Since the June 23, 2016, United Kingdom plebiscite that was held to measure support for the country either to keep or leave the membership of the European Union (EU).
The writers and political analyst related with numerous British media outlets had started discussing the advantages and disadvantages of UK relinquish with the European Union.
Due to the majority of opposition, UK has decided to leave the EU by 30 March 30, 2019, after a period of Brexit (British Exit from the European Union) consultations. Here follows a list of some pros and cons discussed by many British media houses if their country leaves the European Union next year in March.
The pro-Brexit quarters had solidly expressed concern over the total economic cost of their country’s EU membership, saying it was around 11 per cent of Britain’s annual GDP, which would be better spent on industrial and scientific research. Leaving EU would result in an instant cost saving.
In their view, Britain had paid £13.1billion to the EU in 2016 and received £4.5billion value of spending, so their country’s net support to the European Union was £8.5billion!
A British exit from EU had viewed that Britain could self-sufficiently trail international deals including trade and cargo to India, China and United States. They said, leaving the EU would permit the UK’s government and financial powers to design a regulatory framework that is well-matched to their national needs.
Outside the EU, said the others, the UK would be unable to trade with its neighbours and reduce its exchanging power with the rest of the world. Brexiters said it could more than pay damages for those shortcomings because it would be free to establish its own trade agreements.
Immigration is questionably the most indicted issue in the referendum debate. One of the EU’s establishing principles is the free movement of people, along with the free movement of goods, services and money. Due to this, the UK has no governed over immigration from other EU member states.
According to the Office for National Statistics, there were 942,000 eastern Europeans, Romanians and Bulgarians employed in the UK, along with 791,000 western Europeans and 2.93m employees from outside the EU in 2016. China and India are the biggest sources of overseas workers in the UK.
The remaining said that, while the recent leap of immigration had led to some difficulties with housing and service endowment, the net effect had been devastatingly positive.
On contrary, most Brexiters said immigration should be affectedly cut and Britain should regain control of our borders. Other pro-Brexit activists would not necessarily shrink immigration but agreed that it should be up to the British Government to set the rules.
After becoming prime minister, Theresa May put immigration at the centre of her methodology to Brexit, promising to end freedom of movement and honour Cameron’s initiatives to reduce net migration to the tens of thousands.
The “Metro newsletter” had extra added that the EU is one of the world’s largest markets, accounting for 25 per cent of global GDP. It is also our major trading partner. Presently, 45 per cent of the UK’s export is to the EU, while 50 per cent of import is from the EU. And our membership of the EU makes us a more attractive terminus for foreign investment.
Media writers against Brexit have frequently sustained that the European Union had presented many commands which undeniably facilitated British workers and protected their rights including regulated working hours and break times.
They argued that European Union rules also assured fortification for workers when companies changed ownership, the regulations confirmed at least four weeks of annual leave, four months paid parental leave and superfluous protections for pregnant workers and the anti-discrimination laws made sure that people were not differentiated against on the grounds of race, ethnicity, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation.
For Leavers, exiting the EU is going to allow Britain to regenerate itself as a truly independent nation to connect with the rest of the world. For others, it would result in Britain to suffer the deprivation of the influence in Europe, turning back the clock and receding from the global power networks of the 21st century.
Brexit would bring some definite advantages, said The Economist before the referendum. For instance, the UK would recoup control over fishing rights around its coast. But it concluded that the most likely outcome would be that Britain would find itself as a tickly outsider with slightly limited contact to the single market, almost no influence and few helpers.
Previous work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith, who was in support of Brexit, said Britain was leaving an open door to terrorist attacks by lasting in the EU. Due to this open border, the security was greatly affected as we were unable to control people.
Conversely, numerous senior military figures, including former chiefs of defence staff, Lord Bramall and Jock Stirrup, claimed the opposite.
Since the Brexit vote, the Government has said it will work to maintain security relationships with the EU.
The head of MI5, Andrew Parker said that in this ambiguous world we hope for a long-lasting and comprehensive agreement that would handle the obstacles and tolerates professionals to work unruffled.
