Brexit, the future of an isolated Britain

Britain’s decision to leave the E.U, as announced last Friday, was, undoubtedly, a significant event; not only for the U.K and E.U, but also for the rest of the world. With 51.9 percent of those who voted choosing a Brexit, the ‘out’ campaign triumphed as polls had predicted. About nine areas even voted by more than 70 percent to leave. While there were also significant areas such as most parts of Scotland, which voted by 62 percent to stay, Northern Ireland and parts of London.

Over 75 percent of the votes in Lambeth, Hackney and Haringey were for remaining in the E.U.
The turnout was impressive at 72 percent, significantly higher than last year’s general election which had 61 percent; the highest turnout in eighteen years. However, the interest and participation was disproportionate.

While younger voters were more likely to vote remain, turnout in places with a younger populace tended to be lower. The sentiment of wanting to leave the E.U was also disproportion on socio-economic lines. Of the 30 areas with the least graduates, 28 voted leave, while all 30 of the areas with most people identifying as English voted to leave.

Prime Minister David Cameron, as announced the day after the referendum, will resign but his resignation will not be immediate. Things will continue as normal until October when a new leader of the Conservative Party, and thus a new Prime Minister, will be chosen. Then, negotiations with the E.U (article 50) will begin. These negotiations will last at least two years before the U.K can actually leave.

Although the political class in the U.K are trying, as much as possible, to continue things as normal, certain political changes are already evident. European leaders met in Brussels last week, without the U.K. The leaders encouraged cohesiveness of the remaining 27 nations, with Luxemburg’s Prime Minister, Xavier Bettel, stating that, “With a disunited United Kingdom, we need a united Europe more than ever.” This emphasis on unity is not a surprising reaction of the E.U, as the U.K’s exit could trigger a desire for other members of the E.U to leave.

While it is far too early to say if the Brexit will have, in the long-term, a negative or positive effect, there are already immediate results of panic and economic instability that have started to take place.

As Scotland and N. Ireland voted overwhelmingly to stay in the E.U, consequences of the Brexit could trigger a break-up of the U.K. All 32 council areas in Scotland voted to remain. Nicola Sturgeon, First Minister of Scotland, remarked that Scotland sees its future with the E.U and that the undemocratic nature of keeping them out of the union against their will might signal another referendum on Scottish independence. If such a referendum does take place, and Scotland decide to leave the U.K and join the E.U, this could be problematic for the rest of the U.K, not just because of the break-up. If Britain exits the European free travel zone, and Scotland stays in it, E.U immigrants might use Scotland as a means to enter other parts of the U.K. Furthermore, E.U integration has played a major role in the continued peace between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland since the 90s. Through the E.U, N. Ireland has been able to remain part of Britain while enjoying free commerce and travel with the Republic of Ireland (as the Republic of Ireland is part of the E.U). The U.K’s exit from the E.U could disrupt this peace and cooperation between the two regions.

Ways in which students will be affected by the break-up include the scrapping of the Erasmus scheme. The Erasmus scheme is a student exchange programme that relies on the free movement of students within the E.U. Through the scheme, U.K students were able to study for a year in an E.U country and E.U students were able to do the same in the U.K. This will no longer be able to take place after the U.K’s divorce from the E.U. Fees will also be affected as U.K students benefit from paying ‘home’ fees in E.U countries. Meaning that they can save a considerable amount of money for their degree compared to studying in the U.K, as fees in E.U countries tend to be much lower.

Leaving the E.U means they will now have to pay the higher ‘international’ rates. Rates for E.U citizens coming to the U.K. will also rise. This means that many students from disadvantaged backgrounds might be discouraged. A lack of free movement between the E.U and the U.K. means that flight prices will rise and U.K citizens may have to pay for visas when visiting or relocating. This will also impact international research projects as well as exchange students.

Working abroad will become problematic having left the E.U and E.E.A. (European Economic Area) as citizens will not be entitled to E.U rights and will have to rely on domestic immigration law. A big problem will come from the fact that only highly skilled workers will be desirable, which again puts the working classes at a heavy disadvantage. Currently, E.U students in the U.K have unrestricted access to work alongside their studies.

International students have capped amounts of hours, however, and it is likely that this will happen for E.U students too. The E.U provides a great amount of funding for Universities, including around £1bn per year in research grants. There will likely be a significant drop in the amount of money available for future research projects.

The U.K’s exit from the E.U will also affect holidaymakers. The decline in the pound’s value, which dropped to a record low, means that holidaymakers are now receiving £9 less in euros and £12 less in US dollars for every £100 exchanged.

Petrol prices are also expected to rise, with the Petrol Retailers Association warning that consumers should prepare for an increase in the price of a litre of fuel.

The Brexit will, of course, also affect immigration significantly but how this will pan out is uncertain right now. It will, largely, depend on who emerges as leader of the Conservative Party. It is likely, though, that Britain will continue to have an open policy in terms of immigration, just not one that favours E.U countries disproportionally. The E.U policy of free movement is likely to be compromised, as Britain will now have control over how many E.U nationals are able to enter the U.K. Those who promoted the ‘out’ campaign promoted a points-based immigration system, much like what is practiced in Australia and Canada, whereby the most skilled and appropriate candidates are selected according to the needs and capacity of the country.

If this approach is taken, it could mean that skilled immigrants from Africa, including Nigerians, would have a better chance of gaining entry into the U.K. What policy the U.K will eventually adopt is yet to be seen, though. An anti-immigration policy, whilst unlikely, is also a possibility.

Such an outcome would be disastrous for immigrants seeking better economic opportunities, and those fleeing war and devastation. The future immigration policy the U.K will eventually adopt will depend on the agreement, if any, that is reached with the E.U. If the U.K forges an association agreement in terms of trade, this would keep the free movement policy in place. Norway and Switzerland are examples of countries that have such agreements with the E.U. If Britain restricts free movement from the E.U, however, this will also apply to U.K citizens and they may have difficulties travelling to E.U countries.