With Britain in full swing of debate ahead of the referendum, 2 memories from the earlier debate stick in my mind.
In
1975, the anti-Europe argument was largely the preserve of
Left-Labour: people now in favour of continuing EU membership, were
then opposed, from Jeremy Corbyn to shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary
Benn, then campaigning with his father Tony to leave. Of course, there
were some figures n the Right, such as Enoch Powell and Nicholas
Ridley, who opposed EEC membership, but these were largely seen as
mavericks. Nonetheless, small though it was, the anti-Europe element in
the Tory party forced the Heath government in 1972 to rely on
pro-European Labour MPs (some of whom later defected to form the Social
Democrats Party) to get the legislation through that paved the way for
the UK's accession to the EEC
Now the anti-EU sentiment seems
more embedded in the Conservative mainstream: those supporting Leave
include cabinet ministers such as Michael Gove, former leader Ian
Duncan-Smith & former London mayor Boris Johnson; they have joined
the campaign alongside UKIP leader, Nigel Farage.
So, this is
the 1st memory, of 2 articles in the Sunday Times, 1 for, 1 against. It
was the against argument that made the most impression on me: with free
movement of capital, workers would be pissed upon. They certainly were
in the years that followed, mainly as a result of the Thatcher reforms.
But it would take more than leaving the EU for them to be unpissed upon
(*) .
Back then, there were many people who had memories of the
Second World War, had even fought in it. For some of them, what was
then the European Economic Community (subsequently the European
Community, then the European Union) represented peace: France and
Germany had relatively recently been at war (their 3rd clash in 70
years); now war between these rivals was unthinkable.
Another
idea, viewed through the Cold War prism, was that the EEC strengthened
the Western bloc. In one discussion in the early 1970's, when the
question of "rule from Brussels" was brought up, Peter Ustinov said
(this is the 2nd memory), "better that than rule from Moscow".
The
counter-argument to this, then as now, was that it was NATO, not the
EEC, that guaranteed the security of Western Europe. And, of course,
this was somewhat in contradiction to the idea of the EEC as agent of
peace.
Now, when David Cameron talks about the 70 years of peace
in Europe that have been achieved, he is accused by Boris Johnson of
saying that if the UK left, World War 3 would break out, although he
himself was prepared to leave (if negotiations had not been concluded
satisfactorily). And it is this caricature of his remarks that seems to
be remembered.
What has changed since 1975, is that the EU has
been a huge engine for democracy. Portugal had just emerged in 1974
from 45 years of right-wing dictatorship; Franco was still in power in
Spain; Greece was just emerging from the rule of the colonels. Allan
Little, in
his series for the BBC WS, rightly emphasises the events of
23 Feb 1981, when for a few hours it seemed that Spain might plunge
back into military dictatorship. After that, for the Spanish Left,
including (the / former) Communists, membership of the EEC was a
foreign policy priority.
These
3 countries formed the next wave of EEC expansion in 1981 & 1986,
following the accession of Britain, Ireland and Denmark in 1973.
* (reference to follow)
1 Jun 2016 (to be continued)
Published 22 Jun 2016:
with campaigning about to close, I am publishing what I have written so
far, incomplete as it is and lacking some links and references.
Update 24 Jun 2016:
corrected link to Allan
Little's series (Europe's Challenges: Expanding the Union, Episode 2 of
3).