TOPIC

Brexit
SUBMITTED BY
AMRITA JHA
CLASS: M.COM-2 (Accountancy)
SEMESTER 3
ROLL NO.38

SUBMITTED TO:
UNIVERSITY OF MUMBAI

PROJECT GUIDE:
Prof: Bharat Sir

VIVEK EDUCATION SOCIETYS

VIVEK COLLEGE OF COMMERCE
Siddharth Nagar, Goregaon (W)
Mumbai - 400062
YEAR: 2015-16
VIVEK EDUCATION SOCIETYS VIVEK COLLEGE OF COMMERCE Siddharth Nagar,
Goregaon (W) , MUMBAI-400062.

VIVEK COLLEGE OF COMMERCE

CERTIFICATE
I Prof. Bharat Sir hereby certify that Ms. Amrita Jha. A student of Vivekcollege of
commerce of M.COM-2 Accountancy (Semester 3) has completed project on BREXIT in the
Academic Year 2015-16. This information submitted is to an Original to the best of my
Knowledge.

External Examiner:

Principal

Date:

Project Co-ordinator:

College Seal

Date:

DECLARATION

I Ms

.Amrita

Jha of Vivek college

of commerce, Goregaon(W)

of M.COM-2

ACCOUNTANCY(Semester 3) has completed on BREXIT in the academic year 2015-16.

This information submitted is true and original to the best of my knowledge.

Date:

Signature of student

INDEX
1.

25

Introduction
2.

28
Research Methodology

3.

29
Types of Research

4.

32

5.

Brexit Hypothesis
Data Sources

33

6.
7.

Technique of analysis
Limitation of Brexit

54
55

8.

Literature review

58

ACKNOWLEDEGEMENT

I would like to thanks the University of Mumbai and my college for giving me this
opportunity for taking such a challenging project , which has enhanced my knowledge about
BREXIT
I express my sincere gratitude to the principal, course co-ordinator, Guide Prof. Bharat
Sir and our librarian and other teachers for their constant support and helping for completing the
project.
I am also grateful to my friends for giving support in my project. Lastly , I would like to
thank each and every person who helped me in completing the project especially my parents.
NO ENDEAVOUR ACHIEVES SUCCESS WITHOUT THE ADVICE &COOPERATION OF
OTHER

QUESTIONS
1) Define Research? What are the characteristic of Research?

Research is a process of steps used to collect and analyze information to increase our
understanding of a topic or issue". It consists of three steps: Pose a question, collect data to
answer the question, and present an answer to the question.
Or
In the broadest sense of the word, the definition of research includes any gathering of data,
information and facts for the advancement of knowledge.
Or
The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines research in more detail as "a studious inquiry or
examination; especially investigation or experimentation aimed at the discovery and
interpretation of facts, revision of accepted theories or laws in the light of new facts, or practical
application of such new or revised theories or laws"
Characteristic
1. Research is directed toward the solution of a problem.
2. Research emphasizes the development of generalizations, principles, or theories that will
be helpful in predicting future occurrences. Research usually goes beyond the wcic objects,
groups, orsituations investigated and infers characteristics of a target population from the
sample observed. Research is more than information retrieval, the simple gathering of
information.
3. Research is based upon observable experience or pirical evidence. Certain interesting
questions do not lend themselves to research procedures because they cannot be observed.
4. Research demands accurate observation and description. Researchers may chom to use
quantitative measuring devices whenpossible. Then this is not powble or appropriate to
answer the researchers quesiion, they may choose from a variety of qualitative, or non
quantitative, descriptions of their observations. Good research utilizes valid and reliable data
gathering procedures.
5. Research involves gathering new data from primary or rst hand sources or using existing
data for a new purpm. The students are expected to read a number of encyclopedias, books,
or periodical references and to synthesize the information in a written report. Merely
reorganizing or restating what is already known and has already been written, valuable as it
may be as a learning experience, is not research. lt adds nothing to what is known
6. Although research activity may at times be somewhat random and unsystematic, it is more
often characterized by carefully designed procedures that apply rigorous analysis.
7. Research requires expertise. The researcher knows what is already known about the problem
and how others have investigated it. He or she has searched the related literature carefully
and is also thoroughly grounded in the terminology, concepw, and technical skills necessery
to understand and analyze the data gathered.
8. Research strives to be objective and logical, applying every possible test to validate the
procedures employed, the data collected, and the conclusions reached. The researcher

attempts to eliminate personal bias. There is no attempt to persuade or to prove an

