Chính sách của anh đối với EU từ 1992 đến 2016

ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC KHOA HỌC XÃ HỘI VÀ NHÂN VĂN - Chu Thanh Vân CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU TỪ 1992 ĐẾN 2016 LUẬN ÁN TIẾN SĨ QUỐC TẾ HỌC Hà Nội - 2018 ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC KHOA HỌC XÃ HỘI VÀ NHÂN VĂN - Chu Thanh Vân CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU TỪ 1992 ĐẾN 2016 Chuyên ngành: Quan hệ Quốc tế Mã số: 62 31 02 06 LUẬN ÁN TIẾN SĨ QUỐC TẾ HỌC Người hướng dẫn khoa học: PGS.TS Nguyễn Thị Thanh Thủy PGS.TS Bùi Hồng Hạnh Hà Nội - 2018 LỜI CAM ĐOAN Tôi xin cam đoan luận án tiến sĩ “Chính sách Anh EU từ 1992 đến 2016” công trình nghiên cứu riêng tơi Các luận điểm luận án trung thực chƣa đƣợc công bố cơng trình nghiên cứu Tất tham khảo kế thừa đƣợc trích dẫn đầy đủ NGHIÊN CỨU SINH Chu Thanh Vân LỜI CẢM ƠN Nghiên cứu sinh xin trân trọng cảm ơn tập thể hƣớng dẫn, thầy cô bạn nghiên cứu sinh, sinh viên Khoa Quốc tế học, Trƣờng Đại học Khoa học Xã hội Nhân văn, Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội chuyên gia ngồi Trƣờng góp ý hỗ trợ nguồn tài liệu q trình hồn thành luận án NGHIÊN CỨU SINH Chu Thanh Vân MỤC LỤC LỜI CAM ĐOAN LỜI CẢM ƠN MỤC LỤC DANH MỤC CHỮ VIẾT TẮT DANH MỤC SƠ ĐỒ MỞ ĐẦU Lý chọn đề tài Mục đích nhiệm vụ nghiên cứu Đối tƣợng phạm vi nghiên cứu Phƣơng pháp nghiên cứu 10 Đóng góp luận án 11 Bố cục luận án 11 Chƣơng TỔNG QUAN LỊCH SỬ NGHIÊN CỨU 13 1.1 CÁC LÝ THUYẾT TIẾP CẬN QUAN HỆ ĐỐI NGOẠI VÀ CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH VỚI EU 13 1.1.1 Lý thuyết tiếp cận quan hệ quốc tế 13 1.1.2 Lý thuyết hoạch định sách đối ngoại 17 1.1.3 Tiếp cận ba cấp độ hoạch định sách 20 1.2 CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU GIAI ĐOẠN 1992-2016 24 1.2.1 Các yếu tố ảnh hƣởng đến sách đối ngoại Anh 24 1.2.2 Thực tế điều chỉnh sách Anh với EU giai đoạn 1992-2016 .32 1.3 TRIỂN VỌNG QUAN HỆ ANH - EU VÀ ẢNH HƢỞNG CỦA QUAN HỆ NÀY ĐẾN CHỦ NGHĨA KHU VỰC VÀ TỒN CẦU HĨA HẬU BREXIT 36 1.4 NHẬN XÉT VỀ CÁC TÀI LIỆU NGHIÊN CỨU VỀ ĐỀ TÀI CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH VỚI EU 39 1.4.1 Những kết đạt đƣợc hạn chế 39 1.4.2 Hƣớng phát triển đề tài 41 Chƣơng CƠ SỞ HOẠCH ĐỊNH CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH VỚI LIÊN MINH CHÂU ÂU 43 2.1 CƠ SỞ LÝ LUẬN 43 2.1.1 Chính sách đối ngoại Anh với EU nhìn từ lý thuyết lợi ích quốc gia lý thuyết hội nhập khu vực 43 2.1.2 Hoạch định sách đối ngoại Anh với EU nhìn từ cách tiếp cận ba cấp độ 51 2.1.3 Các mơ hình hoạch định sách đối ngoại phổ biến giới nƣớc Anh 55 2.2 CƠ SỞ THỰC TIỄN 62 2.2.1 Vài nét hình thành phát triển EU 62 2.2.2 Quá trình hội nhập Anh vào EU 65 2.2.3 Quan điểm Anh việc thành lập khối EU 70 2.2.4 Lợi ích nghĩa vụ Anh EU 72 2.3 TIỂU KẾT 78 Chƣơng NỘI DUNG VÀ VIỆC TRIỂN KHAI CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU TRONG GIAI ĐOẠN 1992-2016 80 3.1 CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU TRÊN LĨNH VỰC CHÍNH TRỊ 80 3.1.1 Chính sách sử dụng phiếu phủ đàm phán EU 80 3.1.2 Chính sách Anh việc mở rộng EU 82 3.1.3 Sự tham gia Anh vào trình phê chuẩn hiệp định văn kiện quan trọng EU 83 3.2 CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU TRÊN LĨNH VỰC KINH TẾ 89 3.2.1 Chính sách đóng góp cho ngân sách EU Anh 89 3.2.2 Chính sách Anh đồng Euro 90 3.2.3 Chính sách Anh lĩnh vực nông nghiệp 96 3.2.4 Chính sách Hịa hợp với Thị trƣờng chung Châu Âu 100 3.2.5 Chính sách Anh viện trợ phát triển đầu tƣ 102 3.3 CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU TRÊN CÁC LĨNH VỰC AN NINH VÀ XÃ HỘI 104 3.3.1 Đối với vấn đề an ninh phòng thủ chung châu Âu 104 3.3.2 Đối với vấn đề tị nạn nhập cƣ 109 3.3.3 Đối với hợp tác lĩnh vực luật pháp chống tội phạm, chống khủng bố 110 3.4 CHÍNH SÁCH BREXIT CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU 112 3.4.1 Các nguyên nhân bên tác động đến sách Brexit Anh 112 3.4.2 Các nguyên nhân bên nƣớc Anh dẫn đến sách Brexit 113 3.5 TIỂU KẾT 117 CHƢƠNG ĐÁNH GIÁ VÀ TRIỂN VỌNG CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU 120 4.1 ĐÁNH GIÁ CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH VỚI EU TỪ NĂM 1992 ĐẾN NĂM 2016 120 4.1.1 Đánh giá sách Anh EU giai đoạn 1992-2016 từ quan điểm lợi ích quốc gia 121 4.1.2 Đánh giá sách Anh EU theo mơ hình hoạch định tiếp cận ba cấp độ 129 4.2 ĐÁNH GIÁ ẢNH HƢỞNG CỦA CHÍNH SÁCH BREXIT ĐỐI VỚI ANH, KHU VỰC VÀ THẾ GIỚI 132 4.2.1 Đối với nƣớc Anh 132 4.2.2 Đối với EU 134 4.2.3 Ảnh hƣởng Brexit khu vực khác giới .136 4.3 TRIỂN VỌNG CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU TRONG NGẮN HẠN VÀ TRUNG HẠN 138 4.3.1 Chính sách hợp tác kinh tế 138 4.3.2 Chính sách hợp tác an ninh quốc phòng 139 4.3.3 Chính sách hợp tác lĩnh vực khác 141 4.4 GỢI Ý CHÍNH SÁCH CHO VIỆT NAM TRONG QUAN HỆ VỚI ANH VÀ EU 142 4.4.1 Gợi ý sách cho Việt Nam quan hệ với Anh 142 4.4.2 Gợi ý sách cho Việt Nam quan hệ với EU 145 4.5 TIỂU KẾT CHƢƠNG 146 KẾT LUẬN 149 DANH MỤC CÁC CƠNG TRÌNH KHOA HỌC CỦA TÁC GIẢ LIÊN QUAN ĐẾN LUẬN ÁN 152 TÀI LIỆU THAM KHẢO 153 PHỤ LỤC STT DANH MỤC SƠ ĐỒ Sơ đồ 1: Kỳ vọng vai trò Anh giới 49 Sơ đồ 2: Quy trình định Mơ hình Cấp tiến .56 Sơ đồ 3: Quy trình định theo Mơ hình Thể chế 58 Sơ đồ 4: Quy trình định theo Mơ hình Đa nguyên 61 MỞ ĐẦU Lý chọn đề tài Hiện nay, xu hƣớng ngoại giao mở quốc tế hóa - tồn cầu hóa, nghiên cứu sách đối ngoại ngày chiếm vị trí quan trọng cần thiết đặc biệt bối cảnh tồn cầu hóa diễn mạnh mẽ khắp nơi, tính phụ thuộc lẫn quốc gia ngày tăng Trong số này, quan hệ Anh với Liên minh Châu Âu (EU) ví dụ tiêu biểu Nhìn lại lịch sử gắn bó Anh EU, mối quan ngại lãnh đạo nƣớc lớn tổ chức khu vực học giả giới nhân dân Anh tƣơng lai lâu dài mối quan hệ hai đối tác ngày tăng, bối cảnh trƣng cầu dân ý ngày 23/6/2016 Anh diễn với kết nghiêng phía đòi rút Anh khỏi khối EU Thực tế vị trí Anh EU ln bị giới trị học giả giới Việt Nam nghi ngờ Nhiều ngƣời băn khoăn nƣớc Anh ngày ấy, cƣờng quốc đứng nhì giới, lại phải trải qua nhiều lần xin gia nhập Cộng đồng Châu Âu (EC) đƣợc chấp nhận, số nƣớc khác, yếu nhiều, dễ dàng có đƣợc lời mời tham gia liên minh Từ ngày thức tham gia vào EC (năm 1973) sau EU (năm 1992), Anh gần nhƣ chƣa dốc sức vào việc xây dựng châu Âu thống nhất, tồn vẹn Trên trang web thức giới thiệu quốc gia, khu vực Đồng tiền chung Châu Âu (Eurozone), Khu vực Không Biên giới Schengen EU tính đến 11-2017, nƣớc Anh có tên mục “quốc gia thành viên” hoàn toàn khơng có tên hai danh sách quan trọng “Quốc gia sử dụng đồng Euro” “Thành viên tham gia Khu vực Không Biên giới Schengen” Cuộc khủng hoảng kinh tế tài tiền tệ năm 2008-2009, với khủng hoảng ngƣời di cƣ đến EU năm gần gây rạn nứt khó hàn gắn nội EU, làm trầm trọng tính vị kỷ chủ Yes, we have looked also to wider horizons—as have others—and thank goodness for that, because Europe never would have prospered and never will prosper as a narrow-minded, inward-looking club The European Community belongs to all its members It must reflect the traditions and aspirations of all its members And let me be quite clear Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community That is not to say that our future lies only in Europe, but nor does that of France or Spain or, indeed, of any other member The Community is not an end in itself Nor is it an institutional device to be constantly modified according to the dictates of some abstract intellectual concept Nor must it be ossified by endless regulation The European Community is a practical means by which Europe can ensure the future prosperity and security of its people in a world in which there are many other powerful nations and groups of nations We Europeans cannot afford to waste our energies on internal disputes or arcane institutional debates They are no substitute for effective action Europe has to be ready both to contribute in full measure to its own security and to compete commercially and industrially in a world in which success goes to the countries which encourage individual initiative and enterprise, rather than those which attempt to diminish them This evening I want to set out some guiding principles for the future which I believe will ensure that Europe does succeed, not just in economic and defence terms but also in the quality of life and the influence of its peoples [end p3] WILLING COOPERATION BETWEEN SOVEREIGN STATES My first