EU Membership: Contradictory or Integral to the British Constitution?

The British constitutional system, or lack of a written constitution, seemingly represents a legacy of either trust or confidence of the British in their political system to the outside observer. In British Politics: A Very Short Introduction, Tony Wright coveys the transformational nature of the unwritten constitution by outlining its markers of change throughout the last century. Within the first half of the nineteenth century, he states that the dominant constitutional perception supported a democracy characterized by parliamentary legal sovereignty (Wright 23). Since, the United Kingdom has experienced transitions from a unitary state to devolution, a continual shift in power from the House of Lords to the House of Commons, and the effects of Blair’s constitutional revolution. To countries like the US, where the written Constitution supervises the practices of government, the assumingly fluid nature of the British constitution would merit concern for manipulation or corruption, especially in the face of change. But, as exemplified in the country’s acceptance of the constitutional norms of the first half of the century and the constitution’s potential to change with the ebbs of current events, British politics place a certain confidence in the transformational nature of its constitution, a nature that is weighted with tradition.
With such a confidence, it seems contradictory that the United Kingdom conceded to join the European Union in 1972, an institution with guidelines that could potentially undermine the authority of the British constitution. This is a contradiction still debated within today’s society. In Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945, Tony Judt states that the Prime Minister responsible for the United Kingdom’s participation was the “…only political leader since World War Two unambiguously and enthusiastically in favor of joining his nation’s fate to that of its continental neighbors” (Judt 526). Wright echoes this lack of country-wide sentiment, commenting that several citizens felt shortchanged and ignorant in the 1975 referendum (Wright 25). As the European Union has attempted to become even more closely unified, Britain has attempted to find its balance between receiving the benefits of the European Union while asserting a certain independence. Judt explains that their resistance to the common currency “…represented a device for blocking institutional integration” (Judt 716). Overall, in a continual attempt to define its identity, Britain has worked to reconcile its trust in its own independent political system that is continually shifting with other elements of identity, including class, race, and now a collective European identity (Wright 47). While the United Kingdom’s membership to the European Union might be interpreted as a challenge to its unique constitutional set-up, however, I agree with Wright’s claim that EU membership is not a challenge, but rather a part of the constitution, which is ultimately a narrative of the political shifts within the United Kingdom. Alongside the new issues facing nations today, the British constitution, anchored in tradition, will continue to document Britain’s interaction in the continually evolving history of man.