement for the United Kingdom within the European Union European Council Brussels, 19 February 2016 (OR. en) SN 21/16
Delegations will find attached a modified text of the draft Decision of the Heads of State or Government, meeting within the European Council, concerning a New Settlement for the United Kingdom within the European Union.
SN 21/16 1 EN DRAFT DECISION OF THE HEADS OF STATE OR GOVERNMENT, MEETING WITHIN THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, CONCERNING A NEW SETTLEMENT FOR THE UNITED KINGDOM WITHIN THE EUROPEAN UNION The Heads of State or Government of the 28 Member States of the European Union, meeting within the European Council, whose Governments are signatories of the Treaties on which the Union is founded, Desiring to settle, in conformity with the Treaties, certain issues raised by the United Kingdom in its letter of 10 November 2015, Intending to clarify in this Decision certain questions of particular importance to the Member States so that such clarification will have to be taken into consideration as being an instrument for the interpretation of the Treaties; intending as well to agree arrangements for matters including the role of national Parliaments in the Union, as well as the effective management of the banking union and of the consequences of further integration of the euro area,
SN 21/16 2 EN Recalling the Union's objective of establishing, in accordance with the Treaties, an economic and monetary union whose currency is the euro and the importance which a properly functioning euro area has for the European Union as a whole. While nineteen Member States have already adopted the single currency, other Member States are under a derogation which applies until the Council decides that the conditions are met for its abrogation and two Member States have, pursuant to Protocols No 15 and No 16 annexed to the Treaties, respectively no obligation to adopt the euro or an exemption from doing so. Accordingly, for as long as the said derogations are not abrogated or the said protocols have not ceased to apply following notification or request from the relevant Member State, not all Member States have the euro as their currency. Recalling that the process towards the establishment of the banking union and a more integrated governance of the euro area is open to Member States that do not have the euro as their currency,
104 Recalling that the Treaties, together with references to the process of European integration and to the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe, contain also specific provisions whereby some Member States are entitled not to take part in or are exempted from the application of certain provisions or chapters of the Treaties and Union law as concerns matters such as the adoption of the euro, decisions having defence implications, the exercise of border controls on persons, as well as measures in the area of freedom, security and justice. Treaty provisions also allow for the non-participation of one or more Member States in actions intended to further the objectives of the Union, notably through the establishment of enhanced cooperations. Therefore, such processes make possible different paths of integration for different Member States, allowing those that want to deepen integration to move ahead, whilst respecting the rights of those which do not want to take such a course,
SN 21/16 3 EN Recalling in particular that the United Kingdom is entitled under the Treaties: - not to adopt the euro and therefore to keep the British pound sterling as its currency (Protocol No 15), - not to participate in the Schengen acquis (Protocol No 19), - to exercise border controls on persons, and therefore not to participate in the Schengen area as regards internal and external borders (Protocol No 20), - to choose whether or not to participate in measures in the area of freedom, security and justice (Protocol No 21), - to cease to apply as from 1 December 2014 a large majority of Union acts and provisions in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters adopted before the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty while choosing to continue to participate in 35 of them (Article 10(4) and (5) of Protocol No 36), Recalling also that the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has not extended the ability of the Court of Justice of the European Union or any court or tribunal of the United Kingdom to rule on the consistency of the laws and practices of the United Kingdom with the fundamental rights that it reaffirms (Protocol No 30), Determined to exploit fully the potential of the internal market in all its dimensions, to reinforce the global attractiveness of the Union as a place of production and investment, and to promote international trade and market access through, inter alia, the negotiation and conclusion of trade agreements, in a spirit of mutual and reciprocal benefit and transparency, Determined also to facilitate and support the proper functioning of the euro area and its long-term future, for the benefit of all Member States,
SN 21/16 4 EN Respecting the powers of the institutions of the Union, including throughout the legislative and budgetary procedures, and not affecting the relations of the Union institutions and bodies with the national competent authorities, Respecting the powers of the central banks in the performance of their tasks, including the provision of central bank liquidity within their respective jurisdictions, Having regard to the Statement containing the draft Decision of the Council on specific provisions relating to the effective management of the banking union and of the consequences of further integration of the euro area, Having regard to the Conclusions of the European Council of 26 and 27 June 2014 and of 18 and 19 February 2016, Noting the Declaration of the European Council on competitiveness, Noting the Declaration of the Commission on a subsidiarity implementation mechanism and a burden reduction implementation mechanism, Noting the Declaration of the Commission on the safeguard mechanism referred to in paragraph 2(b) of Section D of the Decision, Noting the Declaration of the Commission on issues related to the abuse of the right of free movement of persons, Having taken into account the views expressed by the President and members of the European
