Brexit (2) The UK has a say in European democracy and an economic benefit (that’s good)

The EU’s democracy works by having representatives from each country voted in to take a seat at the European Parliament. These representatives are called Members of the European Parliament (MEPs). The system is analogous to the way British democracy already works (ignoring the fact that countries tend to vote in radical-right political parties as MEPs, even relative to the Government they vote in for domestic government). The UK currently has a disproportionate say the running of the EU, through this democracy.

The UK’s biggest economic sector, fittingly, is economics: banking and financial services. The EU commissioner that deals with that is Jonathan Hill, a British man. The EU banking rules are ultimately resided over by a Brit, giving a Brit international say over regulations that control Britain’s biggest economic sector. I’m not saying Mr Hill has a dictatorial say over this, as there is still a democratic process that can be blocked by an elected Parliament if deemed necessary; but I am saying the UK will lose this sway if it leaves the EU.

This matters, because the UK will have to surrender its say in European Union politics if it leaves. At the moment, the UK has sway over vast areas in terms of policy. To maintain the current fruits of European trade, the UK will have to agree to become a follower of European politics while losing that democratic say. Else, it will have to trade at a disadvantage.

My job has always relied on the EU. I have been a teacher in international schools and a teacher as well as manager of international Summer Camps. The visa-free travel of EU member states has been important to my not only my job, but the entire industry to which I belong. The effect of creating visa restrictions is that it limits the numbers of students who come or that can even stay. This has been the effect in changes to visa rules for Russia and China and it is damaging the industry. But it’s not just language and international school jobs that the EU creates: manufacturing jobs rely on an observance of EU standards and regulations; travel relies on a lot of people actually travelling (which will be harder with visa restrictions in place); UK exports only compete in the European market because the trade agreement stops UK exports from having import tax applied (so British goods can undercut American ones).

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Brexit (2) The UK has a say in European democracy and an economic benefit (that’s good)”

  1. I’m not an expert on foreign travel; aside from Canada and Mexico, I’ve only traveled in Europe once, and that was was before the EU. I’m not clear why without the EU, “visas” would become required. In every case where I’ve traveled internationally, I went through border checkpoints with nothing other than my passport.

    Sure, the EU “setup” seems fine. And it may even work as designed. Aside from you, the only input I’ve received is that it is not working as designed; that Germany tends to exert more control than (allegedly) they deserve. True? Untrue? I don’t know; based on the statements made against BREXIT, it appears that the STAY forces are debating from a position of emotion rather than logic. Maybe that is how things are done these days, but I’m fairly unemotional, so I look at that methodology with distrust.

    1. It looks very much the other way around to me: the arguments for remaining are based on genuine benefits in terms of policy, economics and rights afforded to citizens. Where are Brexit arguments seem based on fear of immigrants, “STRONGER” (with no flesh on the bone) and sovereignty; it all looks like nationalism to me.

    1. Many people across Europe consider it a key part of the Single Market, so it is a wonder what exactly we’re considering leaving for.

      1. Well, obviously most of the exit vote will be based on immigration fears. Then following a successful leave mandate we’ll likely get negotiations underway for an EU-wide trade agreement based upon free movement (it’ll have to be) and as a consequence all hell could break loose. That could stop the agreement being made. People are in a mood for a fight. Whichever way the vote goes, it’s going to get messy in my opinion.

        1. One MP murdered in cold blood yesterday, with strong suggestions of there being a political motivation. That would obviously be far too simplistic an analysis, like saying Omar Mateen’s mass murdering was all about Jihadism, but it looks like Nationalist politics was a motivating factor in the case of the murdered English MP.

        2. I’ve tried not to listen to the bluster that surrounds the shooting. But, I have heard there is a rumour that the guy was some kind of nationalist.
          But I’ve also heard his family said he wasn’t even all that political.

        3. The psychopath often needs some ideology or justification to hang his or her hat on, and to ameliorate the cognitive dissonance of knowing their intended actions are essentially immoral. One can seldom get at any first cause in such matters, much as everyone likes to think they can.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s