"'A troublesome partner.' Using examples, to what extent would you say this comment accurately describes the United Kingdom's membership of the EU since 1973"
"'A troublesome partner.' Using examples, to what extent would you say this comment accurately describes the United Kingdom's membership of the EU since 1973" Since the mid-1980s, the transfer of state powers to a EU level and reforms affecting the distribution of power in EU policy have challenged the sovereignty of member states. Since the United Kingdom joined the European Union through the Conservative Prime Minister, Edward Heath, it has been seen as the most awkward partner in the 'club' and has been a force for disintegration within it.1 This was particularly apparent during Margaret Thatcher's premiership.1 This view however, neglects an appreciation of the importance of accomodationism within the UK approach to EU developments. The UK/EU relationship from 1945-present will be profiled in the contrasting terms of uncooperativeness then accomodationism with an attempt at explaining the reasoning for the actions of the 'troublesome partner.'1 Plate 1: Thatcher in 1975 in pro-European campaign Source 2 At the time of Britain's accession in 1973, EU membership was seen as essential for the reversal of economic decline. Since then, UK governments have encouraged the EU to develop into a large free trade area, but have sought to limit EU competences and revenues in attempts to ensure that sovereignty is not diminished and that the UK governmental system, as a whole,
Has the creation of the Single European Market been a success?
Has the creation of the Single European Market been a success? The Single Market was contemplated in the Rome Treaty. It consisted of an eight-year programme to be completed between 1985 and 1992 and one of the main objectives was to eliminate barriers that existed to trade in the then European Community. Its completion was considered to be one of the most ambitious targets and one of the most enduring successes.1 The Single European Act provided the legal framework that made the attainment of the target of a Single European Market by 1992 a realist possibility, through a process of harmonisation for existing legislation. The mobility of capital, labour and goods and services became reality in simultaneous with the establishment of a new European trading block in which competition between countries and companies has increased. The key objectives of the Community are in the Rome Treaty. In this essay I will analyse whether or not the Single European Market has been a success, defining success as 'a favourable accomplishment'. The original plans for a Common Market as known in the Treaty of Rome, which emphasized the creation of a Common Market and Customs Union between the member states, meant the removal of tariffs and other obstacles to trade between the original Six and, as expressed through the Common External Tariff (CET), the adoption of a Common Trade Policy
Should Britain Join the Euro
Should Britain Join the Euro? One of the primary arguments against joining is that there are severe structural differences between the members' economies. These may well undermine the success of the project, meaning Britain would do well to stay out. There is no guarantee that the Euro will be successful, and this is a key issue to consider when assessing whether or not Britain should join at this stage. Britain has already had her fingers burnt by the disastrous entry into the doomed European Exchange Rate Mechanism, the previous attempt to fix European currencies against each other which collapsed, plunging Britain into recession. Another key argument against entry is the loss of economic independence that would be seen from Euro membership. If Britain were to join the Euro, our interest rates, currently the tool used for control of inflation by the Bank of England, would be set by the European Central Bank (ECB). Since being given independence the Bank of England has been successful in controlling inflation in this way. Problems could well arise if Britain loses interest rates as a tool for its own economic objectives. The past few decades have shown we need all the measures we can to keep control of the economy! To illustrate this problem, let us suppose that there are inflationary fears in Germany and France, two influential member countries, but not in Britain. In
To what extent has the European Union been successful in "establishing" a coherent European identity
Introduction European identity, meaning unification or integration of Europe, is easily described as European residents have the ideas where they really belong to, Europe or just German, France or others. Nowadays, when Europe is talked about, people involuntarily associate it with the European Union. Perhaps the main reason is the enlargement of the European Union. Now the EU includes 27 countries, more than half the whole European countries and almost all the powerful countries have already joined the EU for years. Thus in some way we can say that the EU unifies the Europe. At this time, even though the EU cannot be regarded as a real nation, the EU also hopes a kind of patriotism existing in the whole Europe, and in the post-time Winston Churchill had already illustrated this view that "Why should there not be a European Group which could give a sense of enlarged patriotism?" (Wikipedia(a)) Under the uniform administration of the EU, the European identity seems to appear again after the Holy Roman Empire economically, politically and socially, but mainly in the economic aspect. What the EU has done? Economics "Karl Marx viewed economic change as a revolutionary process, and one which determined social and political structures." (Parker, E 2003) Thus the EU firstly chooses to take efforts to effectively manage the EU economy. Apart from the single currency and Economic
Outline the problems of the First Past the Post system and consider whether the Alternative Vote would provide a fairer system.
