NEED OF BREXIT FOR THE EU
THE NEED OF BREXIT FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION
Didier BERTIN - July 10, 2016
We refer below to England, which is the main actor of Brexit that will damage the whole UK.
I-historical Background and introduction
1-History in Brief
The United Kingdom is so called because of the control by Britain of a small parcel of Ireland (Northern Ireland) whose interest seems to be maintained it in the European Union (EU) together with the rest of Ireland and the Brexit could thus reduce the UK in the Britain. The Brexit might thus endanger the peace in Northern Ireland.
The existence of Britain could in turn be challenged following the Brexit by the independence that will be required by Scotland to allow him to stay within the EU. Britain would thus be reduced to England and negligible Wales.
The United Kingdom and in fact England could pay a heavy price for its intransigence in its desire to obtain the maximum benefit with the least effort of solidarity to the point of distorting the spirit of EU.
England as leader of UK had already disclosed in the past its rejection of Europe and had directed its policy towards the remains of its former empire through the Commonwealth that is now only a name without significant economic reality for the distant England when alliances are made on basis of geographic proximity.
England itself is a country of only 55 million inhabitants that has adopted multiculturalism as a legacy from the people of its former Empire who came to settle in England and not because of the recent wave of emigration which accused to be partially guilty of the adoption of Brexit. The minorities in England (mainly India, Pakistan, Bengal) amount to 7.5 million i.e. 14% of the English population. As a matter of fact England continues to attract new immigrants because of its lack of legal and social rules really applied permits the economic exploitation of human beings. Such exploitation is English historical tradition illustrated particularly in India and Ireland. It is this mindset that also gave birth to the United States wishing to free themselves from the English yoke.
Regarding the cities that constitutes the backbone of the British economy the situation is amplified with 40% of minorities in London and Leicester and more than 30% in Birmingham (England has only seven major cities).
When Churchill said he did not want that Palestine become as Jewish as England is English, he never imagined that his country would become less English than England was then.
England is a country with a very small area of only 130 000 km2 as compared to 643 000 km2 for France and lacking resources it used to seek in its distant colonies.
2-The first relations with Europe
In the sixties England was considered a vassal of the United States as is still the case; for this reason General De Gaulle in the name of France vetoed twice in 1963 and 1967 on entering ok UK in the European communities.
General De Gaulle wanted to create a third world power not depending on the USA or USSR. Only after his death in 1970 UK was able to join EEC in 1973.
II – England and European Union (EU)
The British presence in the EU scuttled the spirit of the EU in being constantly reluctant to the acceptance of common rules. England (and consequently the UK) has accumulated exemptions of many Community rules and was never a true member of the EU but of a genuine US bridgehead in the EU. In this respect the US disagree with the Brexit.
UK, fictional member of EU:
1 Charter of Fundamental Rights and social laws
England requested and obtained to be exempted from the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union whose application is yet binding. This charter goes beyond the human rights and includes social principles and welfare consideration.
The reject of the Charter by England should have involved an immediate exclusion of UK out of EU. The maintaining of England and thus UK in the union is not due to the weakness of the European rules but to the great cowardice of the other EU members who gave UK multiple exemptions. This probably shows solidarity between conservatives members who see the EU as a simple free trade area. The difference between Europhobes of those who see the EU as a simple economic association is very blurred.
England has even exempted from EU directives limiting working time to 48 hours per week.
2- Schengen Agreements
These agreements have the legitimate aim of allowing the right of free movement of Europeans in their own area and are not accepted by England that seems to wish to preserve its traditional place in countries outside the EU.
For security purposes such agreements can be adapted as is now the case, but it is the very idea of such agreements that England questions.
The idea of a common currency for a common economic space is easy to understand, but the rejection of the idea of a real European Union by England has naturally led this country to also reject the idea of a common currency always to keep as far away from the EU.
The GDP of UK has increased in 2015 due to the EU to depreciate Euro for exports purpose against US dollar and consequently against the sterling pound; the current collapse of the English currency will replace the English GDP to its normal level.
Since 1982 Margaret Thatcher had obtained a permanent reduction of the English (UK) participation to the European budget.
Its participation in the budget should have been 23, 6 billion Euros in 2015 but was reduced to 17 billion Euros after "Thatcher’s reduction" and was further reduced to 15, 72 billion Euros after other reductions under agricultural policy. This budget is to be compared to 20 billion budget participation of France in 2016, while French GDP amounted to 85% (with a depreciated Euro) of the UK GDP in 2015.
The main contributors to the EU budget are Germany France and Italy and the UK ranks only fourth position ahead of Spain.
III-Instilling an anti-European spirit
The English formed the vanguard of the anti-European front and even for their most Europhile subjects the idea of federation them is unbearable. English political class is marked by conservatism and economic markers illustrate how negligible is their idea of national solidarity.
England has been an obstacle to social progress and solidarity in Europe. It can be also seen that in the EU the existing rules regarding social and humanitarian areas are becoming more and more optional and left to the discretion of each Member State. The corner stone idea of Europe has thus been undermined by members that we have too easily accepted only and as English people the sole criteria of optimal market size.
The English spirit has only supported nationalism and populism as illustrated by their last referendum. It was necessary to get rid of such an awkward partner who has substantially crossed for many years the line of acceptable.
IV-The fate of England and Conclusion
Again England will be identified here below as the performer of the Brexit for the whole UK.
After having exploited the European Union in benefiting from its huge open market against the payment of small budget participation, England will have to again know the customs barriers for goods and services and which will certainly cost much more than the expected gains but the Conservatives have only a short-term view.
England lost most of its industry and agriculture in making stricken large parts of its small territory abandoned without providing adequate social assistance to the victims of this policy.
When they will have no longer direct access to the large EU’s market many Banks and industries will leave England to relocate elsewhere in the EU.
England aims to become a tax haven like Cayman Islands but this activity could not give jobs to 55 million people who have needs of real producing companies; in addition Ireland already offers substantial advantages in this field.
The campaign preceding the referendum was based on lies which were mainly the following:
-The stricken English areas are the result of EU’s policy and payments when they are the result of the conservative economic policy of all English politicians.
-The funds which will not anymore be paid to EU will benefit entirely to the English social system (regardless of income declines due to the recession caused by the Brexit).
The inaccuracy of this argument has been acknowledged after the vote by Nigel Farage, leader of the campaign for the Brexit despite he used it often during the campaign.
The two stars of the Brexit campaign Boris Johnson and Nigel Farrage suddenly disappeared from the political scene as if they did not want to be involved in the situation in which they had plunged their country. The English may no longer be welcome in EU and 55 million of English subjects may feel very isolated in the English part of the British island of only 135,000 km2
The most reasonable solution would be a second vote without lies which would bring back the UK in the EU subject to its non-negotiable acceptance of all EU rules, the abandonment of the Sterling pound for Euro, the integration into the Schengen’s area and the end rebates on its budgetary participation.
We cannot either forget the negative role of the other EU members who have too easily accepted the unbelievable requests of the UK and which have therefore also weakened the European spirit reducing EU to an economic association.