emotionally held conviction. The emphasis is on testing rather than on proving the hypoth
9. .Research involves the quest for answers to unsolved problm. However, previous important
studies are deliberately repeated, using identical or similar procedures, with different
subjects, different settings, and at a different time.This process is replication, a fusion of
the words repetition and duplication. Replication is always desirable to conrm or to raise
questions about the conclusions of a previous study.
10. Research is characterized by patient and unhurried activity. It is rarely spectacular, and
researchers must expect disappointment and discouragement as they pursue the answers to
difcult questions.
11. Research is carefully recorded and reported. Each important term is dened, factors are
recognized, procedures are described in detail, references are carefully documented, resulm
are objectively recorded, and conclusions are presented with scholarly Caution and restraint.
The written report and accompanying data are made available to the scrutiny of associates or
other scholars. Any competent scholar will have the information necessary to analyze,
evaluate, and even replicate the study.
12. Research sometimes requires courage. The history of science reveals that many important
discoveries were made in spite of the opposition of political and religious authorities. The
Polish scientist Copernicus{1473 1543) was condemned by church authorities when
heannounced his conclusion concerning the nature of the solar syst. His theory, in direct
conict with the older Ptolemaic theory, held that the sun, not the earth, was the center of
the solar system.Copernicus angered supporters of prevailing religious dogma, who viewed
his theory as a denial of the story of creation as described in the book of Geni. Modern
researchers in such elds as genetics ,sexual behavior, and even business practices have
aroused violent criticism from those whose personal convictions, experiences, oro rvations
were in conict with some of the research conclusions.

2) Explain need of Research in business of Social science?

A lot of what we do in our daily lives is based on common sense, what we have learnt from
others or what we have learnt through personal experience or observation. But sometimes
common sense is not the best approach and sometimes there are conflicting theories about what
is best or what works in a particular situation. Moreover, what works in one situation or for one
condition might be ineffective or even dangerous in another, or when combined with other
measures. Common sense approaches may overlook the impact of external factors which may
contribute to what is observed. Even in the domain of healthcare, there are gaps in knowledge,
theories about how something might work better and ideas for improvement. As healthcare
professionals cannot afford to take risks, research is needed. For clinical trials, this is even a legal
requirement in that pharmaceutical companies cannot obtain marketing authorization (i.e.
permission to sell their new drugs) until they have proved to the relevant authorities that the drug
is safe and effective. They do this by performing a series of clinical trials. Carefully organized

and controlled research enables researchers to test and compare different theories and
approaches, explore different methods and learn from other peoples experience. It also enables
them to rule out or at least consider external factors which might influence their results. For
example, before concluding that drinking green tea is good for X, Y or Z, it is important to
ensure that the tea drinkers studied do not have something else (i.e. other than drinking green tea)
in common such as being more physically active than non-tea drinkers or being vegetarians,
which might equally explain the findings.Another advantage to carrying out research is that for a
lot of studies, the findings can be recorded numerically and then statistically analysed in order to
determine whether the findings are significant (i.e. the extent to which it can be claimed with a
specified degree of certainty that they are not just due to chance). With quantitative studies, the
results can usually be generalised to the wider population (e.g. to people with dementia, carers,
GPs or lay people in general, depending on the group studied). This is because measures would
have been taken to ensure that the group of people who took part in the study were, as far as
possible, representative of other people in that category.The advantage to many qualitative
studies is that they permit an in-depth investigation into a particular aspect of human experience.
They give people the opportunity to explain in their own words how they feel, what they think
and how they make sense of the world they live in. Whilst it is not possible to make
generalisations about a wider group based on a small qualitative study, in some cases the results
may be transferrable to other like situations or groups. However, the advantage to qualitative
studies is that they provide rich, meaningful data and insight into the complexity of human
experience with all its contradictions, differences and idiosyncrasies. Some address topics which
have not previously been researched and may even deal with controversial, sensitive or taboo
issues. Some studies also serve to give a voice to vulnerable or minority groups.

3) Discuss in Detail Different type of Research?

1) Basic Research
This research is conducted largely for the enhancement of knowledge, and is research which does
not have immediate commercial potential. The research which is done for human welfare, animal
welfare and plant kingdom welfare. It is called basic, pure,fundamental research. The main
motivation is to expand man's knowledge, not to create or invent something.According to
Travers, Basic Research is designed to add to an organized body of scientific knowledge and
does not necessarily produce results of immediate practical value. Such a research is time and
cost intensive.
2) Applied Research
Applied research is designed to solve practical problem of the modern world, rather than to
acquire knowledge for knowledges sake. The goal of applied research is to improve the human
condition. It focus on analysis and solving social and real life problems. This research is

