UK Membership of the European Union Political and Economic Considerations

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

UK Membership of the European Union Political and Economic Considerations UK membership of the European Union Political and economic considerations 1. Summary • A referendum on the UK’s membership of the • This would leave around 90% of the UK’s goods European Union will take place by the end of 2017. exports to the EU facing new tariffs. The UK’s ability Autumn or late 2016 currently seem like the most to sell services into the EU – a sector where the UK likely times for the vote. has a trade surplus with the EU – could be significantly affected because of a series of non‑tariff barriers to • The government will put the results of its trade from non‑EU nations. renegotiation of the UK’s relationship with the EU to the country before the referendum. • It is not clear that leaving the EU would improve the UK’s ability to sell in faster growing regions of • Since 1977 an average 53% of UK voters have wanted the world. The EU is focused on expanding trade to remain in the EU and 47% have wanted to leave. with the rest of the world and has a number of such preferential trade agreements with fast‑growing • The EU is widely thought to have significantly increased economies. It is negotiating a number of others, trade and competition in Europe. The benefits for including the Transatlantic Trade and Investment consumers have come in the form of increased Partnership (TTIP) with the US. productivity, lower prices and greater choice. • Outside the EU the fundamental choices facing the • UK critics characterise the EU as an over‑regulated, UK would remain the same: the trade‑off between slow growth region. They point to the UK’s growing autonomy and accepting regulation in order to net contributions to the EU budget and the cost of gain access to overseas markets; the need to build the Common Agricultural Policy. Some see the free relationships and improve access to markets; and, movement of people in the EU as an unacceptable above all, the requirement to drive productivity and limit on the UK’s ability to control its borders. competitiveness at home. • A vote to leave would be the start of a long and complex • Ultimately the effects of leaving the EU hinge on two process of negotiation as the UK sought to create imponderables: the terms on which the UK leaves, a new position in the world. Leaving the EU is a leap in particular, whether the UK can retain access to into the unknown. There is no template for exit. The UK EU markets; and the ability of the UK to exploit the would need to decide on the balance between national freedoms and flexibility of being outside the EU. sovereignty and access to overseas markets. • What is clear is that a referendum will create • Switzerland and Norway are the most widely cited uncertainty for a probably prolonged period. The costs models of successful European countries outside the of exit would be seen very early on. Potential political EU. They make continued, albeit reduced budget and economic benefits from exiting the EU are more contributions, are not members of the CAP, can speculative and would likely be felt in the longer term. negotiate their own trade deals and accept free movement of goods, services, people and capital. • Some would argue that, even if accurate, such Contacts costs are a price worth paying to restore greater UK Ian Stewart • But these models would require the UK to accept sovereignty. The UK faces a choice between access to Chief UK Economist EU regulation while having no say in its design. European markets and national sovereignty. As ever 020 7007 9386 Moreover, they would offer the UK no control over in elections, economics only offers limited answers. [email protected] the movement of EU nationals into the UK. Political judgements loom far larger. • Alternatively the UK could opt for a more distant Alex Cole relationship with the EU and forgo preferential access Economist to EU markets. The UK could instead operate under 020 7007 2947 the so‑called most favoured nation (MFN) rules of the [email protected] World Trade Organisation (WTO) and negotiate free trade agreements with other countries and trading blocs. This would allow the UK to remove itself from EU regulations and budget constraints. UK membership of the European Union 2. Political background In the event of a No vote the UK would invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty requiring the EU to negotiate The last referendum on UK membership of the then a withdrawal agreement. The regulation allows for two European Economic Community (EEC) was held in years of negotiations, and more by mutual consent, 1975, just two years after the UK joined the EEC. during which time existing EU regulation would apply. The electorate voted by 67.2% to 32.8% to stay in. The