Let UK government come clean on Brexit
The impact of a ‘no-deal’ or ‘cliff-edge’ arrangement is so much more severe than any other potential outcome that it must be avoided at any cost
being cut by 500,000 posts and nearly £50 billion (Dh252.5 billion) less investment by 2030 than would be the case if we remained in the single market and customs union.
In London, there could be 87,000 fewer jobs and the capital’s economic output could be 2 per cent lower by 2030 than predicted under the status quo. That would mean fewer opportunities for the next generation and poorer living standards than would otherwise be the case — a huge human cost to pay.
Perhaps most worryingly for Britain’s future, it also shows that the rest of the UK is set to suffer significantly more than London. The independent study concluded that by 2030, economic output across the rest of the UK would be on an average between 3 per cent and 3.3 per cent lower compared with between 1.9 per cent and 2.1 per cent down in London. That means that geographic inequalities across the UK would widen even further, rather than narrowing.
Contributory factors
These inequalities — and the feeling that “only wealthy bankers in London” benefit from the EU — was one of the contributory factors behind the EU referendum result.
The impact of a “no-deal” or “cliff-edge” Brexit is so much more severe than any other potential outcome that it must be avoided at all costs. However, the government’s chaotic approach to the negotiations and unhelpful posturing about “being willing to walk away” means it is still a very real threat.
So I am calling on the government to commission and then publish — in full — their analysis of every single option available for Britain to avoid a “cliff-edge” scenario. That means their analysis should look at what we should do if we are unable to secure a good deal from the negotiations, if the negotiations collapse, or if the final deal fails to be ratified by either the British parliament, European parliament or a number of EU member-states.
This must include all options for extending the Article 50 timeline. It must include all options for an extended interim deal — beyond the two-year period currently on the table. And it must include legal analysis of the options available for withdrawing Article 50 altogether in the worst-case scenario of the UK crashing out of the EU with no deal.
Despite the doom and gloom, there still remains a clear path for the government to protect jobs and growth for future generations: Prioritising a deal that keeps Britain in the single market and customs union in the long term. They must change paths before it’s too late.