`People see a constant transfer of power in one direction only'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.This is edited text from a speech given yesterday by the Foreign Secretary, Malcolm Rifkind, to the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, in Bonn.
"The question at the centre of the debate in Britain is this: where is Europe going: do we want more integration?
"Political integration is different from economic integration. In fact it may be exactly the opposite. Political integration is about centralisation not decentralisation. People talk about pooling sovereignty, but what they mean - to put it more crudely - is transferring power from democratic national governments to European Union institutions.
"Majority voting, greater powers for the European Parliament, more powers for the Commission. Whatever their merits, these are all proposals for more centralised decision-making, for concentrating power in Brussels...
"Part of what disturbs people in Britain and many elsewhere is that they see a constant transfer of power in one direction only. They see all the footprints leading into the cave, and none of them coming out. So they doubt whether it is wise to go any further inside themselves. Where does it end?
"The conclusion that many draw is that, logically, this process will end in a European state. To quote one British newspaper: `European leaders want one nation, one currency, one flag. Their dream of a federal super- state would be a nightmare for Britain'. Perhaps this view is mistaken, but that is how the process is perceived in Britain. Mistaken or not, that is a political fact...
"People in Britain ask, how does a United States of Europe differ from the proposals made by Germany and others for ever closer integration?
"How far down the road of integration do leaders in Germany and elsewhere think Europe should go? It is no good saying that the convoy must go at the pace of the slowest ship. We are not talking about convoys, we are talking about democracy. The European Union cannot afford to brush aside the deeply-held concerns of its peoples just because they happen to be in a minority.
"Since the Maastricht treaty, the European Union has become, if anything, less popular - this is true in almost every member state. But the agenda for the present Inter-Governmental Conference seems to be on auto-pilot...
"Which way forward for Europe? My answer is that what we need is nations without nationalism, states without statism, and Europe without centralism. The European Union will be the essential framework for those states and those nations, working together in a close but decentralised partnership."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments