Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
These arguments are a busted flush, Damien. All of them were made in one form or another when the Euro was proposed and Britain indicated it would not join. Being outside the currency used by all the powerhouse economies of Europe - back in the days when they were powerhouses - was insane, we were warned, no sensible corporation would saddle itself with massive exchange risk by basing operations here when it could just as easily set up in Spain. Just try telling any of that to the people of Sunderland.
|
I don't think they are a busted flush. If that were the case then we wouldn't be so keen to continue to make free-trade deals. There is little appetite for a single currencies but there continues to be incentives to cut the cost of trade between nations. They're not the same thing.
We wouldn't just be leaving the bloc that accounts for 44% of our trade (which is no small number). We would be leaving our other trade deals too, including the prospective one with America, and left to renegotiate them on our own terms. Being able to offer 500 million consumers is a better position to be in than offering 62 million people.
We will also be leaving the system that allows for free movement across the continent which is useful for these pan-European countries. It's especially useful for banks and software development. Look to the attempts to cultivate a Silicon Valley Rival around Old Street (imaginatively named 'Silicon Roundabout') which is drawing in developers and designers from across Europe. We would want to keep that as well but that is far more politically difficult to maintain than arguing to keep the trade deals given the pressure to control immigration.
The EU is a bit of a mess. I would love to go for a Europe-lite that allows us to keep the stuff I mentioned above, the ECHR, and some standards. I hope Cameron negotiates something akin to that although it's very unlikely. However I am not convinced that leaving is a sure-fire bet without consequences.