Skip to main content

Arguments for Brexit and the facts which disprove them

Over the past few weeks I have done a bit of tweeting and I admit that sometimes I can get a bit wound up by responses from people who have closed off their minds and refuse to even think about what Brexit will really do to the UK. In this piece I decided to try and look at the various pro Brexit arguments have heard and then use the facts at hand to see if they are valid. The ultimate aim here is twofold. First, instead of trying to engage one on one in pointless Twitter wars I decided to write down my arguments, hopefully this will help me keep calm about the subject. Second if it brings around one doubting Leaver by using the facts and not propaganda then it will have done some external good as well.

Brexit will allow us to create our own trade agreements which better suit the UK and grow the Economy
The argument here is that we can be free of the single market and negotiate our own trade agreements that better suit the UK. While simplistically that is true there are various factors which will hinder the process. The first is that these trade agreements take time properly agree. There are some instances where it can take 10 years. We were told by the Leave side that new agreements would be easy, especially the one with the EU. To date I am only aware of less than 40 replacement trade deals with the vast majority of them based on the current deal those countries have with the EU already and so the UK by extension. So, what happened to negotiating our own special deals?
The real root of the argument however is massively flawed. The UKs biggest trading partner by some distance is, the EU.



If we are unable to negotiate a free trade agreement with the EU, or even if it simply takes a few years, then it stands to reason that there will be a massive impact on imports and exports. Prices will rise in the UK as tariffs are applied to EU imports and we will export less as the cost of our own goods rise for the same reason. Even if we are somehow able to offset this impact by negotiating new trade agreements elsewhere it is unlikely that they would make up the shortfall anytime soon.

Following common sense if we can’t sell as many goods abroad then we will make less so that naturally means lost jobs. Fewer jobs means less tax gathered via income tax, so either the government will be forced into more austerity measures, and we know how badly that went/is still going, or they will be forced to increase taxes to make up for the short fall. In short it will mean the UK goes back into recession and all the impacts that will have.

You have to remember that the EU is made up of 27 other nations and that is a lot of buying power. Yes China and the US have a lot of buying power too but the US is more interested in reducing imports and increasing exports, actively engaging in trade wars to this end. China again are more interested in their own goods than they are other countries and at present our goods cost too much for India and South America, who can make similar goods cheaper than we can. We are dependent on the EU for trade. So why would we shove this wedge in between us and our largest trading partner?

Brexit will allow us to take back control of our borders
Many Brexiteers, definitely led by Nigel Farage in this case, would have you believe that immigration costs this country huge amounts of money and that leaving the EU will allow us to take back control of our borders  by removing us from the EU free movement of people, rules known as the Schengen Agreement.

OK maybe initially it does cost the UK but their claims do not take into account what immigrants then contribute to the country. However, set aside the economics for one minute (but we will come back to them). Immigration has brought amazing diversity to our country. New ideas and new viewpoints that enrich our lives. New art, new music, new food, new technology, new ways of working and living. Some would say this diminishes our own culture. But the UK doesn’t have one culture. It is made up of 4 nations and various other territories, each with their own rich history which has been intermingled with each other and with other nations for centuries. Cultures evolve and grow, they don’t stay the same. The UK is not the same as it was in the 1900s. Rock and roll, now an accepted art form was once seen as a danger to society. Growth is change but not all change is growth.

So back to the cold hard economics. In 2016 Oxford Economics conducted an analysis of the fiscal impact of immigration to the UK. The bullet points of its findings were (this is copied word for word):
  • The average UK-based migrant from Europe contributed approximately £2,300 more to UK public finances in 2016/17 than the average UK adult. In comparison, each UK born adult contributed £70 less than the average, and each non-European migrant contributed over £800 less than the average.
  • The average European migrant arriving in the UK in 2016 will contribute £78,000 more than they take out in public services and benefits over their time spent in the UK (assuming a balanced national budget), and the average non-European migrant will make a positive net contribution of £28,000 while living here. By comparison, the average UK citizen’s net lifetime contribution in this scenario is zero.
  • Taken together, this means that the migrants who arrived in 2016 will make a total net positive contribution of £26.9 billion to the UK’s public finances over the entirety of their stay. The value of this to the UK’s public finances is equivalent to putting approximately 5p on income tax rates (across all marginal rate bands) in that year.
To put this plainly EU immigration benefits the UK more than its own citizens and even non-EU migration, which we already have full control over by the way, makes a positive contribution to public finances. This basically means that the Brexiteer anti-immigration stance is wrong. It’s wrong ethically and more importantly, to a lot of them, it is very wrong economically.

