Brexit implications

Vote leave supporters may not get what they bargained for. They have probably taken aim at the wrong people and blamed them for  the predicament of the country.

Unfortunately, the poor and disadvantaged will not see their lot improving. Since the 1970's there has been a redistribution of wealth. This has been from the poor to the rich. It started when council houses were sold to private individuals and the proceeds of the sales were not re-invested in more council and social housing to replace the properties which were divested. The private sector for housing has never been able to provide sufficient houses for the growing population.

Successive governments have sold valuable government assets such as the railways, the post office and the energy industries to shore up public finances. As Harold Macmillan put it: the nation has sold off the family silver - he was an ex-Conservative Prime Minister. Some industries such as the car industry or telecommunications benefit from privatisation and these sell offs have benefited the economy in general. But the sale of the housing stock and other key industries has only exacerbated transfer of wealth and power from the people to corporate organisations.

The de-industrialisation of the economy has contributed to a loss of real earnings so that wages have hardly risen in 30 years. The transfer of the means of production to other nation states has also resulted in a loss of earning power. Trade union power has been emasculated so that workers rights and living standards have been cut without challenge. Millions of  people have been forced into low paid self-employment or zero-hours contracts and they are struggling to just feed their families let alone pay bills. Hundreds of thousands are relying on food-banks to make ends meet.

All in all the re-distribution of wealth and reduced earning power has meant that large sections of our society are living without hope of improvement in their living standards. Millions of our citizens have simply been left behind and they have been failed by both major political parties. Millions of people have been forced to turn to obtaining credit from "loan sharks" to make their lives just about bearable.

They are victims of a lack of social housing so that many have to pay almost un-affordable rents to private landlords to find a place to rest their heads. Millions of working people just want to be able to hold their heads up high. They want decent jobs that pay decent wages so that they can have a half decent life and pay their way without hand outs. It is no wonder that they want to kick out against the establishment.

The EU commission is responsible for none of this - all of our wounds are self inflicted.

The British economy, in general, has prospered in recent years after it came out of the financial crisis of 2007/08.

The British economy in the main, however, is a low productivity one which depends on  a source of low paid labour which is flexible and which can survive the economic tribulations of zero hours contracts and lay offs. These low paid workers are young and do not have families. And, like all young people without children they are prepared to move house and live in multiple occupation flats. Only young immigrants can tolerate these working conditions.

There is another British economy which requires high skilled workers in information technology, finance,telecommunications, medicine and aerospace etc. There is a shortage of these skills coming from the indigenous population and the only source of these skills is immigrants.

Oh yes, immigration, half of the voters in the referendum were frightened of it, Some of those voters were just xenophobes and many were racists. The poor and disadvantaged voted leave out of protest. Some of the voters were just interested in sovereignty but they all made common cause believing that reducing immigration would solve all our or their problems. It won't as will be seen over the next five to ten years.

The trouble is Britain's economy sucks in immigrants and it cannot grow without them. The economic model relies on either low paid workers or pinching skilled and well educated people from other nations. The Vote Leave leaders have promised economic sunshine but if their model economy is to grow it has to suck in even more immigrants.

If the Vote Leave project fails then the economy will go into recession and then hurrah most of the immigrants will go home. But then many many British people will lose their jobs and the economy will not be able to afford more hospitals, creches and doctors. The housing market will collapse and there will still be a shortage of social housing. Unemployment will bring down wages and the economy will not be able to afford child benefit. We shall be out of the single market and freedom of movement restrictions will mean that young people will have nowhere to go to find work.

There is only one way to help the poor and disadvantaged and bring down the need to import cheap labour. We need a new economic model which re-distributes the wealth and earnings of the nation in favour of the poor and disadvantaged. This will not be achieved by some sort of dangerous ultra-left wing or ultra right wing revolution. We need one nation type politicians such as Clement Attlee or Harold Macmillan to do something for the poor and the struggling middle classes. We need to build houses, hospitals and doctors surgeries. We need an education system that produces well rounded students. We need creches and good health care for our children.We need a workforce that can afford to move location with their  families to fill well paid jobs. We need a more productive society. However, to achieve peaceful and sustainable  change it will take years. Some people may not have the patience so we could be in for a rough ride. Some politicians are completely opposed to changing the economic model so the situation could become even worse.