105 Parliament, Have agreed on the following Decision:
SN 21/16 5 EN SECTION A ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE In order to fulfil the Treaties' objective to establish an economic and monetary union whose currency is the euro, further deepening is needed. Measures, the purpose of which is to further deepen economic and monetary union, will be voluntary for Member States whose currency is not the euro and will be open to their participation wherever feasible. This is without prejudice to the fact that Member States whose currency is not the euro, other than those without an obligation to adopt the euro or exempted from it, are committed under the Treaties to make progress towards fulfilling the conditions necessary for the adoption of the single currency. It is acknowledged that Member States not participating in the further deepening of the economic and monetary union will not create obstacles to but facilitate such further deepening while this process will, conversely, respect the rights and competences of the non-participating Member States. The Union institutions, together with the Member States, will facilitate the coexistence between different perspectives within the single institutional framework ensuring consistency, the effective operability of Union mechanisms and the equality of Member States before the Treaties, as well as the level-playing field and the integrity of the internal market. Mutual respect and sincere cooperation between Member States participating or not in the operation of the euro area will be ensured by the principles recalled in this Section, which are 1 safeguarded notably through the Council Decision referring to it.
1 Council Decision on specific provisions relating to the effective management of the banking union and of the consequences of further integration of the euro area.
SN 21/16 6 EN 1. Discrimination between natural or legal persons based on the official currency of the Member State, or, as the case may be, the currency that has legal tender in the Member State, where they are established is prohibited. Any difference of treatment must be based on objective reasons. Legal acts, including intergovernmental agreements between Member States, directly linked to the functioning of the euro area shall respect the internal market, as well as economic and social and territorial cohesion, and shall not constitute a barrier to or discrimination in trade between Member States. These acts shall respect the competences, rights and obligations of Member States whose currency is not the euro. Member States whose currency is not the euro shall not impede the implementation of legal acts directly linked to the functioning of the euro area and shall refrain from measures which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of economic and monetary union. 2. Union law on the banking union conferring upon the European Central Bank, the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, authority over credit institutions is applicable only to credit institutions located in Member States whose currency is the euro or in Member States that have concluded with the European Central Bank a close cooperation agreement on prudential supervision, in accordance with relevant EU rules and subject to the requirements of group and consolidated supervision and resolution. The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market. Substantive Union law to be applied by the European Central Bank in the exercise of its functions of single supervisor, or by the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, including the single rulebook as regards prudential requirements for credit institutions or other legislative measures to be adopted for the purpose of safeguarding financial stability, may need to be conceived in a more uniform manner than corresponding rules to be applied by national authorities of Member States that do not take part in the banking union. To this end, specific provisions within the single rulebook and other relevant instruments may be necessary, while preserving the level-playing field
106 and contributing to financial stability. SN 21/16 7
EN 3. Emergency and crisis measures designed to safeguard the financial stability of the euro area will not entail budgetary responsibility for Member States whose currency is not the euro, or, as the case may be, for those not participating in the banking union. Appropriate mechanisms to ensure full reimbursement will be established where the general budget of the Union supports costs, other than administrative costs, that derive from the emergency and crisis measures referred to in the first subparagraph. 4. The implementation of measures, including the supervision or resolution of financial institutions and markets, and macro-prudential responsibilities, to be taken in view of preserving the financial stability of Member States whose currency is not the euro is, subject to the requirements of group and consolidated supervision and resolution, a matter for their own authorities and own budgetary responsibility, unless such Member States wish to join common mechanisms open to their participation. This is without prejudice to the development of the single rulebook and to Union mechanisms of macro-prudential oversight for the prevention and mitigation of systemic financial risks in the Union and to the existing powers of the Union to take action that is necessary to respond to threats to financial stability. 5. The informal meetings of the ministers of the Member States whose currency is the euro, as referred to in Protocol (No 14) on the Euro Group, shall respect the powers of the Council as an institution upon which the Treaties confer legislative functions and within which Member States coordinate their economic policies. In accordance with the Treaties, all members of the Council participate in its deliberations, even where not all members have the right to vote. Informal discussions by a group of Member States shall respect the powers of the Council, as well as the prerogatives of the other EU institutions.
