Are Britons souring on the EU?

David Cameron visited Europe this week as British voters show increasing support for Britain's exit from the European Union.

Peter Kneffel
British Prime Minister David Cameron, left, and CSU senior official Gerda Hasselfeldt prepare to shake hands during Cameron's visit at a party convention of the Christian Social Union Party, CSU, in Wildbach Kreuth, southern Germany, Monday. Cameron sought to push forward his campaign for changes to the European Union, arguing that his proposals would benefit the EU as well as Britain.

Why the all the fuss about the European Union?

As British Prime Minister David Cameron met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Wednesday to discuss proposed changes to the EU, Britons' dissatisfaction with their country's membership in the union remains high.

Reuters reports that 54 percent of decided voters are in favor of Britain's exit from the EU, popularly referred to as "Brexit," according to a survey conducted by the polling firm ORB International. When undecided voters are included, 43 percent remain in favor of withdrawing from the EU. In November, support for withdrawal topped fifty percent.

As domestic support for the United Kingdom's membership in the EU continues to drop, Mr. Cameron is making the rounds in Europe with a plan that he hopes will allow the UK to remain in the EU while satisfying British concerns.

Cameron identified some of those concerns in a 2013 speech at the London headquarters of Bloomberg. According to Cameron, Britain feels burdened, rather than blessed, by its membership in the EU.

"People are increasingly frustrated," Cameron said in his speech then, "that decisions taken further and further away from them mean their living standards are slashed through enforced austerity or their taxes are used to bail out governments on the other side of the continent."

In November 2015, Cameron sent a letter to the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, summarizing Britain's objections to the EU's current structure. Chief among these objections was Britain's lack of commitment to one of the pillars of EU membership, working towards an “ever closer union," a phrase that appears frequently in the treaties that established the EU and its predecessors.

This lack of unity is salient in the differing approaches that the UK and Germany take in addressing Europe's refugee crisis. Merkel's government has come out strongly in favor of welcoming refugees, a move that the UK supports in principle. But the UK rejects extending to refugees and foreign workers the same welfare benefits that its own citizens receive.

Merkel has expressed a willingness to enter into negotiations with the UK while maintaining her support for the principles of free movement and equality.

Despite objecting to Cameron's proposed benefits ban for new immigrant workers due to discrimination concerns, Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban also remains hopeful that the two countries could come to an agreement

"The discussions are going well," said Cameron, according to Bloomberg. "They are hard, they are tough, there are difficult issues. But I'm confident, with goodwill – and there is goodwill – I think on all sides we can bring these negotiations to a conclusion and then hold the referendum."

There are existing alternatives to the EU. The European Free Trade Association is a parallel market to the European Union, and has four members: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland. The first three countries participate in the EU's market through the European Economic Area. Switzerland has separate agreements the European Union.

While freedom from some of the EU's regulations might be beneficial for the UK, the "Norway plan" has its own drawbacks. Non-EU members who wish to take part in the economic community, for example, are subject to the same rules as EU members (through agreements like the EEA), but have no say in their creation. Whatever the UK's post-Brexit economic plans, the Economist argues, the country would be deeply unsatisfied with the result.

Hence Cameron's attempts to negotiate a European Union reform plan that would satisfy UK demands for sovereignty and allow Britain to reap the benefits of EU's economic community. He hopes to put the question to voters in a long-awaited referendum by the end of 2017.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.