Unfortunately the "efficient markets" philosophy which has monopolised economic policy since the 1970's cannot provide an economy which provides for the poor and the struggling middle classes as well as for the rich.  Our country has enough resources to provide a decent standard of living for all our poor and disadvantaged people and our immigrants who have contributed enormous sums of wealth to our economy; but our country chooses not to distribute the wealth and income anywhere near equitably.

Vote Leave politicians are going to provide us with more of the same old economic story. We need strong leaders with a completely different vision - come back Attlee and Supermac.

If we cut ourselves off from the European single market to spite our economic faces, in the vain hope of reducing immigration, then we could suffer and the poor will suffer most. There are many Europeans who think the same way as me . It would be better to unite with them to find a better economic solution for all Europeans rather than just carry on with business as usual but without the Bulgarian strawberry pickers. Do you want to see the fruits of an economic recovery left rotting in the field?

The Brexit route to the land of milk and honey and opportunity

I am a Remain supporter. I have no intention of answering any comment from a Leave supporter as I shall not be able to convince you otherwise.

Those wavering about how to vote should consider the following.

In 1975 when we had the last referendum I voted to leave the EEC. It was a fifty-fifty decision for me and when I left the voting booth I realised I had voted with my heart rather than with my head and I had made a mistake.

At the time the vote was considered to be a once in a lifetime event and if Britain had voted to leave I fully expected that to be irrevocable.

In 1975 it would have been possible to disentangle ourselves from the EEC as it was then with relative ease. Now it will be a problem as Britain is intertwined with the EU both economically, socially and culturally.

Before we joined the EEC, in 1973, Britain was considered as the sick man of Europe. We suffered from inflation, balance of payments problems, runs on the pound and industrial strife.

Our country has changed enormously and we have caught up with our European neighbours who before 1973 were surging ahead and out competing us.

Now some members of the political establishment are trying to remove us from the EU project. These members of the establishment have very similar attitudes now as then.  When General De Gaulle said “Non” when we first applied to join the EEC in the 1960s the attitude was: “How dare Johnny Foreigner tell us what to do”? It was the clarion call.

The EU Commission does not dictate policy to any European state. It drafts legislation and implements it. The legal and political decisions are made by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament. The Council of Ministers consists of the elected heads of government of all EU states and the European Parliament.  Not perfect but consider this: Britain’s House of Lords is not elected. Our Head of State is not elected and anyway all of the monarch’s powers are stripped away to be delegated to the Prime Minister and the Cabinet: without a vote. Where is the British democracy in all this?

We have not lost any sovereignty from being part of the EU. We share our sovereignty. We have shared our sovereignty for years with Ireland since they became independent. We have had a common travel area with Ireland and Irish citizens are legally not regarded as foreigners in the UK and vice versa. We can vote in each other’s elections for parliament when we take up residence. The common travel area has worked well for Britain and Ireland for decades just as the EU has worked well for Britain and all other member states.

We pool our sovereignty with Nato and if Iran attacks Turkey we are legally obliged to come to their assistance; you or your sons and daughters might be called up to die on Turkey’s behalf. I presume “Brexiters” want us to regain our sovereignty and leave Nato too: sorry they don’t and their hypocrisy is exposed.

Britain is an integral part of the EU. Yes, we do contribute 350 million a week to the budget but much of this is returned to us directly. The rest of our money is invested in the EU and we benefit from this indirectly. It is not just us and them as Britain has considerable say on how the EU budget is spent and invested.

Californian citizens contribute more to the USA budget than Wyoming citizens do, but Californians do not whinge about this as the have to foresight and generosity to help poorer states in an enlightened form of self-interest.

Yes, there is free movement of labour and this is a good thing. The EU is based on the principles of free movement of capital, goods, services and labour. You can’t have free movement of capital, goods and services without the free movement of labour. Britain will not get a free trade agreement with Europe unless it agrees to free movement of labour.

David Cameron was right; the EU was formed to promote peace in European after decades of vicious war. The EU works to maintain the peace within Europe’s borders. No two fully democratic states have gone to war with each other. All EU members must be democratic states before they join. The spread of democracy encourages peace.

The EU has been a source of inspiration for Britain since the dark days of 1972 and we are now reasonably well placed economically. But there are clouds on the horizon. If the EU or the US falls then they take us with them. We cannot afford to be hubristic as the difficult days of 2008 and 2009 could return for us and our partners. We need to leverage off the strength of the US and the EU and promote sustainable growth in the West in a spirit of co-operation.

The “Brexiters” have no plan for what will happen if we leave the EU. They are in disagreement about immigration, free trade and freedom of movement and this is not a good prospect for a political and economic settlement with the rest of the EU or the US. I might have been prepared to vote Leave and go for the Norwegian option if it meant that all the squabbling would stop. There is no plan other than it will be alright on the night. Vote Leave is not an option for me.

It won’t be alright on the night. If we impose work permits, visas or restrictions and extra taxes on EU citizens after we leave, then EU will do the same to us. There are hundreds of thousands of UK citizens who live and work or retire happily in the rest of the EU so why make life more difficult for them?

The claim that Britain is the 5^th richest country in the world and that we can do what we like with the EU which will bend over and give us what we want, is rubbish. Since the end of the Second World War our power to act alone has been declining. If you want evidence of this then read the history of the 1956 Suez crisis when the UK invaded Egypt which went against  US geo-political interests. The US forced Britain to withdraw by merely hinting that that they would sell UK government bonds to cause a run on the pound.

 The US sees Britain’s membership of the EU as part of their geo-political interests and they will not take too kindly to us leaving so they will stall a trade agreement.

Wise up - Britain is no longer a global power, we cannot throw our weight around either economically or militarily; we need to be part of strong economic blocks and alliances. We cannot act alone.

If we leave the EU the sun will not shine forever on the British. The promise of economic nirvana with "Brexiters" leading the way is an empty one. 

If you want to see the pound plummet on the 24^th of June 2016 and our financial services industry disappear to Frankfurt and New York then vote leave.

"Brexiter" implies that Britain will be less secure if we leave the EU

A leading "Brexiter" has proposed that prime minister David Cameron should immediately introduce emergency security legislation to protect the security of the UK upon leaving the EU. Why would the prime minister need to do this if, as the "Brexit" campaign contends, Britain will be safer when we leave the EU?

This proposal is ill conceived nonsense.

What are the hidden dangers of leaving the EU ? Please would the "Brexit" campaign like to inform us all?

It is irresponsible that we should break our treaty obligations just to go it alone on security  and immigration during the period when we negotiate an exit from the EU. Who would trust a country that reneges on its treaty obligations? Would the US trust us to be a loyal NATO member? How would reneging on our treaty obligations make us safer?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3577984/Gove-Laws-strengthen-UKs-borders-follow-quickly-Brexit.html

Since 1973, when the UK and Ireland joined the EU, the only EU citizens who have been involved in terrorists atrocities in our islands have been from the United Kingdom or Ireland . Some 3,000 citizens were killed by terrorists related incidents during the Northern Ireland troubles. The victims were killed, in the main, by UK born terrorists. The 2005 terrorists attacks perpetrated in London were were made by UK citizens. Michael Gove seems to have conveniently forgotten this history.

During the Northern Ireland troubles the British and Irish people were sensible enough not to have demanded that we suspended the Common Travel Area between our countries, or that we should have deported British or Irish citizens, or erected a border fence between the North and South of Ireland. The Northern Ireland troubles were resolved by two independent states pooling their sovereignty to cooperate on security and above all to improve the political process that led to peace. If  Britain and Ireland had buried their heads in the sand then the Northern Ireland troubles would have continued until this day.

