Sunday 21 June 2015

A Timeline of the European Union

Wikipedia - A good starting  point to browse the EU History


I have been browsing here to see what might help me, as I recognise my knowledge of the EU is certainly not the best. And I wanted to understand the causes behind welfare benefits being apparently so attractive for EU migrant workers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_European_Union_history

Wiki - I am unsure whether it is regarded as biased or unbiased. The cynic in me wonders if the content is different if you are browsing it in different languages?



I soon navigated to the Maastricht Treaty, as in my mind, this seemed to be the start of why the UK electorate on balance chose  a government offering a EU Referendum, in 2015

This treaty marked the birth of the European Union as it is today, with the "Three Pillars of  European Union" being:-

The European Economic Community
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Community

Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_and_Judicial_Co-operation_in_Criminal_Matters

Common Foreign & Security Policy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Foreign_and_Security_Policy


And from these pillars, the European Union was only completely formed at the very end of 2007. Amazing, the EU is only 8 years old! It is younger than the Euro! (2002)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union

My last blog was about the freedom of movement of peoples, and my personal experiences that were admittedly prior to the formation of the EU, and even before the Maastricht Treaty existed, but Maastricht really was the start of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_for_workers_in_the_European_Union

Above is the definition of that freedom, one of four fundamental freedoms that the EU offers.

It talks only of workers, which is fine, but not people out of work. So, which bit of which agreement is the cause for David Cameron wanting to restrict the ability of migrants to claim benefits. Is it a law which is controlled by the UK government or the EU?

For Maastricht, the Conservatives kept us out of the Social Charter, which was one of the elements of the treaty.

In 1999, the New Labour government brought us into it.

So what is the Social Charter

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Social_Charter

I cannot see anything that defines the level of welfare benefits for a member state, beyond what is decided by the member's National Government. Merely just that migrant workers cannot be discriminated against; so as-per Maastricht, then.  I suspect the main issue in the EU Social Charter was the European Court on Human Rights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state_in_the_United_Kingdom

The above link is useful for providing a history of how the UK welfare system developed. I suspect the other nations of Europe have similar histories. I think welfare is probably an integral part of modern Europe; who we all are, and reflects a type of society we want to live-in. I certainly wouldn't advocate a return to the 19th Century, but whatever we have has to be affordable.

And the below table shows the size of the Budget.

I suppose the huge size of  State Pension element is the problem, and the influx of migrant workers makes the future UK tax payers liable for higher payments. There is no fund being built up to pay for future liabilities, with today's tax payments. Huh! How can there be when we run a deficit?

So the route cause of the problem must surely be the benefits system in the UK, not just the EU Treaties.

And the above table just begs another question. There are so many areas of the budget that David Cameron has defined as no-go areas for cuts like the NHS,  the state pension, and International Development Budget, just how will he bring it all under control?

David Cameron's efforts on renegotiating; i.e. trying to allow a 4 year lag on benefits for migrant workers seems a little misguided to me. Is it a sop to a section of the UK electorate? Or is it a cover and Press distraction for other aspects of his renegotiations? Or both!

So on this issue, and really as my last blog concluded, I think:-

  • The UK Government has got to address the level  benefits (the Pull Factors), but only as part of a wider issue of bringing UK spending down for a sustainable affordable future.

  • The EU has actually got to do something to address the problems in the Eurozone (the Push factors) that are driving an influx of migrant EU workers. But equally importantly, it has to be seen to be doing something about it. What does it actually do?
But I would add a third point.
  • Allowing the enlargement the European Union with additional member states must have exacerbated the problems we are currently experiencing. The migrant controls were allowed for 2 years at the time, and these could be extended for a further three years. Was this issue really well managed by the EU government? I know at the time a great many people expressed these concerns and criticisms. That isn't just "ever closer union" it is ever larger union, as well. Just who is driving the agenda and why?

Not easy this, being an undecided voter wanting to find out more.

Back soon .....


.......an Undecided Voter.

Working Abroad.....

Redundancy and Signing on the Dole - In France!

I was made redundant once in my early working life, during one of the UK's seemingly frequent recessions. Do they happen every decade?

The thought of looking for a new job, where I lived, did not thrill me at all. The opportunities weren't numerous.  I also realised that the only way to avoid debt, and be able to continue paying the mortgage was to move out and let my flat. A friend was renting a room at the time, he had to go aswell! It was shortly after the UK's exit from the Exchange Rate Mechanism, the precursor to the Euro. During that period interest rates shot-up just prior to the exit.

Where to go? What to do? A friend who had also been made redundant suggested that we should go to France for six months, to learn French. So we did. For me, it ended up being for 18 months. It was a good time.

We signed on the dole in Annecy, as we knew from the UK dole office that we could claim UK dole money and receive it in France. I cannot remember exactly but we received the money three months later. We were elligable for three months money only. We were not entitled to money from the French Government. And with time we got established and found jobs. The jobs we got were not very well paid, but we got by.

I mention this experience from my early days of working because there is something I do not understand about what David Cameron is trying to achieve.

My understanding is this; the current EU treaties we have allow for free movement of people, capital and goods throughout Europe. This principal is supported by national governments not being allowed under EU law to discriminate between national and foreign workers with respect to unemployment benefits. In addition, in work benefits apparently apply aswell. But.....

The value of benefits is determined by the national governments in member countries.