terms of Britain’s exit would need to be agreed in negotiation with the European Commission and other Since 1975 the EEC has become the European Union, member states. growing from 9 to 28 members, expanding into Central and Eastern Europe, creating the Single Market and the 3. Public and business opinion Single Currency. The EU of today is far larger and more integrated than the Common Market of the mid‑1970s. UK voters have consistently been among the most euro‑sceptic in Europe. Nonetheless, in the last 40 or so The Prime Minister has said that the forthcoming years the public has been more likely to support staying referendum on membership of the EU will be held by in the EU than leaving. Since Ipsos MORI started polling the end of 2017. To allow for the renegotiation that the public in 1977 on average 53% of voters in a simple will precede the vote the earliest likely date for the yes/no poll have supported membership of the EU and referendum is June 2016 (the government has ruled out 47% have opposed it. Public support for the EU fell holding it on 5 May 2016, the same day as elections between a low of 26% in 1980 and a high of 63% in to devolved parliaments in Scotland, Wales and 1991. Over the last two years support for membership Northern Ireland and for London’s mayor). Autumn or has averaged 52% with the latest Ipsos Mori poll late 2016 are generally seen as the most likely dates showing 61% in favour of continued membership. for the referendum. A referendum in 2017 is perhaps a less attractive option, partly because it would extend Business opinion tends to be more favourable to the period of uncertainty about Britain’s relationship the EU than public opinion. The second quarter with Europe. The UK is also likely to want to avoid its 2015 Deloitte CFO Survey showed strong support position in Europe becoming an issue in the French and among the UK’s largest corporates for continued EU German elections, due to be held in April/May 2017 and membership. Nearly three‑quarters of CFOs (73%) September 2017 respectively. favour remaining in the EU, with 23% believing it is still “too early to say” (depends on results of the Voters will be presented with the conclusions of the renegotiation), 1% “don’t know” and just 3% of those government’s renegotiation of the UK’s relationship with polled preferring exit. A recent British Chambers of the EU. Mr Cameron’s list of aims includes protecting Commerce survey (published Q1 2015) shows a clear Britain’s position in the Single Market, returning powers majority of companies view withdrawal from the EU from Brussels, a role for national parliaments to block as an undesirable outcome. Chambers’ members see unwanted EU legislation and excluding the UK from the continued membership of the EU with some powers ideal of “ever closer union”. The Conservative manifesto being transferred back to the UK as the ideal outcome. also called for measures to limit the access of migrants to the British welfare system. However, small businesses are more likely to be split on the issue. Polling for the Federation of Small Businesses Mr Cameron had previously stated that he believed shows 47% of small businesses in favour of EU “proper, full‑on treaty change”1 would be required to membership, with 41% opposed and 11% undecided make some of these aims legally binding, although he (September 2015). The greater euro‑scepticism of has since softened his stance in the face of European smaller businesses illustrates how the costs and benefits opposition. The European Commission President of EU membership are distributed unevenly, with smaller Jean‑Claude Juncker has publicly ruled out any treaty businesses less likely to export and also often less negotiations on Britain’s relationship with Europe until able to deal with potentially costly or time consuming two years after any referendum. Downing Street has regulations. now conceded that the changes it seeks would not lead to treaty change before Britain votes in its referendum. Instead the official position is that Britain would aim for an “irreversible” and “legally binding” guarantee that agreed changes will be attached to the treaty in the years following a referendum. 1. http://www.theguardian. com/politics/2013/jan/23/ david-cameron-eu-speech- referendum, 23rd January 2015 UK membership of the European Union 2 The major British business groups (including the CBI, The next section demonstrates that if the aim of the the Engineering Employers Federation, the Chambers UK’s negotiators were to retain access to, and the of Commerce, the Institute of Directors, the British benefits of, the European Single Market, they would Bankers’ Association and CityUK) favour continued almost certainly have to continue to make budget membership of the EU and a renegotiation of contributions and accept a high proportion of EU Britain’s relationship with the EU.