Coursework 2 British Politics Question: The Coalition Government has proposed that a referendum be held in May 2011. The question that will be asked is concerned with the changing of the electoral system used in British General Elections - the Simple Plurality System (FPTP) to the Alternative Vote. Outline the problems of the "First Past the Post" system and consider whether the Alternative Vote would provide a fairer system. Word count: 967 2/16/2010 Coursework In most of the modern societies an electoral process is an important symbol of a democracy that represents a concept of freedom of choice and fairness. The UK Coalition Government is now facing a need of reforming the process by choosing between FPTP and AV systems. As final decision can affect the whole society, it is crucial to carefully analyze advantages and disadvantages of both systems. FPTP allows a candidate to win by the majority of votes. It is a straightforward system that requires comparatively simplified procedures. In addition, it usually provides stable and strong one-party government. Also, elected party usually governs effectively and carries on the manifesto promises. Another advantage is a good-organized constituency link between MPs and their constituents. They can easily contact their MP to get support (Coxall et al. 2003, Jones and Norton 2010). Finally, FPTP tent to limit extremist
To what extent has the Labour Party today abandoned its core values?
To what extent has the Labour Party today abandoned its 'core values'? Introduction The rise of New Labour has been fraught with controversy, with regards to extensive policy change as well as ideological change. It is certain that Labour has shifted; hence this is not in question. What is in question however is how much Labour has changed and how far Labour has shifted, from its core Socialist roots. To answer this, one must initially take into account electability. During Labour's extensive time in the political wilderness, when Thatcher reigned supreme, a new group of reformers began to emerge within the Labour Party. They realised that in order to gain electoral support, they would have to leave the core socialistic values of 'old' Labour behind. This is because left-wing ideals at this time were hugely unpopular with the electorate. To achieve this electability, New Labour was less dogmatic than the old, socialist core of the Party. Many policies were toned down, especially economic ones. This general shift to the centre ground gained voters back, who had previously been Labour, but had voted Conservative recently. These reformers, were not against socialism however and previously, many were socialists, yet they saw the need for electability, rather than ideology. However, the account above is merely a brief outline, and hence, one must look specifically at major
Functions of the House of Commons and how it makes Government accountable.
a) one function of the house of commons would be making government accountable. This is done in ministerial or prime ministerial question time, where the opposition questions the running of the country and new laws or mandates made by the government. This happens roughly once a month. Another function of the house of commons is scrutinizing the work og government. This is done by a specialist committee called select comittees. These usually have 12-14 members, done by representation in parliament. However these comittees cannot stop the government doing what they want to do as they do not have the power or authority to do so, they are just there to say if it is right or wrong. It is also the only section of parlament which can bring in outside experts to help scrutinize subjects of matter. b) One method in which the House of Commons can control the power of Government is through Prime Ministerial Question Time. What this does is subject him to examination and critisicm from the opposition. This controls the power of the Government as it means the Prime minister has got to justify every mandate or law that he wants to put through, as well as debating questions such as when to pass through the legal statements from the Hillsborough disaster. By doing this it controls the power of Government as representation from other parties apart from the ones in power are able to get
Is the European Union a State?
Is the European Union a
Outline how and why federalism has changed since the 1960s.
Page 1 of 2 Outline how and why federalism has changed since the 1960s. In the 1960s, the government had a creative federalist approach. The aim of Lynden Johnson's Great society programmes was to try to eliminate poverty within the US. This in turn meant large government grants were given to states, which was seen to increase the level of interference from the federal government. Johnson also provided categorical grants instead of block grants, which meant the states had much less control over their spending. He also supplied a lot of federal aid, increasing the dependence of states on the federal government. It wasn't just the executive increasing the role; the judiciary were also pushing the government this way, with cases such as Gideon vs. Wainwright and Miranda vs. Arizona. Since the 1960's the some have stated that New Federalism has been the main objective of the executive and judiciary due to the previous creative federalism. From the 1970s there was an ideological shift, with the rejection of liberal values from the 1960s. President Nixon started the development of the idea that the federal government was too powerful, and that the states needed to have more power of their local rights. He felt that the federal government should be small to promote self reliance and the American idea of 'rugged individualism'. As a reaction to creative federalism and the great
Explain the arguments for and against introducing a codified constitution
Explain the arguments for and against introducing a codified constitution. Discuss. Ursula Oliver 12RJ At present, the UK's constitution is uncodified or de facto; there is no single document though the majority of Britain's constitution lies in written form of acts, court judgments and treaties. The foundation of British constitution is the doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty where acts passed by Parliament are the UK's supreme and final source of law. Therefore, simply by passing an Act, Parliament has power to change the constitution. This has caused debate over whether this uncodified constitution is seen as flexible or a liability to the UK. Some people wish to recover the constitution by introducing a codified constitution which is entrenched, whereas others such as Conservative leader David Cameron believe a British Bill of Rights alongside or instead of the Human Rights Act is best whilst maintaining an uncodified constitution. Arguments for introducing a codified constitution usually suggest that the introduction would help to correct imbalances in the current political system. This refers mainly to the second chamber and considering the constitutional status the House of Lords holds, whilst also allowing a discussion over the relation between the executive and legislature. A constitution which is codified provides a counter-balance to the power of the executive,
