It was no surprise to see Britain greet the European Union's 50th anniversary with the same half-hearted attitude that has so often characterised our relationship with Europe. To mark the occasion there was a football match (the Europe XI lost) and a bit more press than the EU is normally granted, some of it even positive. Yet that does not do justice to what the EU has achieved over the last 50 years. There was little fanfare for the peace, prosperity, democracy and freedom the EU has helped secure and then spread. There was barely even a mention of how Europe has proved it is possible to combine strong social protection with competitiveness. The EU's dedication to improving the environment and combating climate change is, at least, acknowledged but rarely is it given credit for just how ambitious and insightful some of its legislation is.
Perhaps part of Britain's reluctance to embrace the EU is that as a country we take some of its achievements for granted and only focus on its shortcomings or alleged shortcomings. Such is its success in helping to forge a peaceful continent that the very idea of a war-torn Europe is to many younger British citizens an abstract concept. The same is true about the EU's role in the spread of democracy. Britain has long enjoyed a relatively strong, stable democracy. The likes of Greece, Portugal and Spain joined after the fall of fascist dictatorships while the eastern European countries all shrugged off communism. It would have seemed unthinkable 10 years ago that Romania and Bulgaria would have joined the EU by 2007 but such a turn of events illustrates how they see the EU as a way to protect democracy and help build their economy.
Much of the blame for public attitudes must lie with the press, which is overwhelmingly hostile, addicted to "Euromyths" and deliberately following an anti-European agenda set by their owners.On top of that, the attempt by the Tories to cash in on this has meant that Britain is almost alone among the EU's Member States in not having bi-partisan political support for the EU (whatever differences parties have on individual policies).
Contrary to the general impression conveyed by the press, the economic performance of Europe is not lagging behind the USA, but is, in some respects, well ahead of it. The EU's economic growth rate in 2006 and 2007 is over 3%, ahead of that of the USA, and without the latter's massive "twin deficits" (of trade and of government finance). Recently this has been highlighted with the news that the euro has displaced the dollar as the world's principal currency. The euro now accounts for 45% of the global market compared to the dollar's 37%, offering an illustration of the potential economic gains of British membership of the single currency. What's more the relative prosperity much of Europe enjoys has come without sacrificing social protection.
As socialists we should be immensely proud of how the EU has been a positive force in enshrining the values of social inclusion and solidarity alongside economic growth in a way that is clearly different from the US model which allows private wealth and public squalor. The right, embodied by the Thatcherite Centre for Policy Studies, claim that the EU has 'destroyed' Britain's ability to compete, but this charge is not borne out by the reality. Britons enjoying the longest period of uninterrupted growth alongside the workplace rights enshrined by the Social Chapter hardly amounts to economic destruction. On the contrary, it demonstrates that you can have both economic growth and social protection. So let us be clear, the social vision is central to the European project and is too important not to be fought for.
This is not to forget howthe EU affords its citizens increasingly strong consumer protection. Common cosumer protection rules for the common market have provided clearer labelling, which is becoming increasingly stringent. Competition laws have held big businesses like Microsoft and Apple to account. European legislation means mobile phone companies will soon have to lower their roaming charges; excessive credit card charges have been dropped and in many cases repaid; and companies caught price-fixing have been punished heavily.
But the EU is at its best when it produces laws like its chemical legislation (REACH) which was adopted in December 2006. It means that chemicals, whether they are used in everyday products or in industry, will be tested to ensure they are safe to use. If certain chemicals are not safe, then where possible, a safer alternative must be used.Where that is not possible, stringent safeguards will apply. This is legislation that will benefit every EU citizen and the environment. By doing it at European level the burden of cost is shared, while due to the size of the European market, industry cannot avoid the rules by switching from one country to another.Even imported products must comply, meaning that people outside of the Union will also gain from the legislation. And the legislation is pre-emptive, not waiting until after chemicals have damaged people's health (remember asbestos?).
What the EU has achieved in 50 years is remarkable but it cannot afford to be complacent. The Maastricht Treaty was designed with 15 Member States in mind and not 27, as there now are. If the EU is to continue to produce bold legislation then it must recognise its increased size by reforming and becoming more efficient. The Constitutional Treaty was designed to ensure the Union worked effectively and despite the no votes of France and the Netherlands change is still needed. National governments have agreed that the problem of institutional reform should be addressed during June's summit, giving the Labour government a precious opportunity to influence how the EU takes its next steps.