Recommended publications
  • World Commerce Review ■ March 2014 1 Contents
    WORLD COMMERCE R EVIEW ISSN 1751-0023 VOLUME 8 ISSUE 1 ■ MARCH 2014 AMERICAN OIL FROM AMERICAN SOIL NEELIE KROES ARGUES THAT TAMING FINANCIAL MARKETS Q&A WITH CHRIS COPYRIGHT NEEDS TO BE IS A MUST FOR ACHIEVING FAULKNER, PRESIDENT & REFORMED FOR THE SAKE OF STABILITY CEO OF BREITLING ENERGY THE FUTURE ECONOMY WRITES DANIEL DăiANU CORPORATION THE GLOBAL TRADE PLATFORM - 0 . 0 8 6 3 4 8 controlling corporate travel spend is your top priority we belong in your world LZLY]LK @V\RUV^P[»ZHIV\[TVYL[OHUJVUULJ[PUNWLVWSL^P[O[OLPYKLZ[PUH[PVUZ·P[»ZHIV\[[YHUZMVYTPUN PUMVYTH[PVUPU[VZTHY[KLJPZPVUZ[OH[OLSW`V\THUHNLHUKJVU[YVSJVZ[Z;OH[»Z`V\Y^VYSKHUK ^OLU`V\THRL+PULYZ*S\IWHY[VMP[^LOLSW`V\ZLL`V\Y^VYSKTVYLJSLHYS`>LJHSSP[ .SVIHS=PZPVU·ILJH\ZL[OH[»ZL_HJ[S`^OH[P[NP]LZ`V\! UH[PVUHS3[K(SSYPNO[ZY .HPUPTTLKPH[LHJJLZZ[V`V\Y; ,L_WLUZLZKV^U[V[OLPUKP]PK\HSJOHYNLSL]LS =PL^HUKHUHS`ZLL_WLUZLKH[H^P[OPUKH`ZVMWVZ[PUNPUV]LYJ\YYLUJPLZ .LULYH[LKL[HPSLKYLWVY[ZPUQ\Z[TPU\[LZVUZWLUKPUNHJ[P]P[`WVSPJ`JVTWSPHUJL KLSPUX\LUJPLZHUKTVYL +PULYZ*S\I0U[LY *HSS\ZUV^MVYZVS\[PVUZ[OH[W\[PUMVYTH[PVUPUHUL^WLYZWLJ[P]L +PULYZ*S\I*VYWVYH[L'KPZJV]LYJVTcc^^^+PULYZ*S\IJVT 51.51 41151 corporate solutions from diners club international® 3<',B$'9B%X\LQJ%XV7UDYHOBLQGG $0 DN-11-00703 210mm x 297mm London Diners Club International - Buying Business Travel Magazine Sept/Oct Foreword Ukrainian prospects s a new ‘Unity Government’ gets down to work in Kiev, the factors determining the political and economic trajectory of Ukraine will be determined less by a tug of war between Russia and the West than by the actions and decisions of the leadership that emerges in Ukraine.
    [Show full text]
  • The EU Referendum and EU Reform
    HOUSE OF LORDS European Union Committee 9th Report of Session 2015–16 The EU referendum and EU reform Ordered to be printed 22 March 2016 and published 30 March 2016 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords London : The Stationery Office Limited £price HL Paper 122 The European Union Committee The European Union Committee is appointed each session “to scrutinise documents deposited in the House by a Minister, and other matters relating to the European Union”. In practice this means that the Select Committee, along with its Sub-Committees, scrutinises the UK Government’s policies and actions in respect of the EU; considers and seeks to influence the development of policies and draft laws proposed by the EU institutions; and more generally represents the House of Lords in its dealings with the EU institutions and other Member States. The six Sub-Committees are as follows: Energy and Environment Sub-Committee External Affairs Sub-Committee Financial Affairs Sub-Committee Home Affairs Sub-Committee Internal Market Sub-Committee Justice Sub-Committee Membership The Members of the European Union Select Committee, which conducted this inquiry, are: Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top Lord Green of Hurstpierpoint Baroness Suttie Lord Blair of Boughton Lord Jay of Ewelme Lord Trees Lord Borwick Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws Lord Tugendhat Lord Boswell of Aynho (Chairman) Lord Liddle Lord Whitty Earl of Caithness Lord Mawson Baroness Wilcox Lord Davies of Stamford Baroness Prashar Baroness Falkner of Magravine Baroness Scott of Needham Market Further information Publications, press notices, details of membership, forthcoming meetings and other information is available at http://www.parliament.uk/hleu.
