ABSTRACT
Forty years ago-in 1975-British people voted in a referendum to stay in what was then the European Community (EC). Now, in 2015, the UK is on the verge of another referendum on whether to remain a member of the European Union (EU). Then, the impact of Britain’s relationship with the Commonwealth was an issue. Now, certainly in the recent UK election, the question of the Commonwealth as an alternative to EU membership has been raised, notably by the nationalist UKIP party of Nigel Farage. On 1 January 1975, Britain became a member of the EC and the following day I was
one of the first 10 or so UK nationals to start to work in the European Commission in the office of George Thomson, who had also been a minister for the Commonwealth. After Brussels, I took on a job with a Commonwealth organisation in 1980 and have stayed working within different Commonwealth bodies, including the Commonwealth Secretariat, for the last 35 years. Does this mean that I now wish to substitute the Commonwealth for the EU? Not at
all-only in January this year I was with the European Commissioner for Development, signing a seven-year partnership agreement with my organisation, the Commonwealth Local Government Forum (CLGF). This provides funding supplementary to that derived from the Department for International Development and other Commonwealth sources and opens up significant EU funds for our work to promote local democracy and good governance, including in Zimbabwe where we recently secured a €1 million EU contract. Indeed, we have bid for, and won, EU project grants for 20 years, which have all directly benefited our Commonwealth members. Does this imply being seduced by Brussels ‘gold’? Not in the least-EU contracts
have tough reporting and accounting conditions, require substantial co-funding from other sources and need to be results-orientated. Securing these is no different from securing grants from other development partners and, in any case, much EU funding is derived from the taxpayers of the UK, as well as Cyprus and Malta, which are also EU members. Money, although important, is not everything. More significant is the ability to
influence EU policy-making. Thus, in 2013 I flew to Dublin to meet the Irish development minister, who was the president of the European Council dealing with an
important EU Communication on Local Authorities in development policy. On account of this, and through lobbying by our European partners in the PLATFORMA network, with whom CLGF shares a collective office in Brussels, the Communication was successfully adopted. As result there is greater recognition for local government’s role in development throughout the Commonwealth, more access to EU funds by our members and political spin-offs in the current negotiations in New York designed to ensure that the new United Nations post-2015 development agenda is implemented bottom-up, not top-down. So what does all this mean for the bigger picture and the imminent UK referendum
on Europe? There is clearly much for Commonwealth countries to gain by Britain staying an active member of the EU; by being able to influence EU policy which has a direct bearing on them, whether in the field of development or trade and investment; and by maintaining access to significant EU development, regional and social funds. I can think of no Commonwealth country that wants Britain to leave the EU. Over
the past year or so, I have met Commonwealth leaders from Ghana, Jamaica, Malta, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, Tuvalu and Uganda, and ministers and local government leaders from many others. I cannot think of a single one who wants to see ‘Brexit’ from the EU; indeed, most are horrified by the prospect! What then is the way to the future for the EU and the Commonwealth, as opposed to
a return to the past? In many ways, the EU is too big and bureaucratic, while the Commonwealth is too small-at least in resources-and too informal: the EU is notorious for institutional complexity and red tape, while the Commonwealth is too fragmented and insufficiently joined-up among its 70-plus diverse organisations. The EU struggles with deploying its massive development funds, while the Commonwealth is starved of funds. There is therefore a strong case for the two organisations benefiting from each other’s
comparative advantages; not seeing each as in competition or as alternatives. It is, however, not just UK anti-Europeans who should to go to Specsavers for the right glasses to read the fine print of EU-Commonwealth relations. Many Europeans wrongly see the Commonwealth as an offshoot of the British Empire, while they have no problems about Brussels happily giving support-and money-to La Francophonie, arguably much closer to French interests: all need to recognise the remarkable outreach, networks and political legitimacy of the Commonwealth of 53 proudly independent Commonwealth countries. Clearly, there is scope for the EU and the Commonwealth to work together, perhaps
by having a Commonwealth organisations’ office in Brussels. In this endeavour, the UK should link up strategically with Cyprus and Malta and like-minded countries such as Ireland: for example, in 2017, when Prime Minister Muscat of Malta will hold both the EU presidency and the chair of the Commonwealth. Any ‘renegotiation’ of EU terms by David Cameron should therefore also take the Commonwealth dimension into account. I spend much time in Kent, close to the Channel Tunnel, where every day
innumerable lorries, cars and tourists arrive as a testimony of the UK’s close commercial links with Europe. ‘Brexit’ would inflict huge damage on the UK economy; it would equally do a grave disservice to our Commonwealth partners. Ironically, Thanet in East Kent, although it rejected Mr Farage at the UK parliamentary elections, has the only UKIP local council in Britain. Given that Thanet itself benefits from EU grants,
voting for Brexit there is like turkeys voting for Christmas. However, do not expect our Commonwealth partners to support a UK exit from Europe: they realise that British membership of the EU and of the Commonwealth are both essential and indeed are complementary to each other, and that they are not in any way alternative options.
