Tag: Stronger In

The press release issued by Stronger In on 6 January 2016.

Being part of Europe means UK businesses get free access to over 500 million customers in the EU – and can trade with no tariffs or barriers.

This helps them grow and create jobs here in the UK. 200,000 UK businesses trade with the EU (Source: HMRC) and one in every ten UK jobs is linked to our trade with the EU (Source: Office for National Statistics and House of Commons Library).

And it’s estimated that remaining in the EU will mean another 790,000 jobs being created across the UK over the next 15 years – creating more opportunities now and for the future.

The press release issued by Stronger In on 12 October 2015.

Karren Brady, a Board Member of Britain Stronger in Europe, has written an important article in The Sun explaining why British families are stronger, safer and better off in Europe:

“The EU referendum question is: will Britain be stronger in or out of Europe?

For me the answer is clear: British families, consumers and businesses are stronger in than out.

But I know many Sun readers want to be convinced. Europe is not perfect – no partnership is – so we must show the benefits outweigh the costs.

Europe is our largest trading partner. 45% of our exports go there, worth £226 billion last year. 200,000 businesses trade with Europe. European trade supports millions of British jobs. £70 million of investment come to Britain from Europe every day. And a bigger market has driven down prices for consumers, for example cheaper flights.

Why put all this at risk?

Those campaigning to walk away and stand alone – like Nigel Farage and Daniel Hannan – cannot guarantee jobs and living standards will be protected if we leave.

They have simply got it wrong when they say they want Britain to be like Norway. Norway is outside the EU but has trading rights. Sounds good? But in exchange Norway has to accept EU rules – including free movement of people – but has no power to influence them. They pay millions into the EU budget too. It’s the worst of all worlds.

This is also why EU-exit is not an answer to people’s concerns about immigration. If you want access to free trade with Europe, free movement is part of the deal.

Of course the system can be tightened. So it is essential to be in the room at the top table arguing for change – as the Prime Minister is rightly doing.

This campaign cannot be about scare stories. We do not support joining the Euro or a Euro Army. Neither are on the ballot paper or even on the horizon.

We want to strengthen the pound in your pocket – and we will make sure the Queen’s face remains on it.

Britain can be proud and prosperous from within Europe. If countries such as Germany, France and Denmark can hack it, why can’t we?

Yes, we must fight for Europe to work better in Britain’s interests, but weakly walking away is out of character for a country with our history.

We have a bigger vision: leading in Europe while trading around the world.

That’s why we are asking you to vote to keep Britain in and make British families stronger, safer and better off.”

The press release issued by Stronger In on 12 October 2015.

We’re delighted to announce that Lord Stuart Rose, the former Executive Chair of Marks and Spencer, has been appointed the new Chair of Britain Stronger In Europe.

With unparalleled experience of business and enterprise, he knows the value that being part of Europe brings to businesses across Britain.

Lord Rose said, “Most people, myself included, will make a hard-headed, practical calculation in the coming referendum on what is best for the British people. I believe that Britain is stronger in Europe.”

“The choice in the coming referendum is between remaining stronger, safer and better off inside Europe, or taking a leap into the unknown, risking our prosperity, threatening our safety, and diminishing our influence in the world. I believe the case for Britain to remain in the EU is clear.”

The press release issued by Stronger In on 19 February 2016.

We hope to see the completion of the Prime Minister’s renegotiating package shortly. This would make Britain even stronger in Europe and is something the country should get behind.

When we do we will know what ‘in’ looks like. Britain will have the best of both worlds: the benefits of economic partnership but not taking part in arrangements that don’t suit us.

We will still be in the dark, however, on what ‘out’ looks like. Those campaigning for Britain to leave will excitedly declare their hand. But while we know what they will say about Europe, they still cannot tell us how Britain would prosper outside Europe.

Here are the ten questions that everyone campaigning for Britain to leave must be able to answer if they are to have a credible or achievable alternative. At present, it is clear they do not have one.

