In this original book, Mark Baimbridge, of the University of Bradford, and Philip Whyman, of the University of Central Lancashire, study the economic relationship between Britain and the EU. Part 1 includes a cost-benefit analysis of our EU membership, beyond anything that any government has ever dared to do. Parts 2 and 3 examine Economic and Monetary Union in theory and practice. Part 4 explores alternative futures for Britain, including an independent Britain, with alternative economic policies to promote our national economic development.



Their cost-benefit analysis concludes, "EU membership and the momentum towards deeper political and economic integration have consistently undermined UK national interests." From 1973 to 2000, our total cumulated trade deficit with the EU was £90.6 billion, while our trade with the rest of the world was £70.9 billion in surplus. This widening trade gap cost us more than a million manufacturing jobs. The Common Agricultural Policy raises the average family's food bill by £36 a week. We also lose out on the Common Fisheries Policy and the EU budget.



The authors argue that EMU's effects on us would be `overwhelmingly negative'. The conditions for joining would undermine the economy, while burdening British taxpayers. They sum up, "Economic growth would be stymied, unemployment would rise dramatically and the disaster of UK participation in the ERM would be repeated, but this time there would be no easy escape!"



EU supporters say that any autonomy is impossible under globalisation, so that we may as well give up our sovereignty to the EU. But when we left the Exchange Rate Mechanism (the rehearsal for EMU) in 1992, we were able to devalue the pound by 20%, so the economy grew and unemployment fell.



Now, however, the growing integration of the EU threatens what autonomy we still have. The EU Constitution would bind us more tightly, imposing EMU on us whether we like it or not. The authors propose instead that we could choose, as an independent sovereign nation, the economic strategy that we want, so we could rebuild industry to serve the interests of the people, not the minority `political and business elites'.