The United Kingdom and the European Union: Natural Allies (Tony Wright: British Politics)

Before reading Tony Wright's "British Politics: A Very Short Introduction," I operated under an important misconception: I assumed that the United Kingdom as proved reluctant to fully embrace the project of the European Union because its values are inherently different from those espoused by the EU. It is an easy mistake to make, seeing as the British system emphasizes strong national government, while the EU requires national government to become subordinate to international law and norms. However, by examining the description of British politics in the Wright book, I have come to understand that the two systems are only superficially different. The core ideas about politics that underlie the political systems of the EU and the UK are remarkably similar:

The European Union, as Professor King discussed at length, is composed of two types of agencies: intergovernmental institutions and supranational institutions. The members of intergovernmental agencies such as the European Council and, to some extent, the European Parliament are required to represent the interests of their respective nations. Within a supranational institution like the European Commission (and perhaps the Parliament), however, representatives must promote the general welfare of Europe, not the interests of the states that elected them. 

The political system of the United Kingdom has the equivalent of intergovernmental and supranational institutions on a a national level. The prime minister, for example, is expected to act as a one-man supranational institution. Though elected by single constituency with specific interests, the prime minister must place general welfare about the interests of the citizens who directly pt him in office. The remainder of of Parliament, however, acts as the equivalent t an intergovernmental agency. The MEPs must respond directly to the needs and interests of their respective constituencies. (Granted, the argument has been made that parliamentarians act more in line with the part platform than with the interests of their voting blocks. This argument does not hold up to empirical evidence; Wright points out that it is "patently obvious" that parties are "racked by internal divisions." Thus, parliamentarians do in fact break with party lines on behalf of their constituents). 

Therefore, citizens in pre-EU United Kingdom and in the European Union experience remarkably similar forms of representation: they can both boast two layers of representation (one in the form of intergovernmental actors and the other in the form of supranational actors). Thus, the EU and the UK agree that political systems should include two layers of representation with differing objectives. 

The agreement on representation points to an even deeper shared value regarding the role of government in society. In the United States, we do not have an institutionalized supranational form of government. Supreme Court justices are perhaps the group most removed from individual constituencies and yet they remain largely defined by partisan politics. Thus, the fact that Britain and the EU require two layers of representation suggests that both political systems place an extremely high value on the welfare of the citizens. Moreover, they see it as the government's role to sustain individual citizens. This is in direct opposition to the "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" mentality of the United States. Thus, the Eu and the UK are natural ideological allies and full integration of Britain into the European Union should not come at as high of a cost to traditional Britain as I once thought.