The Conservative government in the UK won the 2015 election on a manifesto that included reducing the cost of the welfare bill.

So what is the point of David Cameron trying to introduce something to differentiate between foreign and national workers?

Surely the two main issues are:-

1) change the unemployment benefits structure, to reduce the welfare bill. Are the in-work benefits too generous? It would be interesting to know how much of this part of the welfare bill goes to foreign workers. This area is completely under the control of the UK government. If the percentage of cost relating to foreign workers is relatively small then why expend political capital trying introduce discrimination which is not allowed under the EU treaties?

2) change the factors that are pushing people to follow the jobs....slow growth in the Euro area countries. From the little we know, this is apparently a feature of David Cameron's negotiations.

It will be interesting to look back at these issues when he does go public on the detail of his negotiations.

Back soon...

...the Undecided Voter!




Sunday 14 June 2015

The Catalyst that started me thinking!

The wonderful thing about the internet is that access to information is so much easier.


Issues of interest that one reads in the main stream media, that catch the imagination, can be easily researched more deeply and quickly.

About a year ago, I read something in the news about someone working in the Far East for the UK Department of Trade and Industry, who had published a document called Brexcit. I searched the web for it. It was a paper that described a process route map on how the UK could gradually extract itself from the EU, politically and legally. And what Britain would need to do to succeed economically in Europe and the wider world , freed from the constraints of being in the EU.

As an interesting aside, I seem to recall his government bosses were none too pleased at the media attention that was created and was prevented from carrying out further media interviews.

A copy of the document can be found here...

http://thinkingliberal.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Brexit-Entry-170_final_bio_web.pdf

When I read it, I thought it was quite a positive practical approach to considering just what would be required if Britain did decide to leave the EU. What we would have to do to succeed as a country outside the EU. 


The Brexcit Paper certainly allows the reader to think "outside the box."

For all of my adult life, we have been a part of Europe in its many guises, from what was called the European Economic Community (EEC) to what is now the European Union. Yet the history I learned at school was about Britain as an independent part of Europe and the wider world.

In terms of who will be voting in this referendum, I am at the older end of the spectrum. Everyone younger than me will only know life inside the EU. Many people older than me will have also lived their working lives as part and parcel of the EEC/EU.

Therefore, it is not natural for the average person to easily imagine life outside Europe. And as such, with human nature, being scared of something distorts a persons thinking.

As I mentioned in my first posting, I am not scared of the referendum result, either way. It was this Brexit document that allowed me this luxury.

I do hope both the YES and NO Camps, promote a positive vision for the future that they advocate following the referendum. They lecture foreign governments on the need for free and fair elections. So it will be interesting to see what happens about the period of purdah in the run up to the vote, that is currently being discussed. Politicians will only want to scare the voter about the opposite camp and impose constraints on the debate.

Oh for a decent fair open debate!

Back soon

......the Undecided Voter.

PS ....and just as an extra to ensure a balance of views, at this same site there is an interesting critic of the Brexit document.

http://thinkingliberal.co.uk/?p=1104




Thursday 11 June 2015

Introduction - First Thoughts

Welcome to my Blog!

I plan to use it as a means of helping me decide how to vote in the UK Referendum on its membership of the EU.

Should we stay or leave?

Riding on this simple choice, there are far reaching implications for the UK, and for Europe.

What are these implications?

What are the key issues? And how important is one issue relative to the others. Their relative importance is a personal issue, really. It will be different for each voter based on their knowledge and life experiences , and will shape how the voters make up their minds.

And the sum of the YES and NO votes decides the outcome. How fascinating! No wonder the politicians are reluctant to make use of referendums. I am confidant there will be a high turn-out for this one. I hope it is as high as the recent Scottish Referendum.

This blog will capture my journey through this thought process,  on how I make up my decision on which way to vote.

At this time, I am open minded, genuinely, on which way to vote. I think this is due partly to the fact that I see opportunities in both options. I am not scared of the outcome either way. I think it will be good for us all to decide which way to go, and then plan our route to get there!

I am not a member of any political party. For me, politicians only tell you want they want you to know. Taking input from a variety of politicians can help in decision making on how to vote. But they all try to keep it simple and dumb it down to a few simple concepts that promote their position. The answer lies in the detail, as always.

I am perhaps naively hoping to witness a decent debate on the issue, in the months ahead. It has to be a debate with content and substance to it. My hope is that it focuses on the future and not just dwell on the past. The history of how the EU has developed to date is useful of course. Its current status and how it functions is also important. However, the decision we are making must be focused on the future opportunities that each option may create.

What is the future direction of the EU? Do we want to be a part of it?

If we leave, what options are there for our relationship with the EU and the rest of the world? What opportunities would open up to us if we leave. What are the implications of leaving?

At the outset of this blog, I consider the issues for research fall under the following headings?

Economical Issues
Political Issues
Legal Issues

I plan to include a library of reference material or sites that I find that discuss both options or assist me in making up my mind.

And of course  the benefit of using a blog is that it is public. So hopefully people can suggest useful sources of information to help me. And the blog may help others with a similar dilemma - the Undecided voters amongst us!

At the outset, I want the blog to contain a balanced range of information. If any bias creeps in, perhaps that may be the start of my decision crystalising. Let's see!

Back soon!

...the Undecided Voter.