In or Out

From our Dublin correspondent:

   I have been watching the debates about the United Kingdom leaving the European Union.  British Prime Minister David Cameron has promised a referendum on a simple question: Should the UK stay in the EU or leave it?
   Cameron has been saying that he wants to renegotiate the terms of membership for the UK. Terms of membership are part of the process of joining and every member is expected to follow the rules. The terms really have to do with the length of time a new member has to adjust to all the new rules and give those new members time to get specific EU rules into their national laws.
   The rules at the time a country joins will apply, although new things that come up in the future are sometimes optional. All the other members must agree to the new terms. This will apply to the UK, and I don't think that will happen. Angela Merkel, the chancellor of Germany, has said that would create a two-speed EU.
   Cameron wrote an article for the Sunday Telegraph a few days ago spelling out his new terms. His article said, amongst other things, that he wants the EU to continue to grow and get new members.
   * He does not want the UK to have to use the euro as its currency. In fact, that is not a requirement for long time members, although new members must agree to become euro zone members in the future.
   * He does not want free emigration which allows citizens of any member state to live and work in any other member state. That is actually a clause of the European free trade agreement, of which all EU states are members.
   * He does not want the UK to have to join the Schengen Agreement, which allows for passport-free movement between those member states that have signed up to it. New EU member states must become part of the Schengen travel area. 

  Many countries are in it although Ireland and the UK are not, because they have had a common travel area since 1922. If Ireland joined Schengen and the UK did not, passports would then be needed to go from one area to another, for example Fermanagh in Northern Ireland to neighboring Monaghan in the Irish Republic. Once again, because Ireland and the UK were members of the EU before Schengen came into force, there is no obligation to join.
   (Schengen is a small city in Luxembourg which hosted a meeting of leaders of the EU countries. The outcome of the agreement, signed in 1985, was that when someone arrives in a country that is party to the agreement, that country must validate the passport controls for that traveller. The traveller may then move from country to country without any cross- border controls. At airports in countries that are in the Schengen travel area there is a special "fast lane" for those who arrived from another Schengen country. That still does not mean, however, that your luggage will get off the conveyor any faster.)

   * Cameron does not want an ever-closer union and he wants to stop the EU headquarters in Brussels from getting more power. Transfer of power to the EU is done by agreement between the member states of the EU and that was always the case. If the UK ceded certain authority to the EU in the past then it was done along with all the other EU member states.
   * He and some of the UK members of Parliament want to decide which EU legislation is suitable for the UK and only bring in the things they want.
   * He wants to ensure the UK justice system is unencumbered by decisions of the ECHR (European Court of Human Rights).
  * He does not want a European Army. That is something no one has proposed, although there is an agreement that most members have signed up to, which is have a "rapid reaction force" to step in if and when necessary. It has already been on peace keeping duties in parts of Africa.

   The second debate has to do with an independent Scotland.

   The Scottish First Minister would like to see a sterling area created. That would mean that Scotland would continue to use sterling. He does not say how he would see that happening. The English Finance Ministry has said that won't happen. I suppose what they mean is that they will make decisions about sterling based on UK requirements, and not necessarily on those of Scotland, although there is nothing to stop Scotland from using a Scottish pound, with parity to the English pound sterling. Ireland did that -- parity with the British pound -- from 1922 to 1979.

   An independent Scotland likely would not want nuclear weapons in Scotland. That will be a problem for the U.S., as it has a submarine base in Scotland. Other military installations will also have to be dealt with.

   There is an impression that the oil reserves in the North Sea will continue to fuel the Scottish economy. The reserves are running out and the oil companies that have agreements with the UK will have to renegotiate these leases.  There is a possibility the oil companies will not renew a lease on a nearly depleted reserve.

   The UK Finance Minister has warned Scotland that the major banks in Scotland may relocate to London. There is a precedent for this as when Quebec was toying with independence at least one major bank relocated to Toronto from Montreal.

   If Scotland does become independent, there is a view that it will then join the EU. As a new member of the EU, Scotland could then become a member of the euro zone. However, the Scots dislike the euro as much as the English. They will also be expected to join the Schengen travel area, and if that happens passports will be required to travel from Scotland to the UK or Ireland.