The overwhelming majority of EU citizens who live in the UK are peaceful and law abiding and they are not a threat to national security. The EU, and its citizens, is no more of a threat to Britain than Ireland is.

In the UK about 6,000 people die from accidents in the home. This means that since 2005 about 60,000 people have died from accidents where they feel safe. It is far more dangerous to stay at home than run the gauntlet of terrorism on the streets of the UK. Who are the real scaremongers the prime minister or the "Brexiteers"? We need to have a sense of proportion about the dangers of terrorism and not use it as part of a political blame culture.

The British police and their colleagues in MI5, MI6 and GCHQ have worked very effectively to keep us safe from malicious terror. We shall be safer still if we co-operate fully with the EU - just as we do with the US and Canada. If we have to pool some sovereignty to do this, just as we pool our sovereignty with NATO, then I am all in favour. Britain makes a considerable contribution to the safety and security of Europe. A safer Europe means a safer UK. The safety of Europe will not be improved by Britain leaving the EU.

Vote To Leave the EU -mmmmmmm

Way back in 1975 I voted to leave the EEC but for me it was a 50 50 decision and I had not made up my mind until I entered the voting booth. My head was telling me to stay in and my heart was telling me to leave. At the time I had lots of friends from Australia and they went some way to convincing me that somehow Britain was letting them and the Commonwealth down.

When I came out of the polling booth I realised that I had made a mistake but it was too late to go back and ask for my ballot paper to be changed. I was glad that Britain voted to stay in the EU.

The nation had made an historic decision, one which should have been final. After the vote it was time to get on with our lives: Britain had made a democratic and sovereign decision to remain with our European partners. I never thought for one moment that we would be having the same arguments again.

After the EEC was formed, in 1957, Britain was left out in the economic cold, so it persuaded states such as Norway and Ireland to join EFTA or the European Free Trade Association to act as a counter balance to the EEC. The EEC, however, forged ahead economically; much more than Britain or EFTA. The British Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan realised that Britain's economic future lay with the EEC and he started negotiations for Britain to Join the EEC. His ambitions were thwarted when in January 1963 General De Gaulle as president of France said "Non".

Many of the same types of people who now want to leave the EU were rather miffed by the dismissal of Britain's application by De Gaulle.  The British view then was:"why should a foreigner tell Britain what it cannot or can do?". Unfortunately,back then as now, Britain was not economically strong enough to impose its will.

Britain finally joined the EEC in 1973 under the Edward Heath government. The arguments in both the the Labour party and the Conservative party did not stop so the Labour Party prime minister, Harold Wilson, called a referendum to satisfy the demands of leave campaigners. The general population including me were quite happy to agree with the status quo and at the time there was not much popular demand for a referendum.

In 1975 the referendum was held to decide once and for all Britain's fate. I accepted that now Britain had to wholeheartedly take its place in the EU and to a certain extent it  did.

Britain has benefited enormously from its membership of the EU it has progressed both socially, economically and politically. I have benefited from marrying a European and I have worked in European Union without restriction and without any bureaucracy to deal with. The EU has also benefited. Britain helped to reform agricultural and fisheries policies and it has promoted free trade without financial and bureaucratic barriers. Britain was a sad inward looking place in the 1960's and early 1970's; we only had the Beatles to cheer about and they had broken up.

Britain is now a socially progressive and economically vibrant country. So is the EU. Both Britain and the EU have their economic difficulties. It is hubristic for "Brexiters" to claim that the UK is now so much better off than the rest of the EU. Our future in or out of the EU depends upon the success of the EU and if they fall then so will we.

If we had not joined the EU or we had left after the 1975 referendum we would probably have been forced by economics to join the EEA: just like Norway. We would have been paying into the EU coffers to achieve a free trade agreement. We would have had to accept free movement of labour and we would have had to accept that we changed our trading laws to meet EU regulations.

