Abstract
This article compares the formation of national preferences and interstate bargains for the two historical decisions on British membership, the accession of the UK to the European Communities and British exit from the European Union. While both resemble in their procedure to overcome intra-party division by announcing a referendum about the outcome of interstate bargains, the closer inspection suggests a transformation from a socioeconomic toward ideological foundation of the national preference on British membership and from intergovernmental bargaining effectiveness toward two-level game (in)voluntary defection.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
As a third question, Moravcsik (1998) also refers to the motivation for their institutional choices, which determine the transfer of national sovereignty to the EU [for a critique, see Tsebelis and Garrett (2001) “The Institutional Foundations of Intergovernmentalism and Supranationalism in the European Union].
Only some limits to in-work benefits for EU immigrants were agreed upon, but these would apply on a sliding scale for 4 years and would be for new immigrants only; before they could be applied, a country would have to get permission from the European Council. Child benefit payments could still be made overseas, but these would be linked to the cost of living in the other country. On sovereignty, the UK was reassured that it would not be required to participate in "ever closer union"; these reassurances were "in line with existing EU law". Cameron's demand to allow national parliaments to veto proposed EU laws was modified to allow national parliaments collectively to object to proposed EU laws, in which case the European Council would reconsider the proposal before deciding what to do. On economic governance, anti-discrimination regulations for non-Eurozone members would be reinforced, but they would be unable to veto any legislation. The final two areas covered were proposals to "exclude from the scope of free movement rights, third country nationals who had no prior lawful residence in a Member State before marrying a Union citizen" and to make it easier for member states to deport EU nationals for public policy or public security reasons. The extent to which the various parts of the agreement would be legally binding is complex; no part of the agreement itself changed EU law, but some parts could be enforceable in international law.
References
Cook, C., and M. Francis. 1979. The First European Elections: A Handbook and Guide. London: Macmillan Press.
Finke, D., T. König, S.O. Proksch, and G. Tsebelis. 2012. Reforming the European Union: Realizing the Impossible. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
König, T. 2018. Still the Century of Intergovernmentalism? Partisan Ideology, Two Level Bargains and Technocratic Governance in the post-Maastricht Era. Journal of Common Market Studies (forthcoming).
König, T., and D. Finke. 2009. Why Risk Popular Ratification Failure? A Comparative Analysis of the Choice of the Ratification Instrument in the 25 Member States of the EU. Constitutional Political Economy 20(3): 341–365.
Moravcsik, A. 1998. The Choice for Europe: Social Power and State Purpose from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Moravcsik, A., and F. Schimmelfennig. 2009. Liberal Intergovernmentalism. In European Integration, ed. A. Wiener and T. Diez, 67–87. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Parker, G. 2016. Cameron Pins Brexit on EU Failure to Grant UK Brake on Migration. Financial Times. Retrieved 24 July 2016.
Putnam, R.D. 1988. Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization 42(3): 427–460.
Ross, T. 2014. David Cameron: My Seven Targets for a New EU. The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 8 June 2016.
Tsebelis, G., and G. Garrett. 2001. The Institutional Foundations of Intergovernmentalism and Supranationalism in the European Union. International Organization 55(2): 357–390.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
König, T. European integration and British membership: Still an intergovernmentalist story?. Eur Polit Sci 18, 117–125 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-018-0154-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-018-0154-y