SN 21/16 8 EN 6. Where an issue relating to the application of this Section is to be discussed in the European Council as provided in paragraph 1 of Section E, due account will be taken of the possible urgency of the matter. 7. The substance of this Section will be incorporated into the Treaties at the time of their next revision in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaties and the respective constitutional requirements of the Member States. SECTION B COMPETITIVENESS The establishment of an internal market in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured is an essential objective of the Union. To secure this objective and to generate growth and jobs, the EU must enhance competitiveness, along the lines set out in the Declaration of the European Council on competitiveness. To this end, the relevant EU institutions and the Member States will make all efforts to fully implement and strengthen the internal market, as well as to adapt it to keep pace with the changing environment. At the same time, the relevant EU institutions and the Member States will take concrete steps towards better regulation, which is a key driver to deliver the above-mentioned objectives. This means lowering administrative burdens and compliance costs on economic operators, especially small and medium enterprises, and repealing unnecessary legislation as foreseen in the Declaration of the Commission on a subsidiarity implementation mechanism and a burden reduction implementation mechanism, while continuing to ensure high standards of consumer, employee, health and environmental protection. The European Union will also pursue an active and ambitious trade policy. Progress on all these elements of a coherent policy for competitiveness will be closely monitored and reviewed as appropriate.
SN 21/16 9 EN SECTION C SOVEREIGNTY
107 1. It is recognised that the United Kingdom, in the light of the specific situation it has under the Treaties, is not committed to further political integration into the European Union. The substance of this will be incorporated into the Treaties at the time of their next revision in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaties and the respective constitutional requirements of the Member States, so as to make it clear that the references to ever closer union do not apply to the United Kingdom. The references in the Treaties and their preambles to the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe do not offer a legal basis for extending the scope of any provision of the Treaties or of EU secondary legislation. They should not be used either to support an extensive interpretation of the competences of the Union or of the powers of its institutions as set out in the Treaties. These references do not alter the limits of Union competence governed by the principle of conferral, or the use of Union competence governed by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. They do not require that further competences be conferred upon the European Union or that the European Union must exercise its existing competences, or that competences conferred on the Union could not be reduced and thereby returned to the Member States.
SN 21/16 10 EN The competences conferred by the Member States on the Union can be modified, whether to increase or reduce them, only through a revision of the Treaties with the agreement of all Member States. The Treaties already contain specific provisions whereby some Member States are entitled not to take part in or are exempted from the application of certain provisions of Union law. The references to an ever closer union among the peoples are therefore compatible with different paths of integration being available for different Member States and do not compel all Member States to aim for a common destination. The Treaties allow an evolution towards a deeper degree of integration among the Member States that share such a vision of their common future, without this applying to other Member States. 2. The purpose of the principle of subsidiarity is to ensure that decisions are taken as closely as possible to the citizen. The choice of the right level of action therefore depends, inter alia, on whether the issue under consideration has transnational aspects which cannot be satisfactorily regulated by action by Member States and on whether action at Union level would produce clear benefits by reason of its scale or effects compared with actions at the level of Member States. Reasoned opinions issued by national Parliaments in accordance with Article 7(1) of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality are to be duly taken into account by all institutions involved in the decision-making process of the Union. Appropriate arrangements will be made to ensure this. 3. Where reasoned opinions on the non-compliance of a draft Union legislative act with the principle of subsidiarity, sent within 12 weeks from the transmission of that draft, represent more than 55 % of the votes allocated to the national Parliaments, the Council Presidency will include the item on the agenda of the Council for a comprehensive discussion on these opinions and on the consequences to be drawn therefrom. Following such discussion, and while respecting the procedural requirements of the Treaties, the representatives of the Member States acting in their capacity as members of the Council will discontinue the consideration of the draft legislative act in question unless the draft is amended to accommodate the concerns expressed in the reasoned opinions. SN 21/16 11
