The decision of Prime Minister David Cameron to veto proposed changes to the Lisbon Treaty in December 2011 has once again reignited debate around the UK’s membership of the European Union. With the hope that the changes would enable the EU member states to confront the serious economic problems generated by the ongoing Eurozone crisis, the move has been treated as a controversial one with potential ramifications for the future of the UK’s negotiating position in Europe [Ref: Guardian]. Some argue that the decision has had little effect other than to alienate the UK from its fellow member states with no obvious benefit to its ‘national interest’, since the changes will be enacted by other means. Others both home and abroad, however, have applauded the choice for generating much needed debate on what some perceive to be deeply undemocratic tendencies within the EU. With the prime ministers of Greece and Italy having stood down and been replaced with unelected ‘technocrats’, partly due to pressure from fellow EU leaders, it is argued that the EU is trading democracy for stability and survival [Ref: Economist]. Given the potential significance of any future decisions over the relationship the UK has with Europe, there have been calls for the government to offer a referendum on membership to its electorate: something not offered since 1975. Importantly, those proposing the referendum differ on their attitudes towards the UK’s relationship with the European Union but, whether pro or anti-EU, agree that giving the electorate a choice would grant legitimacy towards any decision to opt out or further integrate. Opponents to offering referendum, however, argue that such a complex and wide-ranging decision with potentially significant impacts on the UK’s economic relationship with its European neighbours should not be taken at such a sensitive moment, and that any democratic reform would be more effective, and rational, when there is less potentially at stake [Ref: Debating Europe].

The European Union and the democratic deficit
The European Union (EU) is an economic and political partnership between 27 European countries, including the UK. It mainly comprises the European Parliament, which is directly elected every five years, the Council of the European Union, representing the governments of member states, and the European Commission, which proposes new laws to the Parliament and Council, and manages the implementation of policy. Supporters of the EU maintain that it is democratic in that all laws and policies have to be agreed by a directly-elected European Parliament and, more importantly, the parliaments of the member states represented by the Council of the EU. As the union has continued to expand, however, it has received considerable criticism for a ‘democratic deficit’ [Ref: Europa] where the role of national electorates and governments are held as less influential in the decision-making processes than the commissioners and ‘Eurocrat’ officials [Ref: Daily Telegraph]. Following the rejection of the EU Constitution – an attempt to address some of these concerns whilst codifying numerous treaties - by voters in France and the Netherlands in 2005, and the controversial ratification of the similar Lisbon Treaty in 2009 [Ref: BBC News], many argue the EU has become more undemocratic, perhaps overtly anti-democratic, in attempts to evade popular votes in recent years [Ref: OpenDemocracy].

The Eurozone crisis
Since the financial crisis of 2008, there has been further controversy over attempts to maintain the stability of the Eurozone – an economic and monetary union of 17 member states (not including the UK) who share the common currency of the euro. To prevent further bailouts to countries such as Greece, Italy and Ireland and the deepening of the crisis across the Eurozone, European leaders have sought to agree on strict fiscal rules regarding national debt. Enacting the deeply unpopular and controversial austerity measures these require, however, led to the departures of the democratically elected leaders of Greece (George Papandreou) and Italy (Silvio Burlesconi), and their replacement by unelected so-called ‘technocrats’ [Ref: FT]. Some defenders of the EU argue that such measures are short term and necessitated by meeting the demands of the economic crisis – and that the changes were ultimately democratically ratified by the countries’ respective parliaments. Critics argue, however, that it is representative of the ‘democratic deficit’ at the core of the EU [Ref: Telegraph] – and that there is no guarantee that powers granted during the crisis will necessarily be returned at a later date.

Euroscepticism: the English disease?
Since joining the European Economic Community (a forerunner to the EU) in 1973, endorsed by popular referendum in 1975 [Ref: BBC News], the UK has often had a fractious relationship with Europe. There has been a long-standing divide in British politics between Europhiles (who favour closer integration with the union) and those who want greater independence (Eurosceptics). Although the UK is often discussed as a particularly Eurosceptic nation (especially in negotiations over treaties) and is not a member of the Eurozone, it has generally continued to integrate further and is considered an influential member. Given the Conservative Party has traditionally tended towards Euroscepticism, David Cameron has been criticised for failing to offer a manifesto pledge to provide a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty [Ref: Daily Mail]. It is argued that exercising the veto is an attempt to simultaneously appease domestic Eurosceptic supporters while avoiding giving a promised referendum on any further substantial transfer of powers [Ref: Independent]. Both Europhile and Eurosceptic critics at home and in Europe criticise Cameron for hypocrisy; his supporters argue that he is doing what an elected politician should do on the world stage and trying to secure deals which best represent his national electorate.

The referendum
In the UK, even Eurosceptics are divided on the issue of whether the UK should leave the European Union, and it remains an extremely divisive issue. Yet those calling for a referendum vary on their attitudes to membership. Whether pro or anti-EU, proponents of a referendum argue that it would force the government into an honest debate on the merits of membership which has been avoided for many years.  A referendum, they argue, so, would grant democratic legitimacy to any difficult decisions made by a UK government on the European stage: especially if it requires giving away any more national sovereignty to Brussels. Opponents argue, however, that the risk is too great: the UK is too committed – by successive democratically elected governments - to the European Union to leave at this moment without serious repercussions.  If a referendum is called, the government would either be irresponsible in allowing a potentially disastarous vote to leave, or bring democracy into further disrepute by ignoring the public and instead acting in the ‘national interest’. Either way, it is argued, the UK would only weaken its ability to influence much-needed reform once the crisis is managed [Ref: Spiegel Online]. With that in mind, in October 2011 Parliament comprehensively voted down a motion to offer a referendum. For some, this was taken as considerable democratic backing – by elected representatives - to continue the status quo. For others, however, the fact that MPs were encouraged to vote against their own manifesto pledges on a non-binding motion highlighted the undemocratic tendency [Ref: Huffington Post]. On an issue where voters may have their sovereignty eroded through transference of powers, it is maintained they should be asked for their specific consent [Ref: People’s Pledge]. The debate therefore hinges on the extent to which a democracy should be willing to put its faith in public mandate.