At first glance, the results of the general election in the United Kingdom last month may appear to threaten the future of the UK as a member of the European Union. Practically all the pre-electoral polls predicted a hung Parliament. However, David Cameron carried the day and, following five years of a Tory – LibDem coalition, the new government in London is assured of a slim majority in the House of Commons.

As I write, the Commons is debating the EU Referendum Bill. The Bill was, in fact, overwhelmingly approved in second reading on Tuesday.

It is interesting to follow the various scenarios unfolding. Cameron has pledged to hold the ‘in-out’ referendum before the end of 2017. Some commentators also claim it is likely to be held sooner, possibly even next year, in May.

With acting Labour leader Harriet Harman having pledged her party’s support for the Bill, there is no doubt left at all that the British electorate will soon be asked that very simple yet loaded question: should Britain remain a member of the EU?

In his Talking Point on Wednesday, UK Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond stated that the stakes are high given that “the UK is a large and open economy with a long history and a significant role on the world stage which can contribute hugely to Europe’s success”.

Without trying to predict the outcome, I trust that, ultimately, logic will prevail because I believe that the greatest losers were the UK to leave the EU would be the British people themselves who are major beneficiaries of the Single Market. Moreover, the UK’s influence on the world stage would be diminished should the UK leave the EU.

Both the Conservatives and Labour will probably be campaigning for a Yes vote. Although there will be those who try to stir up anti-EU sentiment, I do not anticipate the UK leaving the EU in the foreseeable future. In fact, the UK election may actually have served as an opportunity to finally settle the issue of the country’s relationship with the EU. In 1975, the UK electorate had voted overwhelmingly for membership of the then European Community. The result was 67 per cent in favour with a 65 per cent turnout.

Can our leaders deliver the EU to its peoples?

In her speech at the State Opening of Parliament on May 27, Queen Elizabeth II declared: “My government will renegotiate the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European Union and pursue reform of the European Union for the benefit of all member states.”

I have just returned from Bruges, where I was attending a short course at my alma mater, the College of Europe. This brought back memories of the opening of the 1988/89 academic year, that is, my year, and the now famous so-called ‘Bruges Speech’ delivered by then UK prime minister Margaret Thatcher.

I remember the anticipation we felt as students to finally having the opportunity to meet the Iron Lady in person.

I can recall some of the reactions as she started off her speech with a bang, congratulating the college administration on its “courage” in inviting her to speak of “the subject of Britain and Europe”. Her next sentence was: ” If you believe some of the things said and written about my views on Europe, it must seem rather like inviting Genghis Khan to speak on the virtues of peaceful coexistence!”

Thatcher went on to emphasise the importance of Britain being at the heart of Europe. “Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community.” However, she then qualified her statement by describing the kind of union Britain envisions.

The UK is one of those countries that insist the EU should remain a union of sovereign states and should never become a kind of federal Europe. Many feel that too many powers have been transferred to the EU institutions in Brussels, Strasbourg, Luxembourg or wherever.

In December 2014, the British government published the last seven reports in its so-called review of EU Balance of Competences. Hammond stated that the review underlines the need for the EU “to focus on those areas where it genuinely adds value, alongside pursuing an ambitious reform agenda for the benefit of all 28 member states. There are many areas where action can and should be taken in member states rather than at the EU level”.

Cameron recently embarked on a tour of the member states’ capitals. When meeting French President Francois Hollande in Paris, he appealed to his counterparts to be “flexible and imaginative” when pursuing reform.

When it comes to reform, there will have to be a lot of flexibility and imagination, yet, the reform Cameron is seeking requires a formal process of amending the EU treaties. This means that all 28 member states must agree on any change, sign the treaty and subject it to national ratification procedures which may, in certain member states, also require a referendum.

One the other hand, should the British people vote to leave the EU, the procedure inserted in the Treaty on European Union by the Lisbon Treaty in 2007, providing the possibility for a country to leave the EU, would come into play for the first time. Any ‘withdrawal’ agreement would have to be negotiated and concluded on behalf of the Union by the EU Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

Apart from the laborious procedures necessary from the legal and legislative standpoint, what preoccupies me is the lack of interest and enthusiasm by most Europeans in any discussion about the future of the EU.

Many citizens are not well informed about the EU. Sometimes, even politicians are unable to make the basic distinction between the European Council and the Council of Europe.

There are many misconceptions about what the Union’s competences are. Few seem to appreciate that, in many areas, the sovereignty of the member states remains untouched and all the EU seeks to do is to support or coordinate national policies. Moreover, where the EU has a competence, this has been freely granted by sovereign member states in accordance with rules and procedures that they have all willingly agreed to.

In Bruges, Thatcher laid down as her first guiding principle for the future of the EU “willing and active cooperation between independent sovereign states”. This is what the EU has been all about since 1951 when the treaty that established the Coal and Steel Community, the first European Community, was signed. All subsequent treaties, including the Lisbon Treaty, have been one manifestation after the other of a Union that is still, in essence, an international organisation having sovereign member states at its core.

To give an example, the European Council, which brings together the heads of State or of government of the member states, remains the chief motor of the EU, defining its overall political direction and priorities. Possibly this is one reason why the people feel detached from the whole European project and, for instance, show little interest in voting when European Parliament elections take place.

The member states will take up Cameron’s invitation to negotiate because no country wishes a Brexit to happen. However, I fear that whatever deal is struck will be negotiated by the member states with hardly any notice being taken of people’s concerns. It will be yet another political deal between governments of sovereign states that may or may not choose to be flexible and imaginative!

Although the final outcome may well indeed be a better and stronger EU, this will not address the issue of popular sentiment towards the EU.

In the preamble to the Treaty of Rome of 1957, which set up the European Economic Community, the first sentence expresses the determination of the contracting parties “to lay the foundations of an ever-closer union among the peoples of Europe”.

People were meant to have been at the centre of the European project. Can our leaders (British included) perhaps be more flexible and imaginative about this and deliver the EU to its peoples?

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.