EN For the purposes of this paragraph, the votes allocated to the national Parliaments are calculated in accordance with Article 7(1) of Protocol No 2. Votes from national Parliaments of Member States not participating in the adoption of the legislative act in question are not counted. 4. The rights and obligations of Member States provided for under the Protocols annexed to the Treaties must be fully recognised and given no lesser status than the other provisions of the Treaties of which such Protocols form an integral part. In particular, a measure adopted pursuant to Title V of Part Three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) on the area of freedom, security and justice does not bind the
108 Member States covered by Protocols No 21 and No 22, unless the Member State concerned, where the relevant Protocol so allows, has notified its wish to be bound by the measure. The representatives of the Member States acting in their capacity as members of the Council will ensure that, where a Union measure, in the light of its aim and content, falls within the scope of Title V of Part Three of the TFEU, Protocols No 21 and No 22 will apply to it, including when this entails the splitting of the measure into two acts. 5. Article 4(2) of the Treaty on European Union confirms that national security remains the sole responsibility of each Member State. This does not constitute a derogation from Union law and should therefore not be interpreted restrictively. In exercising their powers, the Union institutions will fully respect the national security responsibility of the Member States. The benefits of collective action on issues that affect the security of Member States are recognised.
SN 21/16 12 EN SECTION D SOCIAL BENEFITS AND FREE MOVEMENT Free movement of workers within the Union is an integral part of the internal market which entails, among others, the right for workers of the Member States to accept offers of employment anywhere within the Union. Different levels of remuneration among the Member States make some offers of employment more attractive than others, with consequential movements that are a direct result of the freedom of the market. However, the social security systems of the Member States, which Union law coordinates but does not harmonise, are diversely structured and this may in itself attract workers to certain Member States. It is legitimate to take this situation into account and to provide, both at Union and at national level, and without creating unjustified direct or indirect discrimination, for measures limiting flows of workers of such a scale that they have negative effects both for the Member States of origin and for the Member States of destination. The concerns expressed by the United Kingdom in this regard are duly noted, in view of further developments of Union legislation and of relevant national law. Interpretation of current EU rules 1. The measures referred to in the introductory paragraph should take into account that Member States have the right to define the fundamental principles of their social security systems and enjoy a broad margin of discretion to define and implement their social and employment policy, including setting the conditions for access to welfare benefits.
SN 21/16 13 EN (a) Whereas the free movement of workers under Article 45 TFEU entails the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment, this right may be subject to limitations on grounds of public policy, public security or public health. In addition, if overriding reasons of public interest make it necessary, free movement of workers may be restricted by measures proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. Encouraging recruitment, reducing unemployment, protecting vulnerable workers and averting the risk of seriously undermining the sustainability of social security systems are reasons of public interest recognised in the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union for this purpose, based on a case by case analysis. Based on objective considerations independent of the nationality of the persons concerned and proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued, conditions may be imposed in relation to certain benefits to ensure that there is a real and effective degree of connection between the person concerned and the labour market of the host Member State. (b) Free movement of EU citizens under Article 21 TFEU is to be exercised subject to the limitations and conditions laid down in the Treaties and the measures adopted to give them effect. The right of economically non active persons to reside in the host Member State depends under EU law on such persons having sufficient resources for themselves and their family members not to become a burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State, and on those persons having comprehensive sickness insurance. Member States have the possibility of refusing to grant social benefits to persons who exercise their right to freedom of movement solely in order to obtain Member States' social assistance although they do not have sufficient resources to claim a right of residence.