The modern day "Brexiter" would have had to have found other reasons to leave the EEA. And,of course, that would have been immigration. The facts of the matter are that immigration  is very difficult to control. More people come to Britain from outside the EU than from within it. We have absolute control over non-EU immigration but the numbers continue to rise. We just have to accept that Britain is going to attract many immigrants so let's get on with our lives and welcome them.

The Vote Leave economic arguments are failing, so I expect them to concentrate on the fear of immigration to achieve their aims. But the British are not fooled that easily. The benefits of free trade are not outweighed by the dis-benefits if immigration.  Immigrants more than pay their way and they have helped to keep our economy growing during hard economic times. They have skills that we cannot survive without . They keep many businesses going and they help to keep the NHS working.
Without immigrants we would be worse off. If we ask our guests  to get get visas  before they live and work in the UK then the EU will reciprocate. We do not want or need to have a "trade war" in people.

It  seems to me that many "Brexit" politicians want to be big fish in a small pond. They want to tell people what to do . They cannot achieve this in Europe so they want to leave the EU so that they are left alone to push the British around. Their promise that they will control immigration is there just to ensure that Britain will leave the EU.  This promise will be broken either because many of the "Brexiters" do not care about immigration or "real politik" economics will demand the free movement of labour between the EU and Britain.

Britain's economy is too intertwined with the EU for us to leave without pain. Likewise, we have too many people from the rest of the EU to play games with their future. Also, we should recognise that we could be playing fast and loose with the future of the many hundreds of thousands of British citizens who have freely chosen to work or live in the rest of the EU.

The best course of action is to vote to remain and let that be the end of  the referendums.

The one reason for remaining in EU which overrides everything else - Peace.

The EEC, now the EU, was formed  by the six original states: France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Luxembourg, when they signed the Treaty of Rome in 1957. The EEC officially came into being in 1958.

The reason to create the EEC was not just economic it was also political. It was vital that Europe should not suffer again from the horrors of the two World Wars which started in Europe in the twentieth century. The first world war saw millions of young men dying under horrific conditions in the trenches and front lines. The USA was dragged into the war and so was the British Commonwealth or Empire as it was then.

The League of Nations formed after the First World War failed to prevent the even more horrific and terrifying World War Two. Not only did thousands of service men suffer but millions of civilians suffered death or serious injury. We saw the holocaust where over 6 million innocent Jewish people were murdered because of their race. Hundreds of thousands of innocent Gypsies and Slavic people were murdered because they appeared different. There was an orgy of xenophobic slaughter and war crimes.

Modern day xenophobes would do well to reflect upon this - you could become the victim.

The leaders of Europe did reflect upon this and one of the best ways of preventing the same humanitarian crimes happening again was to form the EEC. The EEC would encourage free trade between the peoples of Europe. Freedom of movement to find work would encourage friendship between the common people of Europe to promote friendship and peace. The ideal was to make war unthinkable not just because the economies of Europe would become intertwined but because the peoples of Europe, at a grass roots level, would create  a political consensus to prevent their leaders from starting unnecessary and cruel wars.

If you look at the last thousand years of European history  we have had uncountable wars culminating in the most cruel war of all: World War Two.  The EU has created an environment of peace between its member states. A peace that has lasted more than fifty years. Britain joined the EU in 1973 and it has enjoyed increasing prosperity and cultural advancement in that time. There have been economic setbacks for both Britain and the rest of the EU. However, in the main, all citizens of the EU have enjoyed peace and security and the prospect of a brighter future if they wanted to work for it.

It is easy for relatively peaceful countries to fall back into war. Yugoslavia and Ukraine are two European examples. When Yugoslavia broke up because of severe nationalist influences we saw war between the former states quickly take hold. We saw war crimes being committed. Within a year a peaceful country had descended into chaos. The former states of Yugoslavia now want to agree a rapprochement. Croatia and Slovenia have already achieved this by joining the EU and now it is the turn of Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia to do the same.  The EU is their key to achieving peace and friendly national relations again.

Ukraine went from hosting the European football championships one year to waging a civil war a couple of years later. The dangers of disunity and xenophobia are clear to all.