guiding principle is this: willing and active cooperation between independent sovereign states is the best way to build a successful European Community To try to suppress nationhood and concentrate power at the centre of a European conglomerate would be highly damaging and would jeopardise the objectives we seek to achieve Europe will be stronger precisely because it has France as France, Spain as Spain, Britain as Britain, each with its own customs, traditions and identity It would be folly to try to fit them into some sort of identikit European personality Some of the founding fathers of the Community thought that the United States of America might be its model But the whole history of America is quite different from Europe People went there to get away from the intolerance and constraints of life in Europe They sought liberty and opportunity; and their strong sense of purpose has, over two centuries, helped to create a new unity and pride in being American, just as our pride lies in being British or Belgian or Dutch or German I am the first to say that on many great issues the countries of Europe should try to speak with a single voice I want to see us work more closely on the things we can better together than alone Europe is stronger when we so, whether it be in trade, in defence or in our relations with the rest of the world But working more closely together does not require power to be centralised in Brussels or decisions to be taken by an appointed bureaucracy Indeed, it is ironic that just when those countries such as the Soviet Union, which have tried to run everything from the centre, are learning that success depends on dispersing power and decisions away from the centre, there are some in the Community who seem to want to move in the opposite direction We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them re-imposed at a European level with a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels Certainly we want to see Europe more united and with a greater sense of common purpose But it must be in a way which preserves the different traditions, parliamentary powers and sense of national pride in one's own country; for these have been the source of Europe's vitality through the centuries ENCOURAGING CHANGE My second guiding principle is this: Community policies must tackle present problems in a practical way, however difficult that may be If we cannot reform those Community policies which are patently wrong or ineffective and which are rightly causing public disquiet, then we shall not get the public support for the Community's future development And that is why the achievements of the European Council in Brussels last February are so important [end p4] It was not right that half the total Community budget was being spent on storing and disposing of surplus food Now those stocks are being sharply reduced It was absolutely right to decide that agriculture's share of the budget should be cut in order to free resources for other policies, such as helping the less well-off regions and helping training for jobs It was right too to introduce tighter budgetary discipline to enforce these decisions and to bring the Community spending under better control And those who complained that the Community was spending so much time on financial detail missed the point You cannot build on unsound foundations, financial or otherwise, and it was the fundamental reforms agreed last winter which paved the way for the remarkable progress which we have made since on the Single Market But we cannot rest on what we have achieved to date For example, the task of reforming the Common Agricultural Policy is far from complete Certainly, Europe needs a stable and efficient farming industry But the CAP has become unwieldy, inefficient and grossly expensive Production of unwanted surpluses safeguards neither the income nor the future of farmers themselves We must continue to pursue policies which relate supply more closely to market requirements, and which will reduce over-production and limit costs Of course, we must protect the villages and rural areas which are such an important part of our national life, but not by the instrument of agricultural prices Tackling these problems requires political courage The Community will only damage itself in the eyes of its own people and the outside world if that courage is lacking EUROPE OPEN TO ENTERPRISE My third guiding principle is the need for Community policies which encourage enterprise If Europe is to flourish and create the jobs of the future, enterprise is the key The basic framework is there: the Treaty of Rome itself was intended as a Charter for Economic Liberty But that it is not how it has always been read, still less applied The lesson of the economic history of Europe in the 70's and 80's is that central planning and detailed control not work and that personal endeavour and initiative That a State-controlled economy is a recipe for low growth and that free enterprise within a framework of law brings better results The aim of a Europe open to enterprise is the moving force behind the creation of the Single European Market in 1992 By getting rid of barriers, by making it possible for companies to operate on a European scale, we can best compete with the United States, Japan and other new economic powers emerging in Asia and elsewhere [end p5] And that means action to free markets, action to widen choice, action to reduce government intervention Our aim should not be more and more detailed regulation from the centre: it should be to deregulate and to remove the constraints on trade Britain has been in the lead in opening its markets to others The City of London has long welcomed financial institutions from all over the world, which is why it is the biggest and most successful financial centre in Europe We have opened our market for telecommunications equipment, introduced competition into the market services and even into the network itself—steps which others in Europe are only now beginning to face In air transport, we have taken the lead in liberalisation and seen the benefits in cheaper fares and wider choice Our coastal shipping trade is open to the merchant navies of Europe We wish we could say the same of many other Community members Regarding monetary matters, let me say this The key issue is not whether there should be a European Central Bank The immediate and practical requirements are: • to implement the Community's commitment to free movement of capital—in Britain, we have it; • and to the abolition through the Community of exchange controls—in Britain, we abolished them in 1979; • to establish a genuinely free market in financial services in banking, insurance, investment; • and to make greater use of the ecu This autumn, Britain is issuing ecu-denominated Treasury bills and hopes to see other Community governments increasingly the same These are the real requirements because they are what the Community business and industry need if they are to compete effectively in the wider world And they are what the European consumer wants, for they will widen his choice and lower his costs It is to such basic practical steps that the Community's attention should be devoted When those have been achieved and sustained over a period of time, we shall be in a better position to judge the next move It is the same with frontiers between our countries Of course, we want to make it easier for goods to pass through frontiers Of course, we must make it easier for people to travel throughout the Community But it is a matter of plain common sense that we cannot totally abolish frontier controls if we are also to protect our citizens from crime and stop the movement of drugs, of terrorists and of illegal immigrants [end p6] That was underlined graphically only three weeks ago when one brave German customs officer, doing his duty on the frontier between Holland and Germany, struck a major blow against the terrorists of the IRA And before I leave the subject of a single market, may I say that we certainly not need new regulations which raise the cost of employment and make Europe's labour market less flexible and less competitive with overseas suppliers If we are to have a European Company Statute, it should contain the minimum regulations And certainly we in Britain would fight attempts to introduce collectivism and corporatism at the European level—although what people wish to in their own countries is a matter for them EUROPE OPEN TO THE WORLD My fourth guiding principle is that Europe should not be protectionist The expansion of the world economy requires us to continue the process of removing barriers to trade, and to so in the multilateral negotiations in the GATT It would be a betrayal if, while breaking down constraints on trade within Europe, the Community were to erect greater external protection We must ensure that our approach to world trade is consistent with the liberalisation we preach at home We have a responsibility to give a lead on this, a responsibility which is particularly directed towards the less developed countries They need not only aid; more than anything, they need improved trading opportunities if they are to gain the dignity of growing economic strength and independence EUROPE AND DEFENCE My last guiding principle concerns the most fundamental issue—the European countries' role in defence Europe must continue to maintain a sure defence through NATO There can be no question of relaxing our efforts, even though it means taking difficult decisions and meeting heavy costs It is to NATO that we owe the peace that has been maintained over 40 years The fact is things are going our way: the democratic model of a free enterprise society has proved itself superior; freedom is on the offensive, a peaceful offensive the world over, for the first time in my life-time We must strive to maintain the United States' commitment to Europe's defence And that means recognising the burden on their resources of the world role they undertake and their point that their allies should bear the full part of the defence of freedom, particularly as Europe grows wealthier Increasingly, they will look to Europe to play a part in out-of-area defence, as we have recently done in the Gulf NATO and the Western European Union have long recognised where the problems of Europe's defence lie, and have pointed out the solutions And the time has come when we must give substance to our declarations about a strong defence effort with better value for money [end p7] It is not an institutional problem It is not a problem of drafting It is something at once simpler and more profound: it is a question of political will and political courage, of convincing people in all our countries that we cannot rely for ever on others for our defence, but that each member of the Alliance must shoulder a fair share of the burden We must keep up public support for nuclear deterrence, remembering that obsolete weapons not deter, hence the need for modernisation We must meet the requirements for effective conventional defence in Europe against Soviet forces which are constantly being modernised We should develop the WEU, not as an alternative to NATO, but as a means of strengthening Europe's contribution to the common defence of the West Above all, at a time of change and uncertainly in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, we must preserve Europe's unity and resolve so that whatever may happen, our defence is sure At the same time, we must negotiate on arms control and keep the door wide open to cooperation on all the other issues covered by the Helsinki Accords But let us never forget that our way of life, our vision and all we hope to achieve, is secured not by the rightness of our cause but by the strength of our defence On this, we must never falter, never fail THE BRITISH APPROACH Mr Chairman, I believe it is not enough just to talk in general terms about a European vision or ideal If we believe in it, we must chart the way ahead and identify the next steps And that is what I have tried to this evening This approach does not require new documents: they are all there, the North Atlantic Treaty, the Revised Brussels Treaty and the Treaty of Rome, texts written by far-sighted men, a remarkable Belgian—Paul Henri Spaak—among them However far we may want to go, the truth is that we can only get there one step at a time And what we need now is to take decisions on the next steps forward, rather than let ourselves be distracted by Utopian goals Utopia never comes, because we know we should not like it if it did Let Europe be a family of nations, understanding each other better, appreciating each other more, doing more together but relishing our national identity no less than our common European endeavour Let us have a Europe which plays its full part in the wider world, which looks outward not inward, and which preserves that Atlantic community—that Europe on both sides of the Atlantic—which is our noblest inheritance and our greatest strength (Nguồn: https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107332) Phụ lục 3: Điều 50 Hiệp ước Lisbon Article 50 Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period For the purposes of paragraphs and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49 (Nguồn: http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-oneuropean-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html) Phụ lục 4: Nghiên cứu trường hợp tỷ lệ người Anh tham gia kỳ bầu cử EU Case Study: British Participation in the EU (redirected from Britain-in-theEU) Page history last edited by Jake Willis years ago Introduction The European Union is a controversial matter in British politics, with different political parties holding different opinions on participation This page aims to investigate the key influences on turnout and participation in the EU within Britain British Participation in the European Union European Parliament introduced direct elections in 1979, yet a consistently low turnout in the UK seems to suggest a lack of interest, or, as Coxall et al (2003) argue, a 'lack of faith in democracy at the European level' (p 279) Britiain has one of the lowest turnouts in the European Union, and the elections tend to be treated as a chance to comment on the national government's behaviour There tends to be evidence of a general ignorance in the knowledge of the European Union within the UK, as stated by Coxall et al (2003) Europe does not tend to be a key matter of interest to the electorate, apart from issues that are seen to infringe on national matters, such as the Euro, or continued integration The issues that get most interest are often the ones reported in the national media Influences of turnout/participation in Britain The media is an important influence within British politics, and broadcasts are influenced by politicians and the political stances of those with high profiles The European Union faces a challenge in the UK against the mainstream media, often with newspapers taking the stance of the political parties they support For instance, the Daily Express takes a very strong anti-EU stance: "The Daily Express crusade to get Britain out of the EU has won massive support We delivered a petition of 373,000 signatures from readers demanding a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU to 10 Downing Street earlier this year." The EU is perceived as being complicated and confusing, so not understanding it is seen to be easier than trying to grasp the concept The sceptics argue that there is a lack of democracy in the Union and the media has also highlighted the unorthodox manner in which the Lisbon Treaty has been followed Britain is assumed to be Euro-sceptic because it is uneducated, so its general outlook is portrayed through what the media broadcasts Political Parties The opinions of political parties influence their supporters participation in the EU The three main parties all have key stances on Britain's place within the Union, with the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats actively supporting Europe and the Conservatives taking a Eurosceptic stance Smaller British parties also have their own views on the European Union, such as the BNP which, despite an anti-integration stance, won two seats in the last EU elections The Labour party stresses the importance of Britain‟s EU membership in regards to transnational issues, such as climate change and security policies It also pledges to ensure that the EU delivers for British