He leído un curioso libreto distribido por la Taxpayers Alliance de apenas un centenar de páginas: Ten Years on: Britain without the European Union, de Lee Rotherham. Se trata de una historia ficción sobre la secesión del Reino Unido de la Unión Europea y los resultados de esta separación diez años después de producirse.
El primer apartado se divide en capítulos sobre distintas áreas de la polít ica europea (empresa, mercado laboral, agricultura, inmigración etc.) y retrata la situación "actual" del país después de pasar diez años fuera de la UE. Abundan los datos y las comparaciones con respecto a la situación hipotética de otros países que han permanecido en la UE así como con el Reino Unido antes de separarse.
El segundo apartado es la "historia" de la separación del Reino Unido de la Unión Europea. ¿Cómo se sucedieron los acontecimientos? ¿Por qué el Reino Unido decidió separarse y qué términos de convivencia y cooperación acordó con Bruselas?
El tercer apartado es una retrospectiva global, desde el año 2020 hacia atrás, del Reino Unido y el resto del mundo.
Este libro, escrito en clave británica, es una pequeña joya para los euroscépticos. Presenta datos y extrapolaciones sólidas, y plantea una alternativa realista o, cuando menos, plausible. El enfoque ficticio-retrospectivo es original y contribuye a juzgar la Unión Europea desde el ángulo del "coste de oportunidad", aquello que el Reino Unido habrá dejado de ganar por pertenecer a la UE durante la próxima década.
Copio varios fragmentos del segundo apartado: ¿cómo se produjo la secesión y bajo qué términos quedó configurada la nueva asociación entre el Reino Unido y la UE?
El coste y los beneficios de la Unión Europea (pág. 71-72):
Treasury staff were tasked with coming up with the basic audit: net and gross budget contributions; cost of red tape; impact on trade with EU member states; tariff barriers with the rest of the world; projected emerging markets, and so on. (...)
The initial figures quickly leaked, hardly surprising given the sums involved. The early working draft revealed that there was a division of opinion. One group of civil servants took a laser beam view and held that EU membership cost the UK four per cent of its GDP very year in fees and bills. A second group, however, held that this figure did not reflect accurately subsidiary and more widespread damaging effects of membership, and held the true figure to run at between 8 and 9 per cent. The British press were staggered; "Mugged!" bellowed the front page of The Sun. (...) Consensus settled at a cost to the UK (depending upon the Pound/Euro exchange rate) running in the order of between £117 billion and £134 billion a year.
Against this, the benefits looked weak. This was because there remained considerable uncertainty as to what tariff and non-tariff barriers UK exporters would face if the country were not a member. The Department of Business had already for some time assessed that even outside the EU, the UK would still enjoy preferential access. In the worst case scenario this would be the "most favoured nation tariff", a misnomer as this provided no preferential tariff, though in turn it would itself encourage the UK (and EU exporter as well) to establish a free trade agreement.
Alternativas posibles fuera de la UE (pág. 72-73):
The best case scenario was initially viewed as a deal permitting full continuing access to the Single Market similar to that of members of the European Free Trade Area (EFTA), thought without influencing the legislation that governed it. (...) New choices were explored; a bilateral trading agreement, such as that between the EU and Canada or Mexico, which were "EEC Treaty Lite"; reinvigorating and expanding EFTA, and re-establishing a broader bilateral deal; or adopting a unilateral quid pro quo arrangement so that if legislation hampered UK exports, similar levels of bureaucracy would be placed on EU imports until the situation was fixed.
Condiciones bajo las cuales el Gobierno británico estaría dispuesto permanecer en la Unión Europea (pág. 75-77):
The dossier's demands were logical and straightforward.
It required all aspects of foreign and defence policy to revert to intergovernmental agreement where it involved the UK.
It provided for the protection of the UK's separate legal and judicial system, since the UK would opt out of all elements of the new Treaty that brought Justice and Home Affairs into EU competence.
It restored legislative and regulatory authority to the UK Parliament, so that no new EU legislation would have effect in the UK unless specific legislation was introduced and passed by MPs, and the UK could not be forced to adopt such laws.
The UK Parliament would also have unfettered power to repeal existing EU regulations. (...)
The ability to opt in or out of specific EU programmes was also stated, adjusting Britain's budget contribution to reflect whether or not it participated. The list of opt-out programmes included the CAP, Fisheries, and various initiatives that teetered on Euro-propaganda. It was recognised that the British Government might be willing to continue to engage in areas such as the environment, transport networks and cross border security. (...)
Another key element related to Britain's position towards the Single Market, addressing tariffs and trade policy. While firmly committed to maintaining a free trade area in Europe, and generally seeking to reach a common European negotiating position in external trade negotiations, the UK would reserve the right to take a separate position and negotiate separate agreements if we thought if necessary to do so. (...)
However, and most crucially, it was recognised that the Single Market had already wandered into the realm of protectionism. Contrary to its founding ideals, focus was increasingly on passing laws to regulate "level playing fields". (...)
Free movement of goods, services and capital meanwhile would still be upheld, though with a reserve on free movement of labour that allowed the Government to intervene to curtail high volumes of migration.
It was, in effect, a series of proposals to allow the United Kingdom to trade in the EU, while stepping away from the political integration.
Después de un referéndum nacional y tensas negociaciones, el Reino Unido se separa de la Unión Europea y pacta con Bruselas una relación de "miembro asociado" (pág. 88):
Associated membership was the name given for the arrangement. The British got their deal; Free Trade and Friednship, accepting the price of a four year wind-down of the old system of contributions to the EU budget.
El UKIP se disuelve (Nigel Farage dice: "we have fulfilled our mission"), David Cameron es reelegido para un segundo mandato, y los parlamentarios británicos de Bruselas se quedan sin trabajo.
(Quienes residís en el Reino Unido podéis encargar el libro gratis aquí, si aún quedan ejemplares)
