“THE VOTE TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION HAS DIVIDED PEOPLE FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE LAST FIVE YEARS. BUT WHAT HAS BEEN LOST IS THAT FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE IN WALES, THE EU WAS NEVER AN INSTITUTION THAT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS ACCOUNTABLE OR DEMOCRATIC. THEY WERE RIGHT TO BE SUSPICIOUS, AND ALTHOUGH BORIS JOHNSON’S BOTCHED DEAL SPELLS BAD NEWS, WE SHOULDN’T THINK THE EU IS A BEACON OF PROGRESS.”
The New Year’s Eve Brexit crisis has again drawn public attention to Britain’s relationship with the European Union, after a year which saw it relegated in the news by the Coronavirus pandemic.
The original referendum, which saw Wales play a crucial role in delivering Brexit, was swiftly appropriated by prominent right-wing Leavers using it as a mandate for a less regulated form of capitalism, to restore British ‘greatness’ and attack immigration.
But a similar myth was created on the Remain side, where their campaign was reimagined as an honourable defeat for a broad internationalist vision and a benign, progressive EU.
People in some of our poorest areas who had voted Leave were derided as acting against their own interests, often accused of knowing nothing of the EU and being ignorant of the funding Wales received.
Lost in much of this discussion, however, is an understanding of the EU’s opacity and distance from the publics it is intended to serve, which was a significant reason for the referendum vote, as it was in the Dutch and French No votes on the European Constitution in 2005.
Whether Brexit will have any kind of effect on the structures of the European Union to make them more responsive to its supposed citizens remains to be seen, although it seems unlikely. But people were right to be deeply sceptical about the state of democracy in the EU, and perhaps one of the few benefits of Britain leaving the institution is that Brussels will no longer serve as a site of great comfort and financial benefit for British politicians who had little interest in being accountable to their voters.
The European Parliament, despite being the EU’s only directly elected institution, is its most powerless, lacking the power to propose legislation and requiring the revision of the Council of Ministers (the body composed of the relevant ministers for the policy area from each European Union country) to any legislation it passes.
Due to the nature of its establishment by an institution composed of different governments with their own local interests, the EU Parliament’s operations are based in three sites: Luxembourg, Strasbourg and Brussels, something which estimated by the EU’s auditors to cost over €100 million a year more than a more traditional one-sited parliament. Appropriately, the Welsh voting public has not voted much for its EU Parliamentarians, with turnout in the all-Wales EU elections reaching an all time low of 29% in 1999 and hitting a record high of 41% in 2004.
Several things made being an MEP an attractive option for someone like, to pick a name at random, Derek Vaughan. Firstly, if you believe in the European Union as a project, there’s the comparative glamour of being an MEP as opposed to being in the gilded cruise ship and public school re-enactment centre in Westminster. Second, the use of the Single Transferrable Vote system in the UK’s European Parliamentary elections and the relatively low turnout mean that if you can get your party to give you a spot near the top of a party’s list, you have to do less of the type of constituency work normally expected of MPs, AMs and councillors – canvassing, appearing at village fetes – to keep your seat.
Third, the salary of an European Parliamentarian is currently €107,194 gross per annum (£98229.12 at time of writing) as compared to the £81,932 per annum you get from Westminster and £67,649 you get from being a Member of the Senedd.
While this salary would be upgrade for all but the highest few percent of earners in Wales, the real golden ticket in the European Union is to be appointed by your government to serve on the European Commission. The Commission is the body responsible for developing and strengthening the EU itself, has the power to propose legislation and to monitor its implementation, and to manage the European Union’s budget.
Each member state proposes a Commissioner, and they are each paid a minimum of £268,404 annually (£243923 at time of writing). By contrast, the United Kingdom Prime Minister is paid just below £160,000 per annum and the First Minister is paid just below £150,000.
The UK government has treated the Commission as both a kind of gilded cage for political opponents from within the ruling party and a luxury retirement home for party grandees, confident that, having been set up in Brussels, they can no longer pose any threat and that any embarrassment they cause will be minimal.
High profile Commissioners have included Chris Patton, who was given the job after a similar appointed role as the last colonial ruler of Hong Kong, Peter Mandleson, who was given the job after repeatedly resigning as a British minister due to allegations of corruption, and the former Labour leader now Lord Kinnock, who was given the job after twice trying failing to be elected to a similar position of authority in Britain.
Lord Kinnock is an instructive example of the freedom from consequence that being a Commissioner grants you, resigning from his post as Transport Commissioner with the other members of the Commission headed by Jacques Santer, admitting, with his characteristic mix of aggression and cowardice “collective responsibility, [but not] collective guilt.” (source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/mar/16/eu.politics1) when it was accused of financial self-dealing. Lord Kinnock was then promoted to Vice Commissioner in the Commission led by Romano Prodi, a position that comes with a yet higher salary.
It is hard to imagine, with the current United Kingdom government, that the Brexit process will lead to any short or medium benefits for the majority of people in Wales. What it does cease is the absurdity of fewer people electing members to serve in a more powerless parliament for more pay than their national equivalents, and the enrichment of political friends and enemies in the Commission.
