So what changed?

Tweet

In 1975, the last time we had a referendum on membership of the EU (or the Common Market, as it was called then) I was very much on the losing side, spending a lot of time leafletting and campaigning against membership.  Plaid’s slogan at the time was “Europe Yes, EEC no”, as I recall.  It was an attempt to put a pro-European case against the EU as an institution, but it failed miserably.  Part of the reason was that the nationalist case for a different type of Europe was drowned out by the Little Englander case against ‘Europe’ in general, but it was also because it was difficult to separate ‘Europe’ from the ‘EEC’; a difficulty facing campaigners still.

There were a number of reasons for supporting the ‘out’ campaign at that time.  Some of those are still valid today, which I suspect is one of the reasons why some supporters of ‘remain’ are having difficulty making their case as positively as they might wish.  The Treaty of Rome, which was the basis of the organisation back then, was seen as being a basis for a ‘capitalist club’; an organisation which would work in the interests of capital rather than working people.  Some of us saw the whole concept of ‘free movement of capital’ as being a dangerous one for the interests of working people.  And of course, for those seeking Welsh independence, the idea of committing to an even bigger union, with an even more distant centre, turning Wales into a periphery of the periphery, was deeply unattractive.

There are echoes of all of those arguments still being heard today, but there are a number of crucial changes which have led me, over the years, to change my opinion.

Firstly, and most importantly, there is the question of the alternative.  Back in 1975, the rather looser organisation known as EFTA seemed to offer a credible alternative.  It seemed rather more likely to many of us that an independent Wales would be able to join that organisation than to become a full member of the EEC from within.  But that alternative no longer exists.  EFTA has, effectively, been swallowed up by the EU, and the alternative to membership of the EU now is to be part of an offshore island state.  It’s not a position from which independence is likely to look attractive.

Secondly, the EU has itself changed.  From a group of six states it has become a continent-wide organisation, including many more nationalities and minorities.  Multilingualism is the norm, along with respect for difference.  It looks and feels like a much more natural home for Wales to be able to express itself as a nation than does a monolingual offshore state.

Thirdly, the tensions between ‘state’ and ‘nation’ are not limited to the UK.  From the insular perspective of the early 1970s, the Welsh and Scottish battles for independence looked and felt like a part of UK politics; apart and separate from what was happening ‘over there’ on the continent.  Today, the fight for an increasing degree of national autonomy looks and feels like part of a much wider European movement; the concerns and aspirations of nationalists in Wales are shared in a number of other places within the EU.

There are other points that I could make; and none of the above means that I’m happy with all aspects of the EU as it stands.  In particular, I’d like to see more ‘regionalism’ in action, and a clear path towards ‘internal enlargement’ rather than an apparent determination to protect and defend the state boundaries and structures which currently happen to exist.  But overall, I’ve become convinced that Wales’ future as a nation will be better served by working towards formal direct membership of the EU than by abandoning the whole concept and returning to the island state for which so many of the ‘Leavers’ yearn.  For me, the EU is, at its simplest, a better ‘context’ for Welsh independence than a stand-alone UK.

It is, in essence, a nationalist perspective on the issue; starting from a consideration of which of the only two alternatives on the table seems to offer the best chance of Wales joining the world.  But it’s a perspective which is, sadly, hardly being mentioned in the campaign.

Changing attitudes

Tweet On Tuesday, the Western Mail carried an article reporting an interview with Professor Patrick Minford of Cardiff Business School which neatly – although perhaps unintentionally – encapsulated one of the main problems with the way in which UK politicians talk about the EU.  It talks about building a new relationship between the two partners – the EU and the UK – as though those two entities are in some way equivalent.

That is not the way the world looks from the point of view of the other members states of the EU.  From their perspective, this ‘them and us’ approach looks very strange, not to say semi-detached.

Around 40 years ago, I was one of a group of Plaid members who went on a fact-finding trip to Brussels and Luxembourg.  It was largely funded by the EEC itself, as part of a clear attempt to persuade various groups and parties in the UK to start liking the institution.  (It didn’t work at the time, but that’s another story.)

One of my abiding memories is of two visits made in quick succession; the first to the office of the UK Permanent Representative, and the second (after they’d obtained special permission from Dublin) to the Irish equivalent.  The contrast was striking.

We were welcomed to the first very formally by a man dressed in a three-piece suit and bow tie with a very posh accent who politely offered us tea before asking “Now gentlemen, how can I help you?” and waiting for our questions.  At the second, an Irishman in a sports jacket and open collar said “Come on in boys.  Would you like a drop of whiskey?”, before expounding on the advantages of membership as seen from an Irish perspective.

That difference in approach was more than just superficial; it was clear that the UK saw the EEC (as it was then) as an external body with which we had a relationship; the Irish saw it as an association of which their country was a member.  That underlying UK attitude has changed little, if at all, over the past four decades.

Worse, it shows no sign of changing any time soon.  Wales is still being represented, badly, by people who seem not really to want to be there.  If the Tories remain in government, and if a referendum is subsequently held, the result will depend more on whether the people of the countries of these islands share that mindset towards the EU than on whether we get more out than we put in.  But all political debate seems to revolve around the latter rather than around the former.  Who's putting the positive case?