generally conducted on large scale basis, it is expensive. As such, it often conducted with the
support of some financing agency like government , public corporation , world bank, UNICEF,
UGC,Etc,. According to hunt, applied research is an investigation for ways of using scientific
knowledge to solve practical problems for example:- improve agriculture crop production, treat
or cure a specific disease, improve the energy efficiency homes, offices, how can communication
among workers in large companies be improved? Applied research can be further classified as
problem oriented and problem solving research.
3) Problem oriented research
Research is done by industry apex body for sorting out problems faced by all the companies.
Eg:- WTO does problem oriented research for developing countries, in india agriculture and
processed food export development authority (APEDA) conduct regular research for the benefit
of agri-industry.
As the name indicates, Problem identifying researches are undertaken to know the exact nature
of problem that is required to be solved.
Here, one clarification is needed when we use the term Problem, it is not a problem in true
sense. It is usually a decision making dilemma or it is a need to tackle a particular business
situation.
It could be a difficulty or an opportunity.
For e.g.:-Revenue of Mobile company has decreased by 25% in the last year. The cause of the
problem can be any one of the following:
Poor quality of the product. Lack of continuous availability. Not so effective advertising
campaign.
High price.
Poor calibre / lack of motivation in sales people/marketing team.
Tough competition from imported brands.
Depressed economic conditions.
In the same case, suppose the prime cause of problem is poor advertising campaign &
secondary cause is higher pricing.

 To tackle the problem of poor advertising, we have to answer questions like, what can be the
new advertising campaign, who can be the brand ambassador, which media, which channel, at
what time & during which programme advertisements will be broadcast.
4) Problem solving
This type of research is done by an individual company for the problem faced by it. Marketing
research and market research are the applied research. For eg:- videocon international conducts
research to study customer satisfaction level, it will be problem solving research. In short, the
main aim of applied research is to discover some solution for some pressing practical problem.
5) Quantitative Research
This research is based on numeric figures or numbers. Quantitative research aim to measure the
quantity or amount and compares it with past records and tries to project for future period. In
social sciences, quantitative research refers to the systematic empirical investigation of
quantitative properties and phenomena and their relationships. The objective of quantitative
research is to develop and employ mathematical models, theories or hypothesis pertaining to
phenomena. The process of measurement is central to quantitative research because it provides
fundamental connection between empirical observation and mathematical expression of
quantitative relationships. Statistics is the most widely used branch of mathematics in
quantitative research. Statistical methods are used extensively with in fields such as economics
and commerce. Quantitative research involving the use of structured questions, where the
response options have been Pre-determined and large number of respondents is involved. eg:total sales of soap industry in terms of rupees cores and or quantity in terms of lakhs tones for
particular year, say 2008,could be researched, compared with past 5 years and then projection for
2009 could be made.
6) Qualitative Research
Qualitative research presents non-quantitative type of analysis. Qualitative research is collecting,
analyzing and interpreting data by observing what people do and say. Qualitative research refers
to the meanings, definitions, characteristics, symbols, metaphors, and description of things.
Qualitative research is much more subjective and uses very different methods of collecting
information, mainly individual, in-depth interviews and focus groups. The nature of this type of
research is exploratory and open ended. Small number of people are interviewed in depth and or
a relatively small number of focus groups are conducted. Qualitative research can be further
classified in the following type.

I. Phenomenology:-a form of research in which the researcher attempts to understand how one or
more individuals experience a phenomenon. Eg:-we might interview 20 victims of bhopal
tragedy.
II. Ethnography:- this type of research focuses on describing the culture of a group of people. A
culture is the shared attributes, values, norms, practices, language, and material things of a group
of people. Eg:-the researcher might decide to go and live with the tribal in Andaman island and
study the culture and the educational practices.
III. Case study:-is a form of qualitative research that is focused on providing a detailed account
of one or more cases. Eg:-we may study a classroom that was given a new curriculum for
technology use.
IV. Grounded theory:- it is an inductive type of research,based or grounded in the observations of
data from which it was developed; it uses a variety of data sources, including quantitative data,
review of records, interviews, observation and surveys
V. Historical research:-it allows one to discuss past and present events in the context of the
present condition, and allows one to reflect and provide possible answers to current issues and
problems. Eg:-the lending pattern of business in the 19th century.
In addition to the above, we also have the descriptive research. Fundamental research, of which
this is based on establishing various theories
Also the research is classified in to
1. Descriptive research
2. Analytical research
3. Fundamental research
4. Conceptual research
5. Empirical research
6. One time research or longitudinal research
7. Field-setting research or laboratory research or simulation research
8. Clinical or diagnostic research

9. Exploratory research
10.Historical research
11.conclusion oriented research
12.case study research
13.short term research

4) What Is Research Methodology? What are the requisite of good scientific

Method?

The process used to collect information and data for the purpose of making business decisions.
The methodology may include publication research, interviews, surveys and other research
techniques, and could include both present and historical information.
Requisite for a Good Scientific Method
1)

Careful logical analysis of the problem, separating its elements and whenever possible
formulating hypothesis.

2) Collection of data pertinent to the problem under the study

3) Classification of data
4) Sound logical reasoning
5) Specific and clear statement of generalization
6) Complete elimination of personal equation
7) Complete and careful reporting of research process.

5) Explain the steps or process in the scientific research?

The typical eight-step research process includes:
1. Select a problem.
2. Review existing research and theory (when relevant).
3. Develop hypotheses or research questions.
4. Determine an appropriate methodology/research design.
5. Collect relevant data.
6. Analyze and interpret the results.
7. Present the results in appropriate form.
8. Replicate the study (when necessary).
Step 4 includes the decision of whether to use qualitative research (such as focus groups or oneon-one interviews using small samples) or a quantitative research (such as telephone interviews)
where large samples are used to allow results to be generalized to the general population under
study.
Steps 2 and 8 are optional in private sector research because in many instances research is
conducted to answer a specific and unique question related to a future decision, such as whether
to invest a large sum of money in a developing medium. In this type of project, generally, there is
no previous research to consult, and there seldom is a reason to replicate (repeat) the study
because a decision will be made on the basis of the first analysis. However, if there search
provided inconclusive results, the study would be revised and replicated.
Each step in the eight-step research process depends on all the others to help produce a
maximally efficient research study.
Before a literature search is possible, a clearly stated research problem is required; to design the
most efficient method of investigating a problem, the researcher needs to know what types of
studies have been conducted, and so on. All the steps are interactive: the results or conclusions of
any step have a bearing on other steps. For example, a literature search may refine and even alter
the initial research problem; a study conducted previously by another company or business in the
private sector might have similar effects.

6) Write a notes on review of literature?

A Literature Review is an overview of what others have written about a specified topic.
Obviously, you cannot read everything that has been written about a subject but your Literature

Review should show that you have a good grasp of the main issues. Your source material may
include books; articles from journals, newspapers or reputable magazines; websites, etc.
Although you are reporting what others have written, your literature review is not simply a lot of
"separate chunks" of "stuff you have read". You should aim to compose your ideas into a
flowing argument or explanation. To this end, you might:
compare or contrast the different viewpoints you have encountered;
group together those authors who broadly agree with each other;
note the disagreements that exist between authors;
trace the development or refinement of a theory;
identify areas that have not been considered or researched;
raise questions;
add your own opinions (suitably backed up by argument or experience).
The very words literature review seem to generate a lot of anxiety among students who meet
the phrase for the first time. What is this new mysterious form of academic writing? How do I go
about creating one of them for myself? In many ways, a literature review is a form of research
report, where the data are the readings that have been located and the major part of the report is
the analysis of that data. And this is perhaps the heart of the matter analytical insight. A
review must not simply describe or summarise the literature, a review must critically assess that
literature. Thus, an effective review analyses and synthesises the published work on a topic and
should (University of Melbourne Library, 2012): Summarise and evaluate findings In addition to
all these expectations, writing a literature review . literature review is a text of a scholarly paper,
which includes the current knowledge including substantive findings, as well as theoretical and
methodological contributions to a particular topic. Literature reviews are secondary sources, and
do not report new or original experimental work. Most often associated with academic-oriented
literature, such reviews are found in academic journals, and are not to be confused with book
reviews that may also appear in the same publication. Literature reviews are a basis for research
in nearly every academic field.[1][unreliable source] A narrow-scope literature review may be included as
part of a peer-reviewed journal article presenting new research, serving to situate the current
study within the body of the relevant literature and to provide context for the reader. In such a
case, the review usually precedes the methodology and results sections of the work. Producing a
literature review may also be part of graduate and post-graduate student work, including in the
preparation of a thesis, dissertation, or a journal article. Literature reviews are also common in
a research proposal or prospectus (the document that is approved before a student formally
begins a dissertation or thesis).

7) What is Research design? Explain it essential of research design?

The research design refers to the overall strategy that you choose to integrate the different
components of the study in a coherent and logical way, thereby, ensuring you will effectively
address the research problem; it constitutes the blueprint for the collection, measurement, and

analysis of data. A research design is the plan of a research study. The design of a study defines
the study type (descriptive, co-relational, semi-experimental, experimental, review, metaanalytic)
and
sub-type
(e.g.,
descriptive-longitudinal case
study), research
question, hypotheses, independent and dependent variables, experimental design, and, if
applicable, data collection methods and a statistical analysis plan. Research design is the
framework that has been created to seek answers to research questions.

8) Explain the different type of research design?

There are many ways to classify research designs, but sometimes the distinction is artificial and
other times different designs are combined. Nonetheless, the list below offers a number of useful
distinctions between possible research designs.[1]

Descriptive (e.g., case-study, naturalistic observation, survey)

Correlational (e.g., case-control study, observational study)

Semi-experimental (e.g., field experiment, quasi-experiment)

Experimental (experiment with random assignment)

Review (literature review, systematic review)

Meta-analytic (meta-analysis)

Sometimes a distinction is made between "fixed" and "flexible" designs. In some cases these
types coincide with quantitative and qualitative research designs respectively,[2]though this need
not be the case. In fixed designs, the design of the study is fixed before the main stage of data
collection takes place. Fixed designs are normally theory driven; otherwise it is impossible to
know in advance which variables need to be controlled and measured. Often, these variables are
measured quantitatively. Flexible designs allow for more freedom during the data collection
process. One reason for using a flexible research design can be that the variable of interest is not
quantitatively measurable, such as culture. In other cases, theory might not be available before
one starts the research.
Historical Research Design - The purpose is to collect, verify, synthesize evidence to establish
facts that defend or refute your hypothesis. It uses primary sources, secondary sources, and lots

of qualitative data sources such as logs, diaries, official records, reports, etc. The limitation is
that the sources must be both authentic and valid.
Case and Field Research Design - Also called ethnographic research, it uses direct observation
to give a complete snapshot of a case that is being studied. It is useful when not much is known
about a phenomenon. Uses few subjects.
Descriptive or Survey Research Design - It attempts to describe and explain conditions of the
present by using many subjects and questionnaires to fully describe a phenomenon. Survey
research design /survey methodology is one of the most popular for dissertation
research.There are many advantages.
Correlational or Prospective Research Design - It attempts to explore relationships to make
predictions. It uses one set of subjects with two or more variables for each.
Causal Comparative or Ex Post Facto Research Design - This research design attempts to
explore cause and affect relationships where causes already exist and cannot be manipulated. It
uses what already exists and looks backward to explain why.
Developmental or Time Series Research Design - Data are collected at certain points in time
going forward. There is an emphasis on time patterns and longitudinal growth or change.
Experimental Research Design - This design is most appropriate in controlled settings such as
laboratories. The design assumes random assignment of subjects and random assignment to
groups (E and C). It attempts to explore cause and affect relationships where causes can be
manipulated to produce different kinds of effects. Because of the requirement of random
assignment, this design can be difficult to execute in the real world (non laboratory) setting.
Quasi Experimental Research Design - This research design approximates the experimental
design but does not have a control group. There is more error possible in the results.
9) What is sampling ?explain essential of good sampling?
Ans. Sampling is the process of selecting units (e.g., people, organizations) from a population
of interest so that by studying the sample we may fairly generalize our results back to the
population from which they were chosen. Let's begin by covering some of the key terms in
sampling like "population" and "sampling frame." Then, because some types of sampling rely
upon quantitative models, we'll talk about some of the statistical terms used in sampling.
Finally, we'll discuss the major distinction between probability and Nonprobability sampling
methods and work through the major types in each.
Essentials of good Sampling?

In order to reach at right conclusions, a sample must possess the following essential
characteristics.
1. Representative:
The sample should truly represent the characteristics of the verse. For this investigator should be
free from bias and the method of collection should be appropriate.
2. Adequacy:
The size of the sample should be adequate i.e., neither too large nor small but commensurate
with the size of the population.
3. Homogeneity:
There should be homogeneity in the nature of all the units selected for the sample. If the units of
the sample are of heterogeneous character it will impossible to make a comparative study with
them.
4. Independent ability:
The method of selection of the sample should be such that the items of the sample are selected in
an independent manner. This means that lection of one item should not influence the selection of
another item in any manner d that each item should be selected on the basis of its own merit.

10) Explain the different method or technique of sampling?

The process which involves the selection of the sample but does not involve its composition is
called as the sampling method. There are different methods for carrying out the sampling process
and these methods can be categorized as follows
a. Probability Sampling Studying different methods for the sampling is very important as its
study helps in the improvement of the precision, accuracy, efficiency etc. of the different sample
results, as these are very much dependent on the actual method that is being used.
This method of sampling, as the name suggests, depends on the theory of the probability. The
selection of the units from a population is done depending on the probabilities that are known.
Probability sampling is a process of sample selection in which the elements are chosen by chance
methods through tables of the random numbers.
The probability sampling method is also referred to as the random sampling method and is
mainly used in the cases involving significant decisions, not giving much importance to the
budget and the time.

Probability sampling methods are of the following types

1. Simple Random Sampling
Is free from the personal bias.
Sample is drawn in such a way that the every member of the population has an equal chance of
being included in the sample.
Sample obtained is referred to as the Random Sample.
Very suitable, if the population is small or if the list of the elements in the population can be
made.
Very useful in the cases involving a homogeneous population.
Is further of two types simple random sampling with replacement and the other one is the
simple random sampling without replacement.
If the units of a sample are drawn one by one from the population in such a way that after every
drawing the selected unit is returned to the population then this is called as the simple random
sampling with replacement.
And if the units of a sample are drawn one by one from the population in such a way that after
every drawing the selected unit is not returned to the population then this is called as the simple
random sampling without replacement.
Random sampling can be performed with the help of certain specific methods and some of these
methods are
A. Lottery method
A lottery is drawn by writing a number or the names of various units and then putting them in a
container.
They are completely mixed and then certain numbers are picked up from the container.
Those picked are taken up for the sampling.
B. Tippets Numbers method
Was evolved by L.H.C Tippet, name of this method comes from his name.
He made a list of 10, 4000 four digit numbers written at random on each page.
From these numbers, samples are drawn at random.
Is a very reliable and a dependable method.
C. Selection from Sequential List
Names are arranged serially in a specific pattern.
Pattern may be alphabetical, geographical or it may be serial in nature.
Then from the list, any number may be taken up.
Selection can be started from anywhere.

