Labour was more pro European, but was however not ready to

accept everything. Tony Blair negotiated for the working time not
to be totally applied to the U.K (48 maximum) so as to protect the
competitiveness of the workforce.

From the very beginning, the U.K always negotiated a special

position, menu, choosing what to adopt, and what not to adopt.
Obviously, among the most significant developments were the
article of the Maastricht treaty was the creation of a common
currency (was to be created 1st January 1999), and Britain had
already obtained an out of this currency.

Blair's position might have been a little more hypocritical, as he

stated (before becoming PM) that the U.K was not ready for a
common currency.

Under Blair, the UK still appeared to be a country that found it

difficult to wholeheartedly support institutions and reforms that
might be perceived as taking its sovereignty or status away.
Blair promoted the image of the UK as a potential bridge between
the USA and the countries of the EU

“Whenever they are divided, the forces of progress, the values of

liberty and democracy, the requirements of security and peace,
suffer. We can indeed help to be bridge between the US and
Europe and such understanding is always needed.”

Blair and new labour seemed to have a much more pro European
attitude, and they were also quite aware that they shouldn't go too
much in this direction, not all of them (the majority was not
convinced they should adopt the euro). As for what was Blair's
position concerning the UK as a bridge between the U.S and
Europe, he wanted to connect strongly with the U.S, leading to his
downfall with the intervention in Irak from U.K troops.
Labour developed the idea that British people should be consulted
whenever a decision would be taken regarding Europe. New
elections took place in 2001, and on that occasion the conservative
manifesto pledged that no decision would be taken to join the
Euro, which influenced labour (as even on their side, the euro-
sceptics obtained a pledge that no decision to join the Euro would
be taken without a refendum. Conservative: no euro / Labour: no
decision without people being consulted first.

Under the leadership of the conservative party, it became an

accepted fact that no decision would be taken without an
agreement of the people. It was a process of democratisation of the
European issue.

What happened next went wrong, as in 2005 there was a first

constitutional treaty that was presented to the 25 members of the
E.U, and it contained structural modifications.

It reformed decision making procedures.

So far, most decisions at the European level had to be taken by

unanimity. If one country had veto, it wouldn't work. What this
new constitution suggested was that more procedure could be
taken with majority decision only. They were no very few domains
where unanimous decisions were to remain necessary.

A referendum was planned in the case of the U.K, but it was not
held since French and Deutsch voters rejected the constitution.
Both France and Holland rejected it.

This first constitution that had been submitted to F and D voters,

was presented as “the only chance, or the end of Europe”. Yet
despite its failure, 2 years later the Lisbon treaty replaced it. It
contained many of the changes advocated by the 1'st one
(including majority) but it kept many of the initial clauses of the
constitutions.

In the UK, Gordon Brown had just replaced Tony Blair at the head
of government, and Brown controversially decided to sign the
treaty without submitting it to a referendum, despite it being a
manifesto promise. (2007)

This lead to an uproar, to which Gordon Brown answered that

there were now many differences between the 2 documents. He
reassured the British people that the national interests had been
safeguarded, and as a matter of fact the UK had once again
secured some opt out clauses.

The UK parliament approved the Lisbon treaty in 2008, but the

government was harshly criticised for that. Gordon Brown tried to
present the treaty as a success for the people, but he was
condemned (mostly by the tabloid press) by the right wing press to
having shown subordination to the EU, for having betrayed the
public by refusing them a say on the issue.

That probably contributed to his unpopularity and subsequent

decline. Further in 2007, there were new elections in 2010, and on
that occasion British people showed a distrust in politicians, a
disinterest, and the outcome of these elections was that there was
no majority party, and that led to a coalition under David
Cameron. In this coalition the conservative clearly were the
stronger partner, they managed to impose their policies on the Lib-
Dem, who did not manage to keep their promises and therefore
disappointed their voters. They then crumbled.

To understand what was to lead then to the referendum on Europe,

we have to go back a little to 2008 and the financial crisis that
shook the world at that stage. Following the 2008 financial crisis,
there were fears concerning the fragility of the pound (being an
isolated currency). As things turned out, the £ began to lose value
against the Euro, and at some point there even was a parity
between the two.

This apparent fragility of the UK's economy and currency led to

some voices tentatively suggesting that maybe it would not be
such a bad idea to join the euro after all.

This did not last long, as the other Eurozone countries began to
suffer from the fallout of the financial crisis and bailed out, began
to be organise and to rescue in particular Greece and Portugal.
They managed to pay back very rapidly, and bail out began to be
organised to come to the rescue of Greece, Ireland and Portugal.
When these bail out were organised at European level, it became
clear that the single currency would have to be accompanied by
better coordination on the budget. If a bail out had to be organised,
it had to be accompanied by stringency measures from the country
receiving them.

The financial crisis engulfed the Eurozone, and there were now
discussions of European control of national budgets. There were
now even speculations on the euro, and led a majority of
commentators that were in favour of joining the euro to change
their mind. Back to Euroscepticism.