1. Would Britain have full access to the single market, covering both goods and services?

As part of the single market UK businesses and those they employ benefit from trade barriers being broken down. Tariffs are removed and regulations are commonly agreed. This increases trade, drives competition, lowers prices and enables business expansion, which increases employment. Is this what the leave campaigns want to sacrifice with a leap in to the dark?

2. Would Britain adhere to free movement and European employment regulations?

The leave campaigns have long argued that Britain must end free movement and repatriate employment regulations. There is no country that opts out of both and retains full or even partial access to Europe’s single market. Those campaigning for Britain to leave must come clean on their precise policy on free movement and EU regulations and its implications for financial security, prices and jobs.

3. Is there an existing trading arrangement Britain would seek to emulate?

We have heard the leave campaigns cite Norway, Switzerland, South Korea, Mexico and even Peru as examples the UK should follow. Each has a different trading relationship with the EU, each of which is worse than being a full member and getting the full benefits of economic partnership. However, the leave campaigns seem totally unable to say what Britain outside Europe looks like. So they must tell us: which country should the UK follow?

4. Would Britain cease paying in to the EU budget completely and therefore make zero annual contribution?

We have heard much about made-up figures on how much the UK sends in EU budget contributions. In truth, we get back more than we put in. But those campaigning to leave must say whether they intend to end contributions altogether. There is no country which makes no payments at all and retains access to the single market. If we were to make no payments, we would experience more trade barriers than we do now, risking jobs, prices and financial security. Is this what leave campaigners really want?

5. Under a free trade agreement, what terms would you campaign for and what evidence exists that this could be achieved?

Many claim that if the UK were to leave we would be given a new trade deal that would give us all the benefits but none of the costs of being in the EU. So far, some fantastical ideas have been suggested. Any deal would have to be agreed by the European Council and European Parliament. Therefore, leave campaigns must come clean about what trade deal they would seek and must show that this would be agreed by European partners.

6. How long would it take to negotiate a new free trade agreement with the EU?

If the UK voted to leave, under Article 50 the UK would have two years to agree a withdrawal deal. But trade deals take far longer to negotiate. How long do leave campaigners expect a UK-EU deal to take, and what would happen to the UK economy in the meantime during a period of such dramatic uncertainty?

7. How would the UK renegotiate bilateral trade agreements with the 50+ countries with whom the EU has agreements, from which the UK currently benefits?

The EU has trade deals with 50+ countries, from which the UK benefits. If we vote to leave, we lose access to these deals and those countries’ markets. We would have to renegotiate these ourselves, as a country of 65 million rather than a bloc of 500 million. This would take years and we would not be guaranteed the same terms we currently enjoy. What guarantees can the leave campaigns give that the benefits we currently enjoy could be replicated?

8. Can it be guaranteed that no job in Britain would be put at risk by our leaving Europe?

Three to four million jobs are linked to our trade with the EU, our largest trading partner. If we were to leave, trade would be hit and therefore these jobs would be at risk. Leave campaigners have already admitted that jobs would be lost. Can they guarantee no job, in the long or short term, would be lost?

9. Can it be guaranteed that investment would not be put at risk by our leaving Europe?

Almost half of all foreign investment in Britain is from the EU and our access to the single market is a primary reason for the foreign investment we get from around the world. If we leave the single market and erect new trade barriers, this investment would be at risk. Many businesses have said that they would rethink long investment decisions. Can leave campaigns guarantee this would not happen?

10. And can it be guaranteed that UK-EU trade would not be damaged by our leaving the EU?

Half of our trade in goods goes to the EU. Over 200,000 UK businesses trade with the EU. We sell six times more in goods to the EU than we do the BRIC countries. If the UK were to leave Europe, trade regulations would be set in Europe and tariffs may apply to our imports and exports. This would make trade more expensive and complex. Can it be guaranteed that trade would not be hit?

The press release issued by Stronger In on 18 February 2016.

Nigel Lawson, the Chair of Vote Leave, and Daniel Hannan, leading leave campaigner, have today conceded what for months the leave campaigns have sought to conceal: Britain outside the EU would lose access to Europe’s single market.

Writing in today’s Telegraph Nigel Lawson says that outside the EU Britain “would continue to trade with the EU, as the rest of the world does today, almost certainly assisted by a bilateral free trade agreement.”

We must be absolutely clear about what this means: Britain would not be part of the single market in goods and services, which is so critical to the UK economy, our businesses and families’ personal finances.

Daniel Hannan, speaking on Sky News, again said that the UK should seek a relationship with the EU similar to that of Switzerland, which does not have full access to the EU’s single market, in particular in services. Services make up 78% of the UK economy, so being cut out of the privileged trading terms currently on offer would have a huge impact on jobs, prices and the economic opportunities available to working people.

Why should we focus on the single market? Because the issue central to our country’s economic future, and indeed this ongoing debate about the UK and Europe, is not whether we would trade with the EU but the terms on which that trade would be conducted.

Currently, as a full member of the EU’s single market, covering both the goods and service sectors, Britain benefits from having no tariffs on our trade and having a seat at the table when trading regulations are set, so we can ensure they work in our industries’ interests.

This increases UK-EU trade since trade barriers are reduced, which enables British-based businesses to expand in their nearest market and increase employment. This increases competition, which drives innovation and lowers prices. And this harmonises regulations, which lowers the overall burden of regulation on businesses. There is simply no alternative trading model which delivers these benefits to the same extent. Such is the attraction of the single market that it is a primary reason for foreign investment in the UK.

This collaboration of course means we need protections, for example over our own currency, which is why the Prime Minister has rightly prioritised this as part of his renegotiation.

If we follow Nigel Lawson’s argument, we may get a trade agreement covering some goods, but we would likely pay tariffs on others, which would push up costs of imports for businesses and therefore consumers, and the costs of exports, which would hit demand for British goods. Given that in the UK 200,000 businesses trade goods with the EU, 75% of our businesses that do so internationally, this would undoubtedly have an impact on their capacity to expand and employ.

Critically, even if we had a free trade agreement with the EU, we would not be in the room when our competitors – whether Germany, France or other major European economies – were determining the terms of trade, for example the standards that products need to meet to enter the European market. Not only would that be bad for British business, as they would be adapting rules to suit the priorities of other European markets not our own, but it would hardly be a boost for British sovereignty: we would go from rule maker to rule taker.

And anyone arguing that they need us more than we need them should consider that half our goods exports go to the EU whereas on average just 5% of EU countries’ come to the UK.

The single market is particularly important for the service sector, where we have a trade surplus with the EU. Currently, within the single market, we have access to the ‘passport’, which allows financial services firms based in the UK to conduct business across the whole European Economic Area while still being regulated in the UK. This, combined with common regulatory standards, has reduced costs, increased expansion and has seen the UK become home to many overseas companies’ headquarters. Switzerland, Daniel Hannan’s favourite example of what the UK should become, does not have this and if we leave this will be lost, with clear implications for jobs at home.

We could of course join the single market having left the EU, as Norway does, paying in to the budget, accepting free movement and accepting EU regulations, but having zero influence. But surely leave campaigners don’t want to adopt a system where we pay but have no say.

We have long asked leave campaigners what ‘out’ looks like, and now we are beginning to find out. The EU is our largest trading partner – we sell six times more to the EU than we do to the BRICs – and the world’s largest free trade zone. As the single market develops it will create jobs and opportunities. If the UK stands outside looking in we will not only miss out, we will be paying to abide by rules signed off in Brussels without a voice of our own.

So now that we have some clarity from the leave campaigns the choice is clear: increased trade within Europe to support jobs and low prices for businesses and families, or the UK outside, with our financial security at risk.

Will Straw is Executive Director of Britain Stronger in Europe

Read more at http://www.strongerin.co.uk/brexit_campaigners_have_conceded_uk_outside_the_eu_wouldn_t_have_access_to_the_single_market#CSikOPoxibu684IG.99