Even if we wanted to re-nationalise the steel industry – and we shouldn’t – we couldn’t. The European Union wouldn’t let us. We are told the EU fights for its members’ interests, but it has failed to stop China dumping cheap steel on world markets. And its ludicrous “climate change” policy has helped drive up energy prices until our steel industry just can’t compete. If you wanted an object lesson in how the EU wrecks businesses, steel provides it.
It is a reminder that, while concentrating on the vital question of restoring British independence and democratic accountability, the Leave campaign must talk more about how Brexit will actually help business...
It’s a lie to suggest that Brexit would ruin us
Simon Heffer
The Telegraph
3 April 2016
Ukip leader Nigel Farage, one of the most prominent advocates for Brexit Credit: Peter Byrne/PA
Even if we wanted to re-nationalise the steel industry – and we shouldn’t – we couldn’t. The European Union wouldn’t let us. We are told the EU fights for its members’ interests, but it has failed to stop China dumping cheap steel on world markets. And its ludicrous “climate change” policy has helped drive up energy prices until our steel industry just can’t compete. If you wanted an object lesson in how the EU wrecks businesses, steel provides it.
It is a reminder that, while concentrating on the vital question of restoring British independence and democratic accountability, the Leave campaign must talk more about how Brexit will actually help business. In his useless Budget, George Osborne issued grim warnings about leaving, and some businessmen fear a virtual return to the dark ages if we go: though some fail to read from the script, such as dotty old Lord Rose, with his prediction that wages would rise if we left.
"When we are handed our voting card on the fateful referendum day we should keep in mind that our dynamic economy has dealt us a great hand"
Dr Savvas Savouri
So I was glad to receive a superb research paper by Dr Savvas Savouri of asset managers Toscafund, echoing a thought becoming more widespread in the Square Mile as big business, like almost everything else, starts to show a refreshing lack of unanimity about our European future: a paper that says, in these words, “Britain will be a better place for leaving the European Union.” It has been much discussed in City circles, but what is happening to our steel industry compels me to give it a wider audience.
Dr Savouri’s rationale is straightforward. He identifies “deteriorating” economic fortunes across the EU, and “less popular” attitudes towards it around the world. He likes the idea of it as a free-trade area, but laments that it has, without popular support, become a political construct dabbling in judicial and military matters: to cope with which it has become “frustratingly technocratic and bureaucratic”, unresponsive, expensive, sclerotic and out of touch with global economic currents.
He recognises difficulties in leaving: the currency may depreciate (helping exporters), the labour market may tighten (hence Lord Rose’s rising wages) and some Britons living in Europe may need to return: though with 407,000 working Britons abroad, compared with 2.1 million EU nationals in Britain, and no possibility of those who have immigrated here legally being asked to leave, it is highly unlikely a mass migration will take place. However, such changes are far outweighed by the possibilities Dr Savouri sees for Britain post-Brexit.
“Any attempt to 'economically ostracise’ the UK… would meet with considerable opposition from those beyond our shores whose own interests would be damaged"
Dr Savvas Savouri
His report stresses the importance of China as a growing economic power, and how well-placed Britain is to take advantage of China’s rise – not least because of the number of Chinese speaking English and having an English education – compared with the rest of the EU. Forget the scare stories about a threat to our service industries after Brexit: London’s pre-eminence in finance is “protected” because there is “no plausible alternative in the western hemisphere” to it, not even Frankfurt or New York.
Forget the scare stories about a threat to our service industries after Brexit: London’s pre-eminence in finance is “protected” because there is “no plausible alternative in the western hemisphere” to it, not even Frankfurt or New York
Dr Savouri senses extensive bluffing over post-Brexit trading links with Europe, raising again the question of whether great companies such as BMW and Volkswagen would really support Germany slapping tariffs on Britain after a decision to leave. He refers to the EU’s Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area: it includes Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, so is it feasible it wouldn’t include the UK? Of course not. He also points out that the EU has done a trade deal with Mexico and a customs deal with Turkey, so it is highly unlikely that it would not want some similar arrangement with us.