D. Grid System
Involves drawing of the map of the entire area.
Then screen with the squares placed on the map of the entire area is drawn.
After this the screen with the squares placed upon the map and some of the squares are selected
at random.
Then the screen is placed upon the map and the area falling in the selected squares is taken as
the sample.
2. Stratified random sampling This type of probability sampling method is one of the most
commonly used methods and involves the division of the whole population into a number of
strata.
These strata are very much exclusive and also very exhaustive in the nature. From each of these
strata, a simple random sample is drawn, by this; the number of the samples drawn from each of
the sample becomes proportional to their respective strata size. When the population is
heterogeneous in nature, this type of sampling plays a very critical role. The stratification in this
method is performed in such an elegant way that the variance between the strata is high and data
within each stratum is very small.
Types of Stratified Random Sampling
A. Disproportionate Stratified Random Sampling In this type of sampling, equal number of the
units are drawn from each stratum, not depending on the size of the strata.
B. Proportionate Stratified Random Sampling in this type of sampling, the number of units in
each stratum is proportionate to its number in the universe.
3. Systematic random sampling This method involves the formation of a sample in a very
systematic manner, involves the arrangement of the units in the population in a serial manner. A
major point to be kept in mind here is that the population should be finite in nature and also
should be defined very clearly.
After this, from the first K units, one unit is selected at random, this unit and also every K th unit
onwards from the serially listed populations forms a systematic sample. This method is very
simple and convenient in use as it saves a lot of time.
4. Multi Stage sampling As the name suggests, this method takes place in a number of stages
population consists of first stage units and each of these first stage units consist of a number of
second stage units. These second stage units further consist of the third stage units and this is
followed till the ultimate unit is achieved.
One of the major positive points of such a sampling method is that the frame of the second stage
units is needed only for the selected first stage units. In this sampling procedure, sample from the
first stage units is chosen with the help of any method that is suitable or correct. After this the

sample of the second stage is chosen by suitable method from first stage units and then this
procedure is followed until the ultimate units are reached.
5. Cluster Sampling This type of method is very useful in lowering the filed cost as this
method is a very practical and easily opera table method. Here the population is divided into a
number of groups and these groups are referred to as the clusters and further these clusters are
referred to as the primary sampling units. This method involves first of all the identification of
the cluster, according to which clusters may be units like districts, talukas, city blocks, schools
etc. Clusters should be homogeneous in the internal characteristics. Then further in this method,
determination of the number of the stages is to be done.
It may involve single stage or two stage or multi stage sampling.
b. Non Probability Sampling This type of method does not provide any type of ground for
estimating the probability for each item in the population process to be included in the sample.
Here sampling error is not measurable and such methods are used widely to contact the
respondents in this case as the primary objective involves the probing for the possible range of
the answers.
Non Probability Sampling methods are mainly classified as
1. Convenience sampling
Selection of the samples is done according to the convenience of the researcher.
Representatives of the samples cannot be known.
So as a result of this, results that are received are biased in nature.
Not suitable for use in the descriptive and the casual studies.
Suitable for the exploratory studies.
Very useful in testing of the questionnaire.
2. Judgment Sampling
Also called as the Purposive sampling.
Firstly, a sample is drawn from the population, which a researcher thinks to be a representative
of the population.
All the members do not get the chance to get selected in the sample.
3. Quota Sampling
Form of the Stratified sampling.
Number to be selected from each stratum is referred to as the Quota.
Quota is selected in advance.
Used in the marketing research studies.

 Sample is selected on the basis of parameters like the age, sex, income etc.
Field workers mainly choose the sample and are assigned quotas.

11) What is secondary data & explain its limitation?

Secondary research is research already published, and is the cheapest form of research because
the data already exists for your acquisition. Secondary research can be split into internal and
external research.
Internal Secondary Research
Sources Of Internal Secondary Research
Internally an organisation has access to a wealth of information, which can be a useful tool for
decision making for managers. Information available may assist the organisation in discovering
why sales are decreasing, why customers are not satisfied, customer usage rates and so on.
Sources for internal secondary research include:

National product sales

Regional product sales

Customer usage rates

Guarantee/Warranty cards completed by customers

Customer comments or complaints

Sales employees

Research and development employees

Past research conducted by the organisation

Clearly as this information can be generated internally the only cost for the firm is the
cost of the time taken by the researcher to collate the data.

External Secondary Research

Sources Of External Secondary Research
On occasions when internal secondary research isn't enough you may need to look at research
carried out by others outside the organisation. Sources for external secondary research include:

Periodicals

Specialist marketing reports i.e. Mintel

Industry magazines

Chamber of commerce

Government statistics

Internet

Professional bodies

Trade associations

Limitations Of Secondary Research.

It is easy to find and collect secondary data., however, you need to be aware of the limitations the
data may have and the problems that could arise if these limitations are ignored.
1. Secondary data can be general and vague and may not really help companies with
decision making
2. The information and data may not be accurate. The source of the data must always
be checked
3. The data maybe old and out of date
4. The sample used to generate the secondary data may be small
5. The company publishing the data may not be reputable

12)

Explain different method of collecting primary data?

Following are given the methods for collection of such data:

(i) Direct personal investigation.

(ii) Indirect oral investigation.

(iii) Through local correspondents.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(iv) Mailed Questionnaire.
(v)Schedules sent through enumerators.
1. Direct personal Investigation:
Here, the investigator himself visits the persons those are source of the data and collects
necessary information either through interview with the persons concerned or through
observation of the data on the spot. This method is suitable where intensive study of any
phenomenon is required.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
This method has many merits and demerits which are given as following:
Merits:
1. The data is more reliable as they are obtained directly.
2. Sensitive questions can be avoided.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
3. There is chance of more response in it.
4. The questions can be adjusted according to the standard of the sources.
5. There is uniformity in data.

Demerits:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
1. It is not suitable where the field is very vast and wide.

2. It is very much expensive.

3. It needs a large number of enumerators.
4. It takes long time to collect the data from all the persons.
5. It is purely subjective in nature, therefore the success of investigation depends mostly
intelligence, skill, tact, insight, honesty and other qualities of investigators.
Suitability:
This method is suitable when:
1. Area of investigation is limited.
2. A very high degree of accuracy is required.
3. The result of investigation is to be kept secret.
4. Area of investigation is homogeneous i.e. having same qualities.
Precautions:
1. Investigator should be trained and skilled.
2. Investigator should not have personal bias.
3. Investigator should be polite and questions should be simple.
4. Investigator must belong to the culture of the informant.
2. Indirect Oral Investigation:
Here, the investigator collects the data indirectly by interviewing persons who are known to be
close to the original persons or the incidence. This method is adopted when the original persons
are not found or found to be reluctant to provide the required information. In this method a list of
questions is prepared, and the witnesses are invited and made to answer the questions. The
answers are recorded by the investigators.
This method has its merits and demerits also:
Merits:
1. It can cover a wide area.

2. It needs less time, energy and money.

3. Third party does not conceal the facts.
4. Intelligence, skill and tact of the investigator brings accuracy.
5. It is simple and convenient.
Demerits:
1. The information obtained from the other persons may not be reliable.
2. The third parties may be biased.
3. The witness chosen may not be proper for the cause or not expert in this field.
Suitability:
This method is suitable when:
1. The direct approach to sources does not exist.
2. The person cannot be relied upon
3. The area of investigation is large.
4. The information is needed, is kept secret from person.
Precautions:
1. Witnesses should not be biased about the subject.
2. Respondent or witness should have adequate knowledge about the person, whose information
is to be received.
3. Number of witnesses should be large.
4. A cross check must be undertaken by investigator.
3. Information through Local Correspondents:
In this method, the investigator does not work but appoints local agents or enumerators in
different parts of the area. These agents or enumerators are asked to collect information and

transmit it to the investigator. This method is often adopted by government, semi-government

and bigger private institutions to collect the information for any purpose.
Following are the merits and demerits of this method:
Merits:
1. This method is cheap or economical.
2. There is economy of time and labour in this method.
3. This method can be used where the area of inquiry is wide.
4. Quality of data is better as enumerators are trained.
Demerits:
1. Data are not reliable which are collected by this method.
2. If high degree of accuracy is required this method is not adopted.
3. The data are not original if collected by this method.
4. Collected data lack uniformity because they are collected by different correspondents and they
differ in quality and taste.
Suitability:
This method is suitable when:
(i)Rough and approximate estimates are required.
(ii)The information is wanted at regular intervals.
(iii) The field of inquiry is wide.

Introduction

Harold Wilson once opined that a week is a long time in politics. This much overused
phrase is apt for describing the events that have followed in the wake of the momentous
Referendum vote for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. Wilson was the Prime
Minister who originally introduced plebiscitary decision-making to Britain in an attempt to bring
unity to his fractious government. The contentious issue was, then as now, UK relations with its
continental partners. Despite the electorate voting decisively to stay in the then European
Economic Community in 1975 the question over British membership was not resolved. The
closeness of the 2016 result and its implications will ensure the issue continues to dominate
debate for the foreseeable future. British exit from the European Union, so-called Brexit, will
have profound consequences. The Referendum delivered a 52% to 48% victory to the Leave
campaign but this result masks serious division within the UK. Scotland voted 62% to Remain
and there are now plans to hold another referendum on independence to protect the countrys EU
membership. Although its constitutional status within the UK is less in doubt there are also
implications for Northern Ireland, where 56% backed Remain, given it shares a border with the
European Union. In contrast, England and Wales both supported Leave by a slightly larger
margin than the UK as a whole. But even here the campaign has been blamed for stoking
resentments and, in the tragic case of the late MP Jo Cox, violence of the most heinous kind.
There is also major uncertainty about the state of the British economy and the degree to which it
can cope with the potential consequences of Brexit, whenever the latter process formally begins.
Aside from the economic situation Britain also faces political uncertainty following the
resignation of David Cameron and the failure of Boris Johnson, his nemesis, to succeed him as
Prime Minister. This after a highly unusual campaign in which both of these Conservatives,
effectively the respective leaders of the rival Remain and Leave camps, only declared how they
would vote in the Referendum months before the country had to decide. Although more united
before the vote, the opposition Labour Party has since been plunged into turmoil by an attempt to
overthrow Jeremy Corbyn. Despite the consistently close polls, the verdict delivered on 23rd
June still came as a shock to many experts. Three weeks before this historic vote former
Education minister and Leave campaigner Michael Gove argued people in this country have had
enough of experts. But now, more than ever, expert and public alike need to try and make sense
of what has happened and could now unfold. This report is a modest attempt to pursue this goal.

The aim of this publication is to capture immediate thoughts, reflections and early research
insights of leading scholars in media and politics in the UK; and in this way contribute to public
understanding of the 2016 EU Referendum whilst it is still fresh in the memory and help shape
the path ahead. Here, we are particularly interested in what ways different forms of media,
journalism and political communication contributed to peoples engagement with the democratic
process during the Referendum and crucially the relationship between media, citizens, and
politicians.
There are eight sections to the report. The opening Context section lays the foundations
of the historical debate over UK-European relations including more recent controversies
surrounding immigration and sovereignty, often played out through the news media. The Politics
section focuses on the contemporary debate and begins to unpack some of the key political
themes of the Referendum campaign such as the rhetoric of excess, the role of facts, falsehoods
and political infighting. Whilst the Referendum was in many ways an exercise in democracy as
people power, serious questions are raised by contributors about how democratic the campaign
actually was given the campaign strategies of the respective Leave and Remain sides. These
campaign themes reverberate throughout this report and are given detailed attention in the
Campaign and Political Communication and Social Media sections. Here, we can also consider
this Referendum campaign in the context of ongoing debates around contemporary campaigning
through billboards, social media, popular culture and televised debates. In this fiercely contested
and divisive campaign, what role did the news media play? In the News and Journalism sections,
we offer empirical, theoretical and at times, polemical perspectives on this question. Whilst press
coverage might have been quite predictable, a number of authors question the more problematic
notion of broadcast impartiality and its role in presenting the issues to the public. A public, it
should be noted, that professed widespread dissatisfaction with the quality of information they
received during the campaign. The fallout from Brexit has been truly tumultuous for both the
main UK political parties and their leadership. In the penultimate section we therefore turn
attention to the Parties and evaluate the significance of the campaign for the major UK wide
contenders for power.
The final section focusses on Voters, including identity, emotion, Britishness, young
people, gender and social class. This sheer diversity of perspectives tells us that there is no single

explanation for why UK voters chose to vote leave on 23rd June 2016. Published within ten days
of the Referendum, these contributions are short and accessible. Authors provide authoritative
analysis of the campaign, including research findings or new theoretical insights; to bring readers
original ways of understanding the Referendum. Contributions also bring a rich range of
disciplinary influences, from political science to cultural studies, journalism studies to
psychology. We hope this makes for a vibrant, informative and engaging read. The people of
Britain voted for a British exit, or Brexit, from the EU in a historic referendum on Thursday June
23. The outcome prompted jubilant celebrations among Eurosceptics around the the Continent
and sent shockwaves through the global economy. After the declaration of the result, the pound
fell to its lowest level since 1985 and David Cameron resigned as Prime Minister. Mr Cameron
said: I do not think it would be right for me to try to be the captain that steers our country to its
next destination. Mrs May has said that she will trigger Article 50 - the step that starts the timer
on two years of Brexit talks - by the end of March 2017. This means that Britain is scheduled to
leave the EU by March 2019. On the day of Brexit, the Great Repeal Bill will come into force
and end the supremacy of EU law over Britain's own legislation. Her phrase "Brexit means
Brexit" has become a tired cliche and she has not yet confirmed whether the UK will leave the
EU's single market. Meanwhile Nicola Sturgeon has raised the prospect of a second Scottish
independence referendum because most Scots voted to remain in the EU. Spain's