The UK was not the only country to have doubts about surrendering control over national policymaking. In the early years of the European Economic Community (EEC), the French, under the presidency of Charles de Gaulle, were opposed to general economic integration. They wanted to protect national sovereignty, including in the social domain. They therefore rejected any major transfer of competence to a supranational institution. Since the UK government had been reluctant to enter into any commitment without knowing what the terms on offer meant or whether their national interests would be best served, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands had moved forward without the UK in launching a common market. At the outset, the UK thus forfeited the ability to influence the shape of European social policy during the EEC's formative years, foreshadowing its difficult relationship with European institutions and other member state governments in the decades to come.

Even before the EEC Treaty was agreed, the aspirant member states concluded that an interventionist social policy would be needed to avoid ‘social dumping’, if disparities in social protection provisions between member states were not to create an obstacle to mobility of labour and capital (Gold, 1993: 14). However, consensus was not easily achieved between the six founding member states on how such a social dimension should be framed and delivered. This chapter explains:

• • why the EEC had a social dimension;

• • what its characteristics were;

• • why social policy was, from the outset, a contentious area;

• • what the EEC/EU's social policy treaty commitments meant for the UK referendum and withdrawal negotiations.

These questions are examined with reference to the themes recurring throughout the book, namely: the relationship between the economic and social dimensions in European policy development; the efforts made by member states to safeguard national sovereignty over their social protection systems; the distribution of competences in the social domain between EU institutions and members states and the potential for their development; the associated shift from harmonisation of national systems to their coordination in recognition of national differences; and the contribution of UK social policy to European integration.