The recent EU summit that thankfully agreed to keep Ukraine solvent (for the time being) has demonstrated (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjezpd95v71o) that it has great difficulty in reaching controversial decisions – that are the very stuff of politics. This was a MAJOR reason why 52% of British Voters opted for Brexit in 2016.
One of the most significant decisions taken by a British Prime Minister was to rule out joining the Euro. The Right Honourable Gordon Brown, PC, CH wrote himself into the history books as a very significant figure by this decision (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_and_the_euro).
British membership of the Euro was a doomed idea because of the fundamental weakness in the EU’s structure: Member states – naturally and not unreasonably – fight their corner in their own interests – and by extension that of their voters.
Had EU members been prepared to make the significant concessions to make UK membership of the Euro attractive – to many UK voters – the Euro – and by extension the EU – would be in a better position.
What would that have entailed?
#1: Pull a thorn out of Britain’s side by abandoning the Common Fisheries Policy in respect of the UK and the Irish Republic. This would severely prejudice the French and Spanish fishing industries.
#2: Restructure the EU and it’s organs radically:
A: Relocate significant EU institutions as follows: The EU Parliament to be located solely in Strasbourg. The European Court of Justice relocated to the Hague. The EU Commission to remain in Brussels. The European Central Bank to be located in London.
B: Whilst removing fisheries as a sole EU competence and re-making it a national competence, make financial regulation and the commodity and stock markets a sole EU competence with a single EU Bourse (stock exchange and commodity exchanges) located in London with ALL publicly quoted joint stock corporations traded on this exchange.
NB: NO French or Spanish politician could agree to #1! And NO German politician could agree to #2B! Which is why the idea was a non starter!
You see, making London as the financial centre of the EU would have given sufficient momentum to make the Euro a true alternative to the US $ and London a major challenger to New York.
NB: It would also have been imperative to ensure that HS2 was completed to Manchester and Leeds and into central London.
Why this is so importance is fundamental to the economy of all Eurozone members: The USA has a HUGE advantage over other developed “First World” economies. The US $ is the de-facto reserve currency of the world. This means that the USA can borrow more (in proportion to the size of their economy) than any other “First World” economy. This means more debt and lower debt servicing costs than others!
Were the Eurozone to have emerged as a realistic challenger to the US $, EU member states (via the EU) could borrow more and pay less than they do now!
But these things could not and cannot happen. Because EU member states cannot take decisions that their voters would strongly object to. Which is why the idea of a United States of Europe was always an unworkable dream! Which is why I joined UKIP all those years ago!