    [Show full text]
  • Can the EU Rebuild Failing States? a Review of Europe’S Civilian Capacities
    Can the EU Rebuild Failing States? A Review of Europe’s Civilian Capacities Daniel Korski & Richard Gowan Foreword by Jean-Marie Guéhenno ABOUT ECFR The European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) is the first pan-European think-tank. Launched in October 2007, its objective is to conduct research and promote informed debate across Europe on the development of coherent, effective and values-based European foreign policy. ECFR has developed a strategy with three distinctive elements that define its activities: A pan-European Council. ECFR has brought together a distinguished Council of over one hundred Members – politicians, decision makers, thinkers and business people from the EU’s member states and candidate countries – which meets twice a year as a full body. Through geographical and thematic task forces, members provide ECFR staff with advice and feedback on policy ideas and help with ECFR’s activities within their own countries. The Council is chaired by Martti Ahtisaari, Joschka Fischer and Mabel van Oranje. A physical presence in the main EU member states. ECFR, uniquely among European think-tanks, has offices in Berlin, London, Madrid, Paris and Sofia. In the future ECFR plans to open offices in Rome, Warsaw and Brussels. Our offices are platforms for research, debate, advocacy and communications. A distinctive research and policy development process. ECFR has brought together a team of distinguished researchers and practitioners from all over Europe to advance its objectives through innovative projects with a pan-European focus. ECFR’s activities include primary research, publication of policy reports, private meetings and public debates, ‘friends of ECFR’ gatherings in EU capitals and outreach to strategic media outlets.
    [Show full text]
  • Printmgr File
    OFFERING MEMORANDUM NOT FOR GENERAL DISTRIBUTION IN THE UNITED STATES BAE Systems plc (incorporated with limited liability in England and Wales under the Companies Acts 1948 to 1980 with registered number 1470151) US$1,000,000,000 1.900% Notes due 2031 Issue price: 99.232% US$1,000,000,000 3.000% Notes due 2050 Issue price: 98.537% BAE Systems plc, a public limited company registered in England and Wales (the “Issuer”), is offering (the “Offering”) $1,000,000,000 aggregate principal amount of its 1.900% Notes due 2031 (the “2031 Notes”) and $1,000,000,000 aggregate principal amount of its 3.000% Notes due 2050 (the “2050 Notes” and, together with the 2031 Notes, the “Securities”). The Issuer is the parent holding company of the BAE Systems group of companies (which, together with the Issuer, are referred to herein as “BAE Systems”). The 2031 Notes and the 2050 Notes will mature on February 15, 2031 and September 15, 2050, respectively (in each case, the “Stated Maturity Date” of the respective series of Securities), and upon surrender will be repaid in an amount equal to the principal amount thereof together with accrued and unpaid interest thereon. Interest on the Securities will be payable semi-annually in arrears on February 15 and August 15 of each year (in the case of the 2031 Notes), commencing on February 15, 2021 and on March 15 and September 15 of each year (in the case of the 2050 Notes), commencing on March 15, 2021. The Securities will be redeemable at any time at the option of the Issuer at a redemption price calculated as set forth under “Description of Securities—Optional Redemption.” The Securities will be direct, unsecured and unsubordinated obligations of the Issuer and will rank pari passu with all other direct, unsecured and unsubordinated obligations (except those obligations preferred by statute or operation of law) of the Issuer.
