Posted on 2016-05-04 | 05:05

I believe, on balance, that it would be better for the United Kingdom to vote to leave on the 23rd June. To understand why, we need to look at some of the historical background. The ‘Common Market’ which Britain entered under the Heath Government in the early 1970s was essentially a free trade area. It evolved into the European Union in 1975.

In the mid-1980s, the Trade Union movement and the Labour Party, which had previously been sceptical about the whole concept of a European Union, also signed up to it after the European Commission President, Jacques Delors, told the Trade Union movement that the only way they could protect themselves against the ravages of Thatcherism and its attacks on working people was to seek the protection of the European Union. Almost overnight the majority of Trade Unions switched from being sceptical or anti-EU to being supportive of the institution.

The coming into being of the European Union was a massive step away from the Common Market. From being just a free trade area this was a huge step towards the creation of a United States of Europe, modelled on the way America was governed, which was always the intention of the founding fathers of the European Iron and Steel community which was a precursor to the Common Market. This could only be achieved by stealth because if the people of Europe were asked, on a regular basis, whether they wished to be part of a European super state then it was highly likely that the proposal would have been rejected.

The European Union is a ‘protectionist club’ of 28 member states with a combined population of 506 million people. Its Single Market rules are very much modelled on neoliberal economic thinking, with capital free to move anywhere within the 28 countries and the 506 million people free to work and settle in any of the countries without any restrictions. In all capitalist economies the sole purpose of companies is to maximise profits for their shareholders. Having 28 countries within which to move capital around means that large companies and multi-national businesses can locate where they can maximise their profits and keep their costs, including wage costs, as low as possible.

Coupled with the ability to minimise tax liabilities by convoluted accounting methods which allow corporations to pretend they operate from tax havens such as Luxemburg within the EU, and Switzerland and exotic tax havens outside of the EU, it is obvious why big business and globalised corporations are fervently in favour of the UK remaining within the EU.

The questions, therefore, which those on the left need to ask is whether the European Union is good value for money and what’s in it for the workers in terms of benefits and jobs.

Firstly, costs. The Government forecasts that net payments to the EU budget for 2016/17 by the UK will be £10.178 billion. Only four out of the 28 members of the EU are net contributors and the UK is the second largest contributor to the EU budget.

Secondly, benefits. It is often claimed by EU enthusiasts that 3 million jobs would be ‘at risk’ if we left the EU. This is highly misleading and arose from a study by the National Institute of Economic and Social Affairs in 1999 which calculated that 3 million jobs are associated with trade with the EU. These three million jobs depend on the continuation of trade with the EU, not on continued membership. It is disingenuous to claim that if we left the EU there would be no further trading between us, particularly as the United Kingdom has a massive trade imbalance of £65 billion with the EU.

The strongest argument put forward by the Remain camp to Labour and Trade Union members is the alleged benefits that workers in the UK get from various employment rights conferred on them by the EU. However, most of the labour rights which are commonly cited as benefits of EU membership, such as maternity and paternity pay, were already enshrined in UK law before the EU sought to harmonise them throughout the 28 member countries.

The British Government has no powers to protect the British steel industry because of EU procurement policy. We cannot, for example, insist that the new HS2 project should only use UK produced steel. In addition, if TTIP goes through then it will fundamentally undermine the sovereignty of all EU member states including the UK. It would greatly reduce the ability of Governments to regulate on behalf of citizens and the environment and it would endanger public services, particularly the NHS, and jeopardise labour standards and food safety.

Those on the left who support the UK leaving the European Union do not believe that Britain is taking a step back into some sort of romantic vision of the past when Britain had an empire across the globe. They believe that the UK, which is still the fifth largest economy in the world, can do better by taking back the sovereignty which we have ceded to the EU and by allowing our democratically elected UK Parliament to make our own laws. The EU Commissioner, Viviane Reding, has admitted that ‘70% of British laws are made in the EU’.

Of course, if the UK votes to leave the EU, there will be panic among the establishment and in the financial markets on the day after and dire predictions of what will follow. But back in 2008 the financial system of the UK, and indeed of the western world, was taken to brink of collapse through the greed and irresponsibility of those self-same people in the financial sector who are now predicting chaos if the people of the UK do not do what they want them to do and vote to remain.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt became President as America experienced a depression following on from the financial crisis on Wall Street in 1929. In his first address to the American people after being elected he made the prophetic comment that ‘the American people have nothing to fear but fear itself’ and the people of the United Kingdom - who are facing a barrage of scare stories and predictions of doom - also have nothing to fear and should take back their own destiny by voting to leave the EU on the 23rd June.

This is an edited version of a longer article. To read the full article, click here.