But Brexit will also impact the UK populations ability to go to Europe. No more free movement means, well we don’t yet know what it means. Those who may have wished to retire abroad later in life might find it more difficult and more expensive to do so. Why would other nations which will be negatively impacted by Brexit welcome Britons to their country? Even general holidays may, and I do state may become more difficult, with potential needs for visas returning. All so we can get control of our borders again. Where it counts, we already have control of our borders. This argument is old, narrowminded and counter-productive, with very little basis in fact.

Brexit will allow to take back our Sovereignty and control of our laws
Em pretty sure we already set our own laws. OK being part of the EU means we have agreed to certain circumstances where there is a higher court, the European Court of Justice, but the majority of laws are made and agreed by the UK parliament.

There is also the fact that the UK holds a veto power in the EU and while it is not an all-encompassing power it is significant. In many circumstances the UK can veto new laws proposed in the EU, in other cases it needs allies, which it has, to block others. In certain areas all 28 countries must agree before something can be passed. These areas include taxes, justice, foreign affairs and the EU budget. This means if the UK parliament/government doesn’t agree with something then it will be very difficult for it to actually become a law and affect the UK.

It is true that with 28 nations it can mean that it takes a while in many circumstances to get things done, but they do get done. Basically, nothing really happens in the EU without the UK having a significant say. To put this more into perspective since 1999 the UK has only voted against 2% of new EU laws. Voting records show that the UK government has voted against only 57 proposed laws, abstained 70 times and voted for 2474 laws. What this means is that the UKs wishes were followed 95% of the time. So, if our wishes are being followed what are we against? Oh yeah that’s right most of the time the government voted against a new law it was to do with new tax dodge prevention laws. Amazing!

Now take laws governing standards for manufacturing goods. Some have said that the UK needs to be free of the red tape that is imposed by the EU. Much of this red tape is to do with health and safety, something to UK claims to lead the way on, and standards for goods. This, it is claimed, makes the goods more expensive to manufacture. But these standards will still need to be met even if we leave the EU as they be required to export our goods to the EU, the only difference is that if we do leave the EU we will have no say on any changes to those standards. Let’s put it another way goods imported to the UK must meet our standards to be sold on our market so why would the EU not impose its own rules on goods imported to the EU?

The fact is Sovereignty, as it is being bandied around, doesn’t really exist in this day and age. Countless treaties, trade deals and other agreements have eroded this grand concept which isn’t really all that measurable anyway. What really counts is that we as the public can have a say which we do through voting in Councillors, MPs, MEPs, MSPs and other elected positions. What really needs to be understood is are these elected representatives really carrying out the wishes of the people? Do they have the Country’s best interests at heart? Do we believe they are telling the truth? If we don’t then we get rid of them at the next election.

Brexit can save the Union
Various leading Brexiteers have claimed that by delivering Brexit we can unite the country and save the Union. What they failed to say is how they intend to achieve any of this. In fact, it has become a soundbite which both the Brexit Party and the Conservatives have extensively used. “We will unite the country!” OK, can someone tell me how exactly they intend to do this. With the country so split between Leave and Remain how do they intend to heal that divide? That detail has been sorely lacking.

A recent graphic from YouGov has been doing the rounds showing what Conservatives would be willing to sacrifice just to see Brexit come true.


Just look at this chart. The average Tory would be willing to see the Union split, do significant damage to the economy and see their own party be destroyed just to bring about Brexit. Now I know some Brexiteers would say that is patriotic but let’s be truthful here this is nothing short of madness. They are willing to do significant damage to the country to see it “free” from the EU. They can’t even properly define what they mean by free! And why are they willing to do this? Because as they see it failure to do so would mean the end of the Tory Party. That’s right party before country.

To save the Union Tories would have to actually care about it. On one hand they say that the Union must stick together that they are delivering a Brexit for the whole UK. But they won’t properly engage with the devolved administrations. They take nothing into consideration other than their own wishes and are willing to see the country burn and split to make their nightmare scenario come true, by their own admission!