The introduction of the Lisbon treaty reinforced British hostility

towards the European union, and contributed to increase the
Euroscepticism.

When David Cameron became prime minister in 2010 (coalition

with Nick Clegg). Despite being pro Europe, Libdem didn't have
their say in the government, it was clearly the conservative who
dominated, and it was seen very clearly when in December 2011,
David Cameron refused to sign the European Fiscal Compact
without telling Nick Clegg first.
Cameron used the UK's veto in order to refuse to participate in the
new European wide agreement (Czech republic refused it as well.)
This decision marginalised the UK's position further (Nicolas
Sarkozy said that there were 2 Europe). Clearly, the idea here was
that they would not allow Europe to have a say over their national
budget. That was a little more than a year after David Cameron
had come to power as prime minister. He himself was a moderate,
so what led him to little more than one year later announce that he
would organise a Brexit referendum.

The first element was the rise of UKIP (created in 1993). It grew
rapidly between 2009-13, which meant that the conservatives were
not faced with the threat of losing their Eurosceptics voters to this
party.

It reached 30k in 2013, 35k in 2015. In terms of results at the

European parliament, they won in 2016, 11 of the 73 UK seat of
EU parliament. (At the time they had 3 members in the house of
Lord, and one seat in the NI assembly, none in Westminster)

From 11 seats in 2013, it obtained 24 seats in 2014.

In terms of campaign, they mainly talked about the cost of EU, the
loss of sovereignty, and the loss of control over immigration.

C/ The 2016 referendum

Concerning the referendum itself, the eurozone crisis had played a

role.
There were regulars opinion polls showing that people favoured
getting out.

January 2013 : Cameron announced a referendum bill for 2017 if

re-elected in 2015.
(Blueberg speech).

Initially the referendum was meant to be subjected in 2017. It was

due to pressure within his own party that after his re-election he
advanced it.

Stay in or get out of the European Union?

May 2015: Conservative victory

Commitment to referendum reiterated.

The reforms David Cameron hoped to make:

Integration: Allowing Britain to opt out of political
integration(sovereignty)
Benefits: Restrict access to in-work and out-of-work benefits to
EU migrants + remove jobseekers after six months if they have
not found work.
Sovereignty: Giving greater power to national parliaments to
block EU legislation
Eurozone vs the rest

Finally, it should be accepted that in Europe there are 2 currencies,

the Euro and others, and they should have the same status.

What Cameron wanted about sovereignty

Allowing Britain to opt out from tue EU's founding ambition to

forge an “ever closer union” of the peoples of Europe so it will not
be drawn into further political integration in a “formal legally
binding and irreversible way”

Giving greaer powers to national parliaments to block EU

leglisation

What the final deal said:

“It is recognised that the UK in the light of the specific situation it
has under the Treaties is not committed to further political
integration into the EU. The substance of this…

About migrants and welfare benefits

What Cameron wanted

EU migrants who want to claim tax credits and child benfit must
live here and contribute to our country for a minimum of four
years
end the ability of UE jobseekers to claim any job benefits “If
jobseekers have not found a job withint T6 month, they will be
required to leave”

What the final deal said :

Newly arrived EU migrants are banned from claiming jobseekers'
allowance for three months. If they have not found a job within 6
month, they will be required to leave. EU migrants workers in the
UK who lose their job, through no fault of their own, are entitled
to the same benefits as UK citizens, including jobseekers
allowance and housing benefit for six months.

About economic governance or safeguarding interest of countries

outside the eurozone.
Cameron wanted an explicit recognition that the euro is not the
only currency of the EU, to ensure countries outside the eurozone
are not materially disadvantaged. He also wanted safeguards that
steps to further financial union cannot be imposed on non-
eurozone- members and the UK wil not have to contribute to
eurozone bailouts.
Cameron won guarantees that countries outside the eurozone, such
as Britain, will not be required to fund euro bailouts and will be
reimbursed for central EU funds used to prop up the euro

23 June 2016:
Referendum (non-biding)
Question: Should the UK remain a member of the EU or leave the
EU union.
51.9% Leave
Turnout 72% (one of highest in British history)

Immediate reactions to the vote

Youth protests and non-inclusion of underage voters

Increase of applications for passports of other EU countries
Racist abuse and hate crimes
Petition for a new referendum

“Any member state may decide to withdraw from the Union ”

(Lisbon treaty article 50)

4- impact on the unity of the UK

A-Northern Ireland

One of the things that contributed to 1998 agreement was a

common council for N/S, no more borders (reassuring
nationalists). If the north leave the EU and the south remains, this
will have an impact on trade and tourism, but also on the N/S
dimension of relations between Stormont and Dublin&the peace
process.
This is about the shake the whole peace process (which is very
fragile)

B-/ Scottish voters backed remaining in the EU by a margin of

62% to 38%.
Second independence referendum is “highly likely” according to
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.