    [Show full text]
  • A British Agenda for Europe Designing Our Own Future
    A B r i t i s h A g e n d a f o r E u r o p e : D e s i g n i n g o u r o w n f u t u r e A British Agenda for Europe Designing our own future A Chatham House Commission Report Chatham House, 10 St James’s Square, London SW1Y 4LE T: +44 (0)20 7957 5700 E: [email protected] www.chathamhouse.org.uk F: +44 (0)20 7957 5710 www.chathamhouse.org.uk Charity Registration Number: 208223 A British Agenda for Europe Designing Our Own Future The Chatham House Commission Report on Europe after Fifty: Policy Implications for Britain Chair: Sir Stephen Wall 1 www.chathamhouse.org.uk Chatham House has been the home of the Royal Institute of International Affairs for over eight decades. Our mission is to be a world-leading source of independent analysis, informed debate and influential ideas on how to build a prosperous and secure world for all. © Royal Institute of International Affairs, 2008 Chatham House (the Royal Institute of International Affairs) is an independent body which promotes the rigorous study of international questions and does not express opinion of its own. The opinions expressed in this publication are the responsibility of the authors. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the copyright holder.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economic Consequences of Leaving the EU
    April 2016 The economic consequences of leaving the EU The final report of the CER commission on Brexit 2016 Advisory Board Esko Aho Sir Richard Lambert Senior fellow, Harvard University, consultative Chairman of the British Museum, former partner for Nokia and former Finnish prime director-general of the Confederation of minister British Industry and editor of the Financial Joaquín Almunia Times Former vice-president and competition Pascal Lamy commissioner, European Commission President emeritus, Jacques Delors Institute Carl Bildt Philip Lowe Former prime minister and foreign minister Former director-general for energy, European of Sweden Commission Nick Butler Dominique Moïsi Visiting fellow and chairman of the Kings Senior adviser, Institut français des relations Policy Institute, Kings College London internationales Tim Clark Lord Monks Former senior partner, Slaughter & May Former general secretary, European Trades Iain Conn Union Confederation Group CEO, Centrica Mario Monti Sir Robert Cooper President, Bocconi University and former Special adviser to the High Representative Italian prime minister and former counsellor, EEAS Christine Ockrent Professor Paul De Grauwe Former chief executive officer, Audiovisuel John Paulson Chair in European Political Extérieur de la France Economy, London School of Economics Michel Petite Stephanie Flanders Lawyer Of Counsel, Clifford Chance, Paris Chief market strategist for the UK and Europe, Lord Robertson J.P. Morgan Asset Management Deputy chairman, TNK-BP and former Timothy Garton Ash secretary
    [Show full text]
  • The Process of Withdrawing from the European Union
    HOUSE OF LORDS European Union Committee 11th Report of Session 2015–16 The process of withdrawing from the European Union Ordered to be printed 28 April 2016 and published 4 May 2016 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords HL Paper 138 The European Union Committee The European Union Committee is appointed each session “to scrutinise documents deposited in the House by a Minister, and other matters relating to the European Union”. In practice this means that the Select Committee, along with its Sub-Committees, scrutinises the UK Government’s policies and actions in respect of the EU; considers and seeks to influence the development of policies and draft laws proposed by the EU institutions; and more generally represents the House of Lords in its dealings with the EU institutions and other Member States. The six Sub-Committees are as follows: Energy and Environment Sub-Committee External Affairs Sub-Committee Financial Affairs Sub-Committee Home Affairs Sub-Committee Internal Market Sub-Committee Justice Sub-Committee Membership The Members of the European Union Select Committee, which conducted this inquiry, are: Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top Lord Green of Hurstpierpoint Baroness Suttie Lord Blair of Boughton Lord Jay of Ewelme Lord Trees Lord Borwick Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws Lord Tugendhat Lord Boswell of Aynho (Chairman) Lord Liddle Lord Whitty Earl of Caithness Lord Mawson Baroness Wilcox Lord Davies of Stamford Baroness Prashar Baroness Falkner of Margravine Baroness Scott of Needham Market Further information Publications, press notices, details of membership, forthcoming meetings and other information is available at http://www.parliament.uk/hleu.
