Part of The Student Room Group

  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Why was the accession of the UK to the EEC in 1972 so politically controversial?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Why was the accession of the UK to the EEC in 1972 so politically controversial? The issue of Britain's involvement in Europe has been the subject of much debate since its inauguration in the early '70's. The topic divides member states, political parties and defines many International Relations. This essay will present the main areas of contention and acrimony that EU membership brings, but to understand how these have come about, we must first look to what bought Britain into Europe in the first place. In 1945, once the Second World War had come to an end, the task of re-building Europe politically and economically was at hand. In 1952 France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg formed the European Coal and Steel Community (ESEC). The UK was invited to be part of this European Market, but rejected the opportunity. The key contributing factor to this was Britain's delusion of grandeur. The feeling amongst the British public and politicians was that they were one of the "big three" superpowers alongside the Soviet Union and the USA, having won the war between them. The British of the mid 20th Century did not think of themselves as Europeans culturally, even if they did geographically (Heywood, 2008, p307). On 1st January 1958 the ECSC agreement was replaced by the European Economic Community (EEC) ...read more.

Middle

In total, 785 MEP's will sit in Parliament and will be responsible for scrutinizing the European Commission's proposals. The European Commission is the executive arm of the EU and consists of 27 commissioners (one from each member state) and the commission's president (Heywood, 2008, p310). The commissioners are appointed by the European Council who are comprised of senior executives from all member states of the Union, The union will decide the overall position and direction of the E.U. Any part of the union which moves to bring in a new law or standard must do so in line with the European Court of Justice (ECJ). As the power of Europe supersedes that of an individual member nation, the ECJ is a very powerful and influential organisation. It consists of 27 judges (again, one from each member state) and eight advocate generals who advise the court (ibid, p310). The ECJ provides an excellent example of the EU's impact in the British constitution and its impact on sovereignty. Britain doesn't have a full written constitution, so when an amendment is proposed to British law it is debated with out a real benchmark for what is and is not allowed. Former MP Tony Wright describes Britain's constitution as a "political shed crammed full of objects collected over a political lifetime. ...read more.

Conclusion

gives states the flexibility to opt-out or amend European legislation to their own satisfaction. It is my view that Britain has not yet lost any sovereignty of note by being a member of the EU. Tony Benn said that "in practice political sovereignty has long rested with the executive" (www.thestudentroom - accessed 12/01/11) and this is an opinion I share. In Britain we can still follow our own defence policy, education policy, welfare policy and healthcare policy. Our economic policy remains predominately our own as a result of not joining the Euro. The trade we gain or the money we lose as a result of EU membership is commonly debated. The UK Independence Party would have Britain leave Europe and negotiate a trade agreement similar to the Swiss model, but the Liberal Democrats would have Britain move closer to Europe to build influence and start to shape not just Britain but Europe the way they would like. The Conservative and Labour parties have moved their positions many times since the mid 70's and tend to follow the more populist anti-Europe stance when in opposition. The creation of the European super-state is undoubtedly a possibility in the future, but it will only happen with the blessings of the people who would live in it, and in the UK the early indications are that they would not. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level European Union section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

or


Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level European Union essays

  1. Why did Britain join the EEC in 1973 and not in 1957?

    This supports the view that Britain did not want or need to get on the 'bus'. Domestic reasons for Britain not getting involved in the talks at this stage are the implication of agreeing to share the coal and steel industries.

  2. Why did the witch-craze happen in Early Modern Europe?

    In order for the witch-craze to disintegrate the whole intellectual and social structure surrounding it had to be broken, this was done in the 17th Century, however, society would always create new stereotypes and scapegoats. Word Count: 1852 Sources Used: Ben-Yehuda, N, The European Witch-Craze of the 16th and 17th Centuries in 'Moral Panics' 114-184 (1994)

  1. Has Europe become a federal superstate?

    It has pledged �3 million, which although not a lot in comparison to the USA's $100, shows a coordinated response. However the appointments of Van Rompuy and Ashton also demonstrate the reluctance of the EU to move towards a federal Europe, seen in the nature of the candidates chosen.

  2. The aim of this essay is to present the reason of British government changing ...

    When the negotiations began in 1950 that led to creation of ECSC, forerunner of the present EC, the British Labour government of Clement Attlee was invited to participate, but declined. As a consequence of this refusal to become founder member, the British found them self's outside a highly successful economic

  1. The Institutional Consequences of Domestic Politics on Africa's International Relations and Regional Cooperation.

    Even the Politicians who make the policies still go across the borders to buy their own private vehicles with police and army so that no one can check them. The third reason is the artificiality of boundaries separating the countries.

  2. Transformation of the U.S. Hegemony in Europe through NATO after the Cold War

    NATO's first enlargement was highly linked with this discrepancy. U.S. through NATO created the ground for the process of enlargement, which in political terms means the adaptation of the Eastern Europe into the western world. This process, however, contributed to the U.S. interests in many ways. It reduced the U.S.

  1. Which EU institution is the most powerful

    However, it cannot introduce them, this is only done by the Commission and it is the Commission that initiates the whole process. In this sense it is not so much a parliament but an assembly and so what power does the European Parliament have?

  2. This essay is intended to have an in-depth appraisal of the implication of the ...

    However, since the ECJ is more of a constitutional court there is the likelihood of conflict when interpreting human rights cases as against a more competent ECHR that is well grounded on fundamental rights issues. Finance The draft constitution provides that the union shall finance all its operation through the

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work