people on jobs, crime and prosperity, backing the Lisbon Treaty The Lib Dems traditionally support the EU, with the leader encouraging Britain to play its full part in the Union Nick Clegg urges citizens to “stand tall” in a vital role regarding big political issues Whilst he backs the Lisbon Treaty, he would like a referendum on Britain‟s continued EU membership to emphasise the positives Although the Conservatives back the EU, they want to stop further political integration and for nation states to regain key law-making powers They oppose the Lisbon Treaty and it was said that a referendum would be held if the party was in power before it comes into force, however, this is no longer the case following the 2010 General Election (BBC, 2009) Alternative political parties also allow British voters the chance to have a strategic say in the United Kingdom's status within the EU The UKIP party believes in a withdrawal from the EU, ending mass immigration and establishing trading relations with former European partners The BNP also agree with a withdrawal, giving indigenous Britons preference in jobs and housing, ending immigration and encouraging a „voluntary repatriation‟ of ethnic minorities The Green Party pushes for an economic rescue plan, conventionally holds the environment of upmost importance and promise a „positive and clean‟ alternative The party are wholly pro-EU, but would also like a democratic reform and clean-up of the Union and a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty (BBC, 2009) Following the 2010 General Election, the coalition government (comprised of the pro-EU Liberal Democrats and the moderate-Conservatives) has stated that any future integration required will be put to a referendum It is hard to predict what the outcome of this would be, especially due to traditionally low turnout of the British electorate Britain and Other European Union States To fully judge citizen participation levels in the EU, it is crucial to examine other countries to determine whether Britain‟s approach is unique or if the Union is generally unpopular throughout As can be seen, UK turnout at European Parliament elections has not taken a general trend Since the first elections in 1999, participation rose until rapidly falling again in 1999 Since then, and despite another rise in 2004, participation has begun to fall In contrast, there has been a significant downward trend in participation across the whole of the European Union, yet this is to be expected as the Union enlarges If new member states not engage their citizens, participation will drop Member States Belgium Denmark Germany Ireland France Italy Luxembourg Netherlands United Kingdom Greece Spain Portugal Sweden Austria Finland Czech Republic Estonia Cyprus Lithuania Latvia Hungary Malta Poland Slovenia Slovakia Bulgaria Romania Average EU turnout However, as can be seen, the UK consistently has one of the lowest turnouts across the entire EU (UK Political Info, 2009) Bibliography BBC (2009) 'At A Glance: Party-by-Party Guide' [online], [Last Accessed 7th May 2011]  Coxall, B; Robins, L and Leach, R (2003) Contemporary British Politics (4th edn), Basingstoke, Palgrave MacMillan  Daily Express (2011) 'Big Fines If Our Public Buildings Fail To Mark Europe Day' [online], [Last Accessed 7th May 2011]  UK Political Info (2009) 'European Parliament Election Turnout 1979-2009' [online], [Last Accessed 8th May 2011]  (Nguồn: http://testpolitics.pbworks.com/w/page/39920084/Britain-in-the-EU) ... KHAI CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU TRONG GIAI ĐOẠN 1992- 2016 80 3.1 CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU TRÊN LĨNH VỰC CHÍNH TRỊ 80 3.1.1 Chính sách sử dụng phiếu phủ đàm phán EU 80 3.1.2 Chính. .. định sách 20 1.2 CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH ĐỐI VỚI EU GIAI ĐOẠN 1992- 2016 24 1.2.1 Các yếu tố ảnh hƣởng đến sách đối ngoại Anh 24 1.2.2 Thực tế điều chỉnh sách Anh với EU giai đoạn 1992- 2016. .. GIÁ CHÍNH SÁCH CỦA ANH VỚI EU TỪ NĂM 1992 ĐẾN NĂM 2016 120 4.1.1 Đánh giá sách Anh EU giai đoạn 1992- 2016 từ quan điểm lợi ích quốc gia 121 4.1.2 Đánh giá sách Anh EU