Wrekin MP Mark Pritchard warns of security issues if UK quits EU

Mark Pritchard said he believes Britain will be safer if it remains within the EU.

The Conservative MP, who acknowledges his support for staying in the EU may come as a surprise, also warned that an exit would put Britain's diplomatic leadership "in peril".

"In recent months, I have come to the view that, on balance, Britain should remain in the European Union," he said.

"This may come as a surprise to some of my parliamentary colleagues who might ask: how can an MP who helped lead the so-called 81 rebellion, which called for an EU referendum, and who co-drafted the parliamentary motion calling on the EU to cut its ballooning budget, and at one point, suggested leaving the EU, now be campaigning to stay in Europe?

"These issues need to be separated. Today, there are many Conservative euro-sceptics like me who rightly view the holding of an EU referendum as a necessary democratic re-enfranchisement of the European Deal, and the EU budget-cut motion being more about Brussels understanding Britain's necessary austerity, rather than any act of anti-Europeanism."

The referendum on Britain's membership of the EU is set to happen before December 2017 and could be as early as this summer.

Mr Pritchard warned: "A decision to isolate Britain from Europe will have significant national security implications.

"Firstly, a British exit would end Britain's political and diplomatic counter-balance to France and Germany's strategic clumsiness.

"Britain's geo-political wisdom, lauded by the likes of the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, and many other EU countries, would be silenced."

He said exiting the EU could also lead to the weakening of NATO and would see the European Union lose Britain's diplomatic advice and counsel.

Mr Pritchard said: "Diplomacy is an integral part of national security. This loss of foreign policy 'effect and leverage' would lead to Europe's responses to international conflicts and humanitarian crises being devoid of Britain's input. Britain's collective knowledge and percipience would have been lost."

Mr Pritchard added: "However, by Britain remaining in Europe the likelihood of major crises arising on the continent of Europe are greatly reduced. In an unsafe world, Britain is safer in the EU and Europe is safer with Britain."

Mark Pritchard's statement in full:

"2016 will probably be the year Britain decides its future in Europe. Unlike other Conservative leaders, David Cameron has embarked on a significant renegotiation of Britain's relationship with Europe, calling on Brussels to complete the Single Market, become far more competitive, give a greater role to national parliaments and rightly crack down on welfare abuses. Most of all, after four long decades, the Prime Minister is giving the British people a say on whether they want to stay in the European Union or leave.

In recent months, I have come to the view that, on balance, Britain should remain in the European Union. This may come as a surprise to some of my parliamentary colleagues who might ask: how can an MP who helped lead the so-called 81 rebellion, which called for an EU referendum, and who co-drafted the parliamentary motion calling on the EU to cut its ballooning budget, and at one point, suggested leaving the EU, now be campaigning to stay in Europe?

These issues need to be separated. Today, there are many Conservative euro-sceptics like me who rightly view the holding of an EU referendum as a necessary democratic re-enfranchisement of the European Deal, and the EU budget-cut motion being more about Brussels understanding Britain's necessary austerity, rather than any act of anti-Europeanism.

A decision to isolate Britain from Europe will have significant national security implications. Firstly, a British exit would end Britain's political and diplomatic counter-balance to France and Germany's strategic clumsiness.

Britain's geo-political wisdom, lauded by the likes of the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, and many other EU countries, would be silenced. An exit would bereft Europe of the elder Anglo-statesman; a country that brings huge international experience, a voice of political reason, diplomatic pragmatism and is a key driver of EU economic liberalism. Abandoning Europe would only advance France and Germany's European grip, and over time, could undermine British geo-political interests.

Secondly, Britain's exit could also lead to the weakening of NATO, with Germany and France extending Europe's own defence structures and budgets, such as the European Defence Agency. In itself not a hostile undertaking, but soon, defence complementarity could be replaced by defence competition, undermining an alliance that has safeguarded Europe's security for nearly seven decades. This weakening of NATO would be a huge strategic miscalculation by Europe and would embolden NATO's enemies.

Thirdly, a British exit would see the European Union lose Britain's diplomatic advice and counsel. Diplomacy is an integral part of national security. This loss of foreign policy 'effect and leverage' would lead to Europe's responses to international conflicts and humanitarian crises being devoid of Britain's input. Britain's collective knowledge and percipience would have been lost. Europe's diplomacy will have become British-lite, and over time, proven and collective European foreign policy would be replaced by a Single European foreign policy, a Franco-German dominated foreign policy - excluding Britain. Less Atlanticist and higher risk.

If Britain tears itself away from the European Union, British politicians and diplomats will no longer sit at Europe's top diplomatic decision-making tables - leading, influencing, encouraging, restraining, warning, and continuing to offer Britain's diplomatic astuteness on matters land, air and sea. Britain's departure will lead to Europe's foreign policy making capability being downgraded and fundamentally weakened.

Over the horizon, this new weakness would present unforeseen and new national security challenges to Britain. Britain has a unique place in the world, it's diplomatic voice and reach is empowered by three essential global pillars: the United Nations, the Commonwealth and the European Union. A British exit would put Britain's diplomatic leadership in peril. Britain's diplomatic trinity would have ended.

There are some who say, 'who cares' if Europe fails if Britain leave Europe - a type of leaving Europe to its own devices approach. This is short-sighted and ill-judged. Britain's modern history shows Europe's crises all too often become Britain's crises too. What happens over there does matter over here. Two major European wars testify to that.

Asserting that Europe needs Britain more than Britain needs Europe is probably a minority argument even amongst Europhiles let alone eurosceptics like myself. It is a matter of judgment. However, what is clear, is that when it comes to national security and international diplomacy, Europe and Britain need each other. This month's Iranian nuclear deal proves that.

An insecure Europe is a strategic problem for Britain whether Britain remains in the European Union or not. However, by Britain remaining in Europe the likelihood of major crises or conflicts arising on the continent of Europe are greatly reduced.

In an unsafe world, Britain is safer in the European Union and Europe is safer with Britain at the very heart of Europe's diplomatic and foreign policy decision making."