With the incredibly long-winded process of passing the Lisbon Treaty now seemingly complete, and with the resultant reluctant climb-down by the Conservative party on its promise to hold a referendum on said treaty, the British relationship with the EU has once again been headline news. The focus on the Eurosceptic debate of handing over British sovereignty to Brussels on the one hand and the pro-European response of decrying the ignorance of such a position because the EU is great and Britain needs to get its house in order on the other, exposes the core problem: there is a massive knowledge gap in what the EU is all about and how that can both benefit and hinder British ambitions. In short, I do not know why, for example, the Lisbon Treaty is a good thing or indeed why it is bad thing, for the United Kingdom.

Neither the in-the-know technocratic discussion on the finer points of EU legislation nor the blunt declaration that the UK must not sell itself to the continent, and beg in Brusels, cap in hand, forevermore, are sufficient for me to develop a considered opinion. I am not an expert on European affairs (this much, I suspect, is already painfully clear) and , to be honest, though I want to know more, I find the pro-European position to which I think I would naturally gravitate clouded by an insider discussion of those steeped in complex bureaucratic knowledge who can’t be bothered to go back to basics.

Where is the EU going? What is its aim? What are the national benefits and what are the costs? What the hell is this whole thing about?

Certainly I find Timothy Garton-Ash more persuasive than Daniel Hannan. Certainly the latent Europhobia of the British public can be held accountable for the lack of a clear, public expression of why Europe is simply good for this country. But surely this is the problem. Politicians appear terrified, at least those important enough for me to pay attention to and for the news to cover, of going on record to say why it all makes sense. The result is that the debate is dominated by facile arguments over the imminent destruction of the proud British nation or a ludicrously over-complicated debate on EU procedures, both of which I find very hard to get involved in. I am a child, eager for learning, and I need the debate to be simplified but not in such a way that I am co-opted. I think the EU is a good thing. I can understand why Britain should play a prominent role in its affairs from a basic, power politics, better in than out, perspective. What I don’t definintely know is, on merit, the clear case for, the clear case against and what the overall plan for Britain in Europe, or indeed European integration as a whole, is.

I accept the fault is largely my own for not doing more research but if I, an interested observer with a mid-level ambition to educate myself, am essentially ignorant, what of those who are not driven to seek out further information? I want to have an honest debate, or rather, I want to observe an honest debate. My position as a johnny-come-lately to the argument however means that no-one will slow down to let me make my mind up on the fundamentals of the issue. I am sure I am not alone