Home   News   Article

'The truth about Brexit'




Truth is a precious commodity and ought to be more valued. Sir John Hayes (article, August 20) says Britain flourished before the EU and can certainly do so again. (I assume by ‘EU’ he includes the earlier European Economic Community, which is what Britain joined.)

But no! Britain wasn’t flourishing before it joined; it was frightening politicians of the day by going rapidly downhill economically as well as losing its standing in the world, which was a major reason it did join. It has reaped considerable benefit from doing so.

Angela Skeels (letters, Aug 20) claims that on leaving , we can - amongst other things - ‘create more jobs, enjoy greater prosperity, and collect more taxes for our public services’.

Brexit (15935047)
Brexit (15935047)

She’s not clear on how the one thing connects with the other.We have stagnated on productivity for many years now-nothing to do with the EU-other major EU countries have continued to make greater productivity gains, putting their productivity 20 or 25 per cent above ours.

And leading Brexiteers have spoken of reducing taxes - hence less for public spend.

We currently have privileged access via EU trade agreements to important major world markets, such as Japan and Canada, which we shall lose on leaving and have to renegotiate for ourselves-with a high risk of gaining less advantage, since we lack the bargaining strength of the EU.

Brexit (15935045)
Brexit (15935045)

She talks of the ‘Brexit Dividend’, the famous lie painted on the side of a bus.In the first place, only a fraction of the £350million would be gained, since things like grants to British farmers, universities, and regions embedded in that amount, would still have to be met by British taxpayers one way or another.

But in any case, the £350million has been more than offset in advance by the dramatically lowered value of the pound since the Brexit vote.(e.g., the significant amount of medicine and medical equipment necessarily bought abroad, now costs us distinctly more.)

As for population growth, the ‘positive strategy’ needed goes beyond anything to do with immigration and will (if implemented) impact directly on the ‘native’ population.(‘Native’ in quotes, because most of us came from earlier generations of immigrants!)

John Tippler

Spalding



COMMENTS
()


Iliffe Media does not moderate comments. Please click here for our house rules.

People who post abusive comments about other users or those featured in articles will be banned.

Thank you. Your comment has been received and will appear on the site shortly.

 

Terms of Comments

We do not actively moderate, monitor or edit contributions to the reader comments but we may intervene and take such action as we think necessary, please click here for our house rules.

If you have any concerns over the contents on our site, please either register those concerns using the report abuse button, contact us here.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More