The Tories, in particular the Scottish Tories, have made a great song and dance about how the SNP are the greatest threat to the Union, but then according to them so is Jeremy Corbyn, while in the mean time they would happily sell out the Union to bring about Brexit. Does that not make them the greatest threat to the Union?

A No deal Brexit means we don’t have to pay the Divorce Bill
Ok this is just utter nonsense. If we don’t pay this settlement it will have massive repercussions. It would be like not paying your mortgage or car payments. The UK's credit score would plummet. Yes, the UK has and needs a credit score. It determines the cost of the Government borrowing money, and let’s face it if there is one thing this Tory Government can do well it’s borrow shit loads of money.

More fundamental than this though. If we don’t pay our debts, why would the EU negotiate a good new trade deal with us if we start with a show of bad faith? Why would any other nation trust us in these matters ever again?

We must now complete Brexit because not doing it would be undemocratic
This section can be summed up by saying that some believe that not delivering Brexit would be undemocratic, consequences be damned. In addition, another referendum would be undemocratic. I’m sorry but none of these statements are true, unless you are seeking to simply revoke Article 50 without a vote. Let me explain what I mean.

It has got the stage that we cannot simply revoke Article 50. A vote was taken, and the Leave side won and that cannot be ignored. However, it is also true to say the vote was based on a principle of wanting to leave. The vote never said how. But still you cannot simply deny the outcome of the referendum that is undemocratic. The only way to legitimately stop Brexit is to show the will of the people has changed with another vote. I would propose it should be done in the following format.

Q1. Straight Leave or Remain – simple enough do we will still want to leave or not.
Q2. Deal or No Deal - If we do want to leave should we take the deal on the table or leave without the deal

I would propose that for a ballot paper to be valid people MUST answer both questions. This way is it not splitting the vote three ways. It simply says leave or remain but if we do want to leave should we take the deal or not. Anyone who does not complete both questions would have their ballot voided. This is fair and democratic and confirms the will of the people while giving the Government a way forward.

There is also the argument that if people want another referendum that we should implement the first one then hold another once a period of time has passed. There is a major flaw in this argument. Once we leave we cannot get back into the EU with the same terms. As a founding member we have been able to keep the pound and have a veto. To go back after leaving we would have to accept the Euro and no veto powers. Therefore, we must be sure this is what we want BEFORE we leave. Anything less is risks betraying the UK population.

The other option is a General Election. But I don’t see the Tories calling one as they would probably lose it.

Other arguments
The EU is building an army. Nonsense. It is true that the members agree to defend each other and that an attack on one member is an attack on them all. But is this not true of all alliances? Also, how exactly would you stop an EU army being made if we are not part of the EU?

The EU is undemocratic. The UK has just had its second unelected PM since the start of Brexit. May ways made PM in the first instance unchallenged within the Tory and now we have Dick, sorry I mean Johnson. EU Parliament positions are elected. Higher positions are negotiated by those elected persons. If there are multiple people put forward for the positions, they have a vote. Yes, things take a while to get done in the EU but there are 28 nations in the EU, that’s a lot of negotiating.

Final Say
I know this blog will not be able to convince anyone who is now set in their ways and unwilling to listen to other points of view. But I hope that some will read it and realise that we need to democratically stop the Brexit process for the good of the country. Brexit really is one of the biggest threats this country has faced since World War 2. The possibility for harming the population is so significant it should never have been attempted, at least not without some sort of plan or the at the very least a staged withdrawal in collaboration with the population.

If I say to you do you want to buy a car, you say yes and then I tell it’s an old banger that costs a fortune, you are not exactly just going to continue to agree because you said yes in the first place. As adults we constantly reconsider the decisions we make and stop ourselves from following through with actions which would do us harm. Why is Brexit any different? Now we know the harm it will cause is now, or even 6 months ago, not the right time to ask the people again, do we really want to move forward with this? And if we do how do you want to move forward?

If the people chose to cancel Brexit, as I believe they would, we must then work with the EU and the Leavers to address their concerns. But we must drop all the propaganda and hatred this issue has stirred up. We can never heal the divide completely, at least not the in short term. But maybe, just maybe we can make a positive start.



Subscribe and share the blog if you have enjoyed this article and make sure to check out the other articles.

You can also follow us via Twitter @needs_saved 

Comments