This is not merely because of the huge balance of payments deficit we have with the EU – in January alone we bought £9.5 billion more goods from them than we sold. It is also because of the damaging effect it would have on the EU in its relations with other international bodies, notably the World Trade Organisation, which works for free trade globally. “Any attempt to 'economically ostracise’ the UK… would meet with considerable opposition from those beyond our shores whose own interests would be damaged,” Dr Savouri writes.
The main benefit to the City – and one so obvious that it beggars belief any big financial institution could want to stay in – is that leaving the EU would stop repeated threats from Brussels to introduce heavy-handed regulation of our financial services industry designed to hobble London and boost Frankfurt and, to some extent, Paris. Fears of a “Tobin tax” – a levy on financial transactions that would make London uncompetitive with financial centres outside Europe – would be over.
Dr Savouri foresees other benefits. Instead of VAT, which Brussels regulates, there could be a sales tax varied, as in America, from region to region according to local needs. He is sure food would be cheaper because our farms are so much more efficient than Europe’s, and we could undercut expensive European produce. And he talks of a chain reaction if we leave: the first link being, quite possibly, Finland’s leaving the euro and making a currency union with non-euro Norway, Sweden and Denmark.
His fundamental point is that Europe is a group of underachievers, with a malfunctioning currency union that is heading for the rocks. Britain, he says, should be dealing with China, America and big Commonwealth countries, building on existing relationships with all of them to develop our huge potential to export financial and other services around the world.
“By 2100 Europe will have been reduced to a minor region, economically and politically, in a world whose power epicentre will have moved many thousands of kilometres to the east,” Dr Savouri concludes. So our choice is between decline and ambition. It was not the choice Messrs Cameron and Osborne put before the British people, but their hysterical scaremongering, like that of their toadies in big business, is best ignored. The EU is but a small and dysfunctional part of the world: the rest of the global economy is ours to embrace and we have the vision to take the chance on June 23: the chance of a lifetime.
It’s a lie to suggest that Brexit would ruin us
It is a reminder that, while concentrating on the vital question of restoring British independence and democratic accountability, the Leave campaign must talk more about how Brexit will actually help business...
It’s a lie to suggest that Brexit would ruin us
Simon Heffer
The Telegraph
3 April 2016
Ukip leader Nigel Farage, one of the most prominent advocates for Brexit Credit: Peter Byrne/PA
Even if we wanted to re-nationalise the steel industry – and we shouldn’t – we couldn’t. The European Union wouldn’t let us. We are told the EU fights for its members’ interests, but it has failed to stop China dumping cheap steel on world markets. And its ludicrous “climate change” policy has helped drive up energy prices until our steel industry just can’t compete. If you wanted an object lesson in how the EU wrecks businesses, steel provides it.
It is a reminder that, while concentrating on the vital question of restoring British independence and democratic accountability, the Leave campaign must talk more about how Brexit will actually help business. In his useless Budget, George Osborne issued grim warnings about leaving, and some businessmen fear a virtual return to the dark ages if we go: though some fail to read from the script, such as dotty old Lord Rose, with his prediction that wages would rise if we left.
"When we are handed our voting card on the fateful referendum day we should keep in mind that our dynamic economy has dealt us a great hand"
Dr Savvas Savouri
So I was glad to receive a superb research paper by Dr Savvas Savouri of asset managers Toscafund, echoing a thought becoming more widespread in the Square Mile as big business, like almost everything else, starts to show a refreshing lack of unanimity about our European future: a paper that says, in these words, “Britain will be a better place for leaving the European Union.” It has been much discussed in City circles, but what is happening to our steel industry compels me to give it a wider audience.
