European Union – In or Out?

The reasons for out seem to be: EU regulation that is harmful to the UK’s interests; migration; and the UK’s contribution the EU budget. The principal reason for staying seems to be access to EU markets.

Regulation that is potentially harmful to British interests can be handled effectively. For example: in the 1990s I was seconded (1 to 2 days per week) as the sole technical advisor to the European Commission on financial services. By explaining the nature of financial services in the UK, when proposals came up from the Commission, I was able to ensure that no regulation inimical to British interests emerged in the first Investment Services Directive.

Regrettably that technical engagement was not there for subsequent financial services directives / regulation from the EU and much unsuitable (for the UK) regulation has emerged. This is avoidable. All HM Government (in particular HM Treasury) has to do is to provide technical experts to the Commission who will be effective. The language in most of the committees is English which makes it easier for Brits to influence the regulation for the wider benefit in general and in particular the benefit of the UK.

Potential EU Migration is thought to be an issue. But migration from countries outside the EU seems to have been forgotten. As a migrant myself (from 1922 members of my family have spent time in the UK – most returned to Ceylon though) I have bought into British values. All migrants should be encouraged to do this. Perhaps then migration will not be seen to be such an issue.

The EU budget can be seen on the one hand as a cost, but on the other as providing an opportunity. First for trade but also for the UK to benefit from the various grants and incentives available. To take full benefit, the UK needs to study the regulation and assist British enterprise and the wider community to benefit from these grants.

About half the world is English speaking. Also Britain has historical trading and wider links with many countries. The UK can be the bridge between the EU and the English speaking world and more widely. Trading with EU countries on the one hand and the rest of the world with the other could be of benefit to the UK.

Moreover, the UK is the world’s pre-eminent centre for financial services. Located between the Far-Eastern and American time-zones it is possible to trade with the Far-East in the morning and the US in the afternoon acting as a bridge between these time-zones and also the EU.

All significant participants in the financial markets have a presence in the UK. Historically this developed from London as a port where commodities were traded as they were unloaded from / reloaded onto ships. Financing of business and trading of futures grew also from the position of London as a port and the links with the empire and more widely.

The market participants in London and UK financial infrastructure are valuable national assets. I note here as an aside, ownership of the infrastructure, which are national assets, should remain in British hands. But if the UK left the EU the market participants could leave for other centres. It would be very difficult to bring them back once they are established elsewhere.

I believe the UK has much to gain by remaining in the EU.