Peace does not come easy and it needs to be worked at. The EU, The Ukraine and Russia must come to an agreement to stop the war in the Ukraine and prevent it from ever happening again. Britain can play a constructive and creative role in achieving a peace settlement to improve the security for all of Europe.

It would be a mistake for Britain to leave the EU as it could encourage disunity not just in Britain itself but also in Europe. Dark forces could arise once more to spoil progress.

In June, we shall be voting to remain or leave the EU; we will not be voting to ban or restrict immigration. I am afraid to say that the British population is being manipulated by fear of immigration to leave the EU.

Of course, the mass migration of people creates problems but schools, hospitals and other infrastructure can be built to mitigate the economic effects of immigration and emigration. We can plan for this. We already have a clear idea of how many people will be living in our country in 2030. We can build our infrastructure based on the extra wealth that immigrants from Europe and other countries create. We are not helpless; we are a resourceful and well organised country and we can easily accommodate the workers coming here if we have the will to do it.

What is the point of complaining about people who come to work in Britain and pay their way and contribute?Why not welcome them and do something to improve their lives? Many of the foreign workers will return home. It would be better if they went home with a good feeling about the British. Economies perform in cycles and our cycle is out of synchronisation with the rest of Europe. One day the tables will be turned and British workers may feel the need to emigrate to the rest of Europe to find employment. Freedom of movement to work is a precious commodity so lets not lose it or waste it because of animosity between neighbours.

It is difficult to mitigate the effects of disliking or even hating people from neighbouring countries and if we allow ourselves and the people of Europe to become xenophobic because of our actions then we are treading into dangerous territory once again.

I say to the people who want to leave the EU because you do not like foreigners that you should think again and be careful what you wish for. Despite the difficulties the future will be brighter for both you and your children and grand children if we stay united to our friends across the channel.

Peace needs hard work. Above, all it needs good will towards your neighbours and a willingness to cooperate with them in a sense of enlightened self-interest. Why not vote for continuing peace?

EU Remain campaign needs some big hitters from all the political parties

The Remain campaign is faltering and is failing to counter much of the propaganda  of the Leave campaigns. " Vote Leave" passion and misrepresentation of the facts is triumphing over reason and a hard headed consideration of why we should remain in the EU out of enlightened self-interest. It appears that the only passionate political voice to remain is coming from David Cameron. No other party leaders are setting aside factional interests to support him. The Labour party leadership is very lukewarm and the Liberal leadership seems embarrassed to raise its voice.

I am fearful that if no other leaders are prepared to make a passionate but cogent and reasoned case for remaining in the EU then Britain will vote to leave. We will then face government by people who have misrepresented the EU and how it operates to the British people.

The EU Commission does not and cannot dictate to any member state what to do. The European Council of Ministers and the European parliament make European Law. The Council of Ministers is the main power broker and it consists of the elected heads of government of all the member states. The EU Commission just acts like the British civil service.

The EU does not dictate to us how we run our affairs; we still retain the Monarchy, the House of Lords, the House of Commons, our own Judicial System, the established Church of England and the NHS. None of these institutions have been in any danger from the EU since we joined in 1973.

Silly myths about EU interference in our major laws or way of life have been perpetrated by malign politicians and newspapers, but now some of these have been debunked by the House of Commons Treasury Committee. The EU has not banned children under 8 from blowing up balloons. It has not banned Britain from re-cycling teabags and it has not legislated for a one size fits all coffin. It is time that we had a grown up debate devoid of pettifogging.

There are many problems which Britain and the EU have to solve. How do we replace the failed economic model of neo-liberalism and with what – Keynesianism, Democratic Socialism or enlightened Capitalism? How do we solve the abuse of corporate power? How do we provide good well paid jobs for all our citizens? How do we provide good health services and how do we pay for them? How do we provide for a good clean environment? How do we maintain the peace that the EU has promoted in Europe for the last 50 years?

We need to solve the problem of refugees. The only way we can stop this humanitarian crisis is to stop the wars. The EU did not start any war and it is disingenuous for “Brexiters” to claim that the EU is responsible for this almost insoluble humanitarian issue.

From a security point of view it is obvious that we need to co-operate fully with our European partners; but we will not be able to do this as effectively outside of the EU.

Britain and Europe are stronger if we tackle our common problems together. We all have a shared history. We share the same, cultural, social and political values.  We can solve all these problems together and make a more prosperous and peaceful future. Where is the “Brexiter” vision of the future? There isn't one. Waving the flag and crying that: “we have got the world’s 5^th biggest economy” is simply not good enough.

If we vote to leave the EU then what guarantee do we have that the politicians that replace David Cameron will pay much attention to Britain and its place in the world? Out of political malice the “Brexiters” might do nothing more than promote their own self-interest. Their political colours and attitudes have been exposed by their egregious misrepresentations.  Britain will be left alone without a vision for its future but worst of all its unemployed, sick and disabled will be left to fend for themselves but without hope.

The Remain politicians must rise to the challenge.  Britain’s future in the hands of the “Brexiters” looks bleak.

Without the EU Britain's power in the world will be seriously weakened

Below is the text of a letter that I sent to a major "Brexit" newspaper; it was not published of course.

The business affairs of Tata Steel UK demonstrate the weakness of Britain’s economic position when it tries to act alone and not in concert with our European partners. China is dumping cheap steel into world markets and this form of commercial activity could destroy steel production in many countries including our own.

The United States has imposed a tariff on Chinese steel to nip dumping onto the American market in the bud. The EU Commission has proposed that the European Union deploys “Trade Defence Instruments (TDI)” to protect our European steel industry. Britain has blocked this. And, of course, the Commission is powerless to over-rule Britain.

Britain has been trying to attract Chinese investment in infrastructure projects in the UK. Perhaps I am being churlish to suggest that Britain’s arm was twisted to block the EU deployment of a TDI against the dumping of Chinese steel.

Tata has decided to abandon steel production in the UK against a backdrop of competing with cheap Chinese steel imports into the EU. Its only interest, quite rightly, is protecting the investment of its shareholders. No amount of flag waving or making claims that Britain has the “5^th biggest economy in the world” is going to cut any ice. Tata would have been expecting Britain to support European measures to ward off steel dumping.

Tata UK would also have been considering the commercial consequences of Britain’s possible exit from Europe. Would its executives be allowed to travel freely in Europe or would they end up in long queues at airports? Worse still, would an EU free of British intervention impose a TDI on British as well Chinese Steel? Tata UK wants to know what Britain’s plans are if we are to exit the EU. “It will be all right on the night” is not good enough. It is no wonder that Tata Steel is quitting Britain; the politicians advocating departure from the EU have no vision or economic strategy for our future outside of Europe.

There is no doubt that potential buyers will be calculating the profits or losses to be made from buying a UK steel industry which is cut off from major markets in Europe, the US, and China either by tariffs, price competition or the restricted movement of its executives. Will a potential buyer take such an investment risk? I fear for the future of steel production in the UK, and I fear for the future of the thousands of jobs and the hundreds of small businesses that depend upon a solution for steel.

Yes, Britain has got the world’s 5th largest economy with a GDP of around USD 3 trillion dollars pa. The US has a GDP of over USD 17 trillion and China over USD 10 trillion pa. Our economy is dwarfed in comparison. Britain on its own has very little economic power to influence events in its own favour.

  

The EU is the 2nd largest economic block in the world with a GDP of around USD 16 trillion pa. If we vote for Brexit the remaining combined GDP of the European Union will be around USD 13 trillion pa. We will be competing against another massive economy. What hope have we got to negotiate more favourable trading terms with these economic giants than we have got now?

Given the enormity of the opposition, would it not be better to remain in one of the biggest economic clubs and co-operate to protect the commercial interests of all member states of the EU? Every citizen of the UK should carefully consider the economic consequences of Brexit.  Flag waving and exaggerated patriotism will not earn us an international crust of bread.