Dr Savouri’s rationale is straightforward. He identifies “deteriorating” economic fortunes across the EU, and “less popular” attitudes towards it around the world. He likes the idea of it as a free-trade area, but laments that it has, without popular support, become a political construct dabbling in judicial and military matters: to cope with which it has become “frustratingly technocratic and bureaucratic”, unresponsive, expensive, sclerotic and out of touch with global economic currents.
He recognises difficulties in leaving: the currency may depreciate (helping exporters), the labour market may tighten (hence Lord Rose’s rising wages) and some Britons living in Europe may need to return: though with 407,000 working Britons abroad, compared with 2.1 million EU nationals in Britain, and no possibility of those who have immigrated here legally being asked to leave, it is highly unlikely a mass migration will take place. However, such changes are far outweighed by the possibilities Dr Savouri sees for Britain post-Brexit.
“Any attempt to 'economically ostracise’ the UK… would meet with considerable opposition from those beyond our shores whose own interests would be damaged"
Dr Savvas Savouri
His report stresses the importance of China as a growing economic power, and how well-placed Britain is to take advantage of China’s rise – not least because of the number of Chinese speaking English and having an English education – compared with the rest of the EU. Forget the scare stories about a threat to our service industries after Brexit: London’s pre-eminence in finance is “protected” because there is “no plausible alternative in the western hemisphere” to it, not even Frankfurt or New York.
Forget the scare stories about a threat to our service industries after Brexit: London’s pre-eminence in finance is “protected” because there is “no plausible alternative in the western hemisphere” to it, not even Frankfurt or New York
Dr Savouri senses extensive bluffing over post-Brexit trading links with Europe, raising again the question of whether great companies such as BMW and Volkswagen would really support Germany slapping tariffs on Britain after a decision to leave. He refers to the EU’s Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area: it includes Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, so is it feasible it wouldn’t include the UK? Of course not. He also points out that the EU has done a trade deal with Mexico and a customs deal with Turkey, so it is highly unlikely that it would not want some similar arrangement with us.
This is not merely because of the huge balance of payments deficit we have with the EU – in January alone we bought £9.5 billion more goods from them than we sold. It is also because of the damaging effect it would have on the EU in its relations with other international bodies, notably the World Trade Organisation, which works for free trade globally. “Any attempt to 'economically ostracise’ the UK… would meet with considerable opposition from those beyond our shores whose own interests would be damaged,” Dr Savouri writes.
The main benefit to the City – and one so obvious that it beggars belief any big financial institution could want to stay in – is that leaving the EU would stop repeated threats from Brussels to introduce heavy-handed regulation of our financial services industry designed to hobble London and boost Frankfurt and, to some extent, Paris. Fears of a “Tobin tax” – a levy on financial transactions that would make London uncompetitive with financial centres outside Europe – would be over.
Dr Savouri foresees other benefits. Instead of VAT, which Brussels regulates, there could be a sales tax varied, as in America, from region to region according to local needs. He is sure food would be cheaper because our farms are so much more efficient than Europe’s, and we could undercut expensive European produce. And he talks of a chain reaction if we leave: the first link being, quite possibly, Finland’s leaving the euro and making a currency union with non-euro Norway, Sweden and Denmark.
His fundamental point is that Europe is a group of underachievers, with a malfunctioning currency union that is heading for the rocks. Britain, he says, should be dealing with China, America and big Commonwealth countries, building on existing relationships with all of them to develop our huge potential to export financial and other services around the world.
“By 2100 Europe will have been reduced to a minor region, economically and politically, in a world whose power epicentre will have moved many thousands of kilometres to the east,” Dr Savouri concludes. So our choice is between decline and ambition. It was not the choice Messrs Cameron and Osborne put before the British people, but their hysterical scaremongering, like that of their toadies in big business, is best ignored. The EU is but a small and dysfunctional part of the world: the rest of the global economy is ours to embrace and we have the vision to take the chance on June 23: the chance of a lifetime.
It’s a lie to suggest that Brexit would ruin us
Last edited: