The future of the European Community: Britain's approach to the negotiations

The European Community was a radical experiment undertaken to end the rivalries which had torn Europe apart twice in the first half of this century. The Treaties of Paris and Rome were conceived as vehicles for change. There can be no doubting the success of the venture-what has resulted is a unique community of nations, attempting not just the coordination of national policies, but common policies, disciplines to prevent short-term beggar-my-neighbour strategies, and a joint external role both politically and in trade. Together these nations can provide effective support for freedom and democracy both within Western Europe and in the world as a whole. Accordingly, enlargement o include Spain and Portugal must be seen as an urgent political imperative. Everything which follows about the future should be taken to apply to a Community of Twelve. The decisions reached in autumn 1983 on Mediterranean agriculture seem to offer the prospect of progress towards this end, but the going is still painfully slow. Britain was right to join the Community. Our accession did not constitute a renunciation of past ties, but a new context for them. The Commonwealth remains central to our foreign policy, as do our relations with our Western partners, including Japan, outside the Community. But a strong and united Europe is better for all than a weak, divided one. At home, the 1983 general election has confirmed public support. The debate about whether we should be in or out is over; now the more fruitful debate about the future direction of our Community is under way. Yet, while the British public accepts the European Community, it is hardly enthusiastic. This is partly an insular reflex. The European Community is a natural scapegoat for national failures and for the impact of world recession. These are perceptions which can be changed over time. The government has a duty to provide information and explanation, and is applying itself seriously to this task. There are, however, deeper, and genuine, concerns. The Community often seems imprisoned in an elaborate and inflexible structure of national trade-offs. The result can resemble fossilised apathy: not the radicalism of the founders, but, on the contrary, resistance to necessary change. Also, there is a real danger that people are coming to see the Community as at best irrelevant, and at worst obstructive, to the fundamental challenge facing all of Europe: to halt the decline in its international competitiveness, to restore sustainable growth and to generate new employment. The Community, like its member states individually, has been trapped by good intentions into sacrificing the future for the present, resorting all too often to buying its way out of trouble. The result has been restricted growth. Until now, Britain has not encouraged the Community to face up to fundamental issues of this kind. It was perhaps diffident as a new member; since then it has been inhibited by the sterile domestic debate over its own membership and absorbed in righting inequities which operated against it, particularly over the budget. But let there be no doubt: this