109
SN 21/16 14 EN Member States may reject claims for social assistance by EU citizens from other Member States who do not enjoy a right of residence or are entitled to reside on their territory solely because of their job-search. This includes claims by EU citizens from other Member States for benefits whose predominant function is to cover the minimum subsistence costs, even if such benefits are also intended to facilitate access to the labour market of the host Member States. (c) Those enjoying the right to free movement shall abide by the laws of the host Member State. In accordance with Union law, Member States are able to take action to prevent abuse of rights or fraud, such as the presentation of forged documents, and address cases of contracting or maintaining marriages of convenience with third country nationals for the purpose of making use of free movement as a route for regularising unlawful stay in a Member State or address cases of making use of free movement as a route for bypassing national immigration rules applying to third country nationals. Host Member States may also take the necessary restrictive measures to protect themselves against individuals whose personal conduct is likely to represent a genuine and serious threat to public policy or security. In determining whether the conduct of an individual poses a present threat to public policy or security, Member States may take into account past conduct of the individual concerned and the threat may not always need to be imminent. Even in the absence of a previous criminal conviction, Member States may act on preventative grounds, so long as they are specific to the individual concerned. Further exchange of information and administrative cooperation between Member States will be developed together with the Commission in order to more effectively fight against such abuse of rights and fraud.
SN 21/16 15 EN Changes to EU secondary legislation 2. It is noted that, following the taking effect of this Decision, the Commission will submit proposals for amending existing EU secondary legislation as follows: (a) a proposal to amend Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the 2 Council on the coordination of social security systems in order to give Member States, with regard to the exportation of child benefits to a Member State other than that where the worker resides, an option to index such benefits to the conditions of the Member State where the child resides. This should apply only to new claims made by EU workers in the host Member State. However, as from 1 January 2020, all Member States may extend indexation to existing claims to child benefits already exported by EU workers. The Commission does not intend to propose that the future system of optional indexation of child benefits be extended to other types of exportable benefits, such as old-age pensions;
2 Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ L 166, 30.4.2004, p. 1).
SN 21/16 16 EN (b) in order to take account of a pull factor arising from a Member State's in-work benefits regime, a proposal to amend Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the 3 Council on freedom of movement for workers within the Union which will provide for an alert and safeguard mechanism that responds to situations of inflow of workers from other Member States of an exceptional magnitude over an extended period of time, including as a result of past policies following previous EU enlargements. A Member State wishing to avail itself of the mechanism would notify the Commission and the Council that such an exceptional situation exists on a scale that affects essential aspects of its social security system, including the primary purpose
110 of its in-work benefits system, or which leads to difficulties which are serious and liable to persist in its employment market or are putting an excessive pressure on the proper functioning of its public services. On a proposal from the Commission after having examined the notification and the reasons stated therein, the Council could authorise the Member State concerned to restrict access to non-contributory in-work benefits to the extent necessary. The Council would authorise that Member State to limit the access of newly arriving EU workers to non-contributory in-work benefits for a total period of up to four years from the commencement of employment. The limitation should be graduated, from an initial complete exclusion but gradually increasing access to such benefits to take account of the growing connection of the worker with the labour market of the host Member State. The authorisation would have a limited duration and apply to EU workers newly arriving during a period of 7 years. The representatives of the Member States, acting in their capacity as members of the Council, will proceed with work on these legislative proposals as a matter of priority and do all within their power to ensure their rapid adoption. The future measures referred to in this paragraph should not result in EU workers enjoying less favourable treatment than third country nationals in a comparable situation.
3 Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union (OJ L 141, 27.5.2011, p. 1).
SN 21/16 17 EN Changes to EU primary law 3. With regard to future enlargements of the European Union, it is noted that appropriate transitional measures concerning free movement of persons will be provided for in the relevant Acts of Accession to be agreed by all Member States, in accordance with the Treaties. In this context, the position expressed by the United Kingdom in favour of such transitional measures is noted. SECTION E APPLICATION AND FINAL PROVISIONS 1. Any Member State may ask the President of the European Council that an issue relating to the application of this Decision be discussed in the European Council. 2. This Decision shall take effect on the same date as the Government of the United Kingdom informs the Secretary-General of the Council that the United Kingdom has decided to remain a member of the European Union.
SN 21/16 18 EN
111