    [Show full text]
  • Question D'europe N°322
    th th 20 October 2015 BREXIT: What Fair Deal between UK and EU Member States? Thierry CHOPIN INTRODUCTION : Christian LEQUESNE (eds) UK's relationship with the European Union has never been a bed of roses. In 1975, barely two years after joining, Harold Wilson’s Labour government consulted the British population by referendum asking them whether they wanted to remain in the European Community. At that time 67% answered “yes”. For the 42 years of membership, taking part in Europe has, for most British governments, comprised preventing Europe’s institutions from having too much power and negotiating exemptions and derogations to protect national sovereignty. In 2015 this has led to a UK that has managed to escape both from the single currency and the Schengen Agreements on the free movement of people. There are three areas in which the UK has made a strong contribution to the European Union without playing a wild-card: the creation of the internal market, enlargement and defence. The British have always felt comfortable with a European Union defined as a vast market, but much less so with one of political union. Since a market can never exist without regulation the governments in London have accepted however, whether they have liked it or not, for the European Union to regulate trade, financial services and capital. Hence enlargements have often been viewed as positive extensions to the market. Since UK, along with France, are the only ones to have an army that can project itself outside of the European Union, it has been able to make a significant contribution to European Defence without committing strongly to the institutionalisation of a European Defence Policy, which might have competed against NATO.
    [Show full text]
  • Part III Eurosceptic Civil Society
    Part III Eurosceptic Civil Society 8 Performing Euroscepticism: The UK Press and Cameron’s Bloomberg Speech Oliver Daddow Introduction UK newspapers have exerted manifest structuring effects over Britain’s national debates about ‘Europe’. First, the UK newspaper market is dominated by various forms of Eurosceptical sentiment and since the Eurozone crisis in particular has expounded a form of ‘hard Euroscepticism’ (Taggart and Szczerbiak 2004) which extolls the merits of EU withdrawal. Second, Eurosceptical journalists have popularized a Eurosceptic discourse through which European integration is constructed both as ‘over there’ and as an implied or explicit threat to British sovereignty interests and national identity (Anderson and Weymouth 1998; Hawkins 2012). Chris Gifford has usefully described this ‘populist politics’ of Euroscepticism in his account of the ideological manifestations of Euroscepticism in the UK (Gifford 2014, p.6). It draws on an obsession with past conflicts and the Second World War especially, which have provided British Eurosceptics with a range of linguistic weapons to keep their audiences in a ‘permanent state of discursive war’ (Daddow 2011, pp.109–34) with a malign ‘other’ across the English Channel (Gifford 2006). Third, with elite Europhile opinion seeping away in elite political discourse and policy the UK press has been a significant factor in agenda-setting on European issues policy through the ‘climate of fear’ it has generated against the public espousal of pro-European narratives (Daddow 2012). Comparatively speaking, Britain is home to an ‘unusually Eurosceptical media market’ especially on the press side: this goes for the volume of Eurosceptical coverage and the bombastic, nationalistic and sometimes xenophobic tone of that coverage (Ford et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2018 Who We Are
    Annual Report 2018 Who we are At BAE Systems, our advanced defence technology protects people and national security, and keeps critical information and infrastructure secure. We search for new ways to provide our customers with a competitive edge across the air, maritime, Segmental land and cyber domains. 43 review We employ a skilled workforce of 85,800 people1 in more than 40 countries, and work closely with local partners to support economic development by transferring knowledge, How our skills and technology. 22 business works Further information can be found online by visiting baesystems.com 220 Shareholder information 1. Including share of equity accounted investments. Contents Strategic report Governance Financial statements Who we are Directors’ report Group accounts Our business at a glance 02 Chairman’s governance letter 72 Preparation 142 Strategic report Our key products and services 04 Directors’ duties 74 Consolidated income statement 144 Group financial highlights 06 Board governance 76 Consolidated statement Operational and strategic highlights 08 Board of directors 78 of comprehensive income 145 Chairman’s letter 10 Board information 80 Consolidated statement of changes in equity 145 Chief Executive’s review 13 Governance disclosures 81 Consolidated balance sheet 146 Group strategic framework 18 Audit Committee report 83 Consolidated cash flow statement 147 Our markets 19 Corporate Responsibility Committee report 87 Notes to the Group accounts 148 How our business works 22 Nominations Committee report 90 Our people 24
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of the European Union: UK Government Policy
    House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee The future of the European Union: UK Government policy This is a volume of submissions, relevant to the inquiry The future of the European Union: UK Government policy, which have been reported to the House. Only those submissions written specifically for the Committee have been included. List of written evidence Page 1. Dr Jóhanna Jónsdóttir 3 2. Anne Palmer, JP (retired) 12 3. Dr Martyn Bond 15 4. Sir Colin Budd, KCMG 20 5. Jean-Claude Piris 26 6. Sir Michael Franklin, KCB, CMG 32 7. The Church of England, The Archbishops' Council 34 8. Professor Clive Church, Dr Paolo Dardanelli and Sean Mueller 39 9. Civitatis International 46 10. Graham Avery, CMG 51 11. Foreign and Commonwealth Office 55; 64 12. Nigel Farage MEP on behalf of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) 69 13. Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) 76 14. Liberal Democrat MEPs 82 15. Professor Michael Dougan and Dr Michael Gordon 88; 94 16. Open Europe 96 17. Ruth Lea 105 18. TheCityUK 110 19. Professor Richard G. Whitman and Thomas Raines 117 20. Professor René Schwok and Cenni Najy 121 21. Liberal Democrat parliamentary party committee on international affairs 134 22. Professor Richard Rose, FBA 145 23. Professor David Phinnemore 152 24. Dr Robin Niblett 157 25. Brendan Donnelly 164 26. European Movement 168 27. Maurice Fraser 172 28. Nucleus 178 29. Sir Peter Marshall, KCMG, CVO 185 30. Professor Pauline Schnapper 194 31. Business for New Europe (BNE) 197 32. Lord Howell of Guildford 205 33. Frank Vibert, Senior Visiting Fellow, Department of Government, London School of Economics 211 34.
    [Show full text]
  • The Process of Withdrawing from the European Union
    XVII legislatura La Brexit, l'art. 50 del Trattato di Lisbona e i negoziati per il recesso dall'Unione luglio 2016 n. 348 SERVIZIO STUDI TEL. 066706-2451 [email protected] _______________________________________________________________________________________ I dossier del Servizio studi sono destinati alle esigenze di documentazione interna per l'attività degli organi parlamentari e dei parlamentari. I testi e i contenuti normativi ufficiali sono solo quelli risultanti dagli atti parlamentari. Il Senato della Repubblica declina ogni responsabilità per la loro eventuale utilizzazione o riproduzione per fini non consentiti dalla legge. I contenuti originali possono essere riprodotti, nel rispetto della legge, a condizione che sia citata la fonte. XVII legislatura La Brexit, l'art. 50 del Trattato di Lisbona e i negoziati per il recesso dall'Unione luglio 2016 n. 348 a cura di: L. Briasco Classificazione Teseo: Unione europea. I N D I C E NOTA INTRODUTTIVA ..................................................................................... 7 1. PREMESSA .............................................................................................. 7 2. LA REAZIONE DELLE ISTITUZIONI DELL'UNIONE E DEGLI STATI MEMBRI .......................................................................................................... 7 2.1. La dichiarazione dei tre presidenti ............................................................ 7 2.2. La risoluzione del Parlamento europeo ..................................................... 8 2.3. La Dichiarazione
    [Show full text]