What is BREXIT in the world?
“RECALLING the historic importance of the ending of the division of the European continent and the need to create firm bases for the construction of the future Europe”
This is only one of the statements contended in the preamble of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU).
Which along with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) creates the denominated “Treaty of Lisbon”.
The international agreement which forms the basis and principles of the EU law.
However, acclamations made on the ties among these nations, as any agreement based on the submission of sovereignty.
The article 50 of this text establishes that any member state may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
Before the referendum 3 million jobs in Britain depended on trade with EU. And even though the leaves used to claim that Britain paid a large amount of almost £20 billion a year to Brussels.
Britain was the eighth-largest contributor per head in UE.
According to BBC news. The UK is one of 10 member states who pay more into the EU budget than they get out. Following France and Germany.
In 2014 and 2015, Poland, Hungary and Greece were the largest beneficiaries, in that order.
The UK also gets an annual rebate that was negotiated by Margaret Thatcher and money back.
In the form of regional development grants and payments to farmers. which added up to £4.6 billion in 2014 and 2015.
According to the latest Treasury figures. The UK’s net contribution for the last few years was £8.8 billion. Nearly double what it was in 2009 and 2010.
Nobody can plausibly argue that all trade with the EU will cease after June 23rd results.
But what is actually behind Brexit?
The origin of Brexit. Shorthand way of saying the UK leaving the EU. Was David Cameron promise in the Conservative Party manifesto for 2015 May’s general elections.
Consisting in a referendum on Britain EU membership. Made on June 23. The Leave won by 52% to 48%, and the turnout was 71.8%, with more than 30 million people voting.
Nevertheless, the inception of the “Euroscepticism”, as it’s commonly called the citizen’s rejection of being part of the EU. It’s older than Mr. Cameron political career.
The reconciliation between France and Germany after Second World War.
Led to the creation of the six-member European Coal and Steel Community in 1957. But Britain stood aside.
Only in the 1960’s the British, beholding the progressive development of the continent economy, try to join, eventually doing so in 1973.
Why is that so?
The actual response is that Britain has always had an essentially transactional relationship with the rest of Europe.
The UE membership has been evaluated over the years in terms of costs and benefits, without emotional commitments.
Britons definite idiosyncrasy and proudly developed as a result of conceiving the UK the strongest and powerful nation over history.
It makes some UE values different than trade agreements. Such as.
“Economic, social and territorial cohesion, and solidarity among the Member States”.
Needlessness, even uncomfortable.
The resistance it’s being strong since the beginning of the union in different political British sections.
By example, Hugh Gaitskell
In 1962 Labour party leader Hugh Gaitskell warned that.
“Joining the common market would end 1.000 years of history”.
The inception of British Euroscepticism is really profound. Matthew Goodwin, of the University of Kent. Connoisseur of the topic and the history of the Eurosceptic UK Independence Party (UKIP). Said before the Brexit referendum that.
“Britain forged its identity against perceived threats from across the Channel”.
And this perception goes beyond generations.
He explained that although the young and better educated tend to be less Eurosceptic.
The popular notion that it is only older working class voters who favor Brexit is not correct.
Sovereignty and democracy are often mentioned sensitive subjects in this point: as Simon Hix of the London School of Economics noticed.
The remoteness and unaccountable institutions joined with a much lazy and knotty elections process of elections are subjects that matter especially to Britons. Who are not used to coalition governments.
However, June 23 referendum results were extremely balanced and showed a strong dichotomy.
London, Scotland and Northern Ireland plumped for “Remain”, while the rest of Britain voted “Leave”.
David Cameron announced. He would step down as prime minister and stock markets plummeted. The initial reaction of the markets was of panic and chaos.
According to an exit poll by Lord Ashcroft, 73% of voters aged 18-24 voted for Remain. While 60% of voters aged 65 and over voted for Leave.
Similar divisions were apparent across education levels: 57% of degree-holders voted to stay in the European Union.
While most of those with only secondary-school educations wanted to leave.
The article 50
But the article 50 doesn’t explain how the to withdraw process will take form. It says. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, fail that.
Two years after the notification. Unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
Especially worrying points on discussion are migration and visa-free travel agreements. Some 3.3 million EU citizens have settled down in Britain.
The biggest community affected will be the Polish with 900,000 immigrants. Followed by the Irish and Germans with 400,000 and just under 300,000, respectively.
Also, more than 1.2 million Britons were currently living in other EU member states. Primarily in Spain, Ireland, France and Germany by June 23rd.
By now, the U.K.’s decision to leave the European Union. It could make it harder for the country to sustain its large and persistent current-account deficit.
Which means it brings in less from overseas trade, investment income, and remittances each year than it shells out to foreigners.
Rob Wood, chief U.K. economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch said.
“If strangers were to become less kind, funding the deficit becomes harder”.
Wall Street Journal affirms that a weaker pound may boost British earnings overseas, but would also stoke inflation.
So British policy makers could get smaller deficit they have yearned for but at the cost of making Britons poorer.
The shock waves from the UK’s June 23 vote to exit the European Union worked financial markets and triggered political upheaval.
Instead, all the factors and the immediate consequences of Britain economic situation leaves affirms. That recovering control and leaving the bureaucracy of EU it’s an investment on long-run.
Hazlitt would say.
“The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy. It consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.”
Only time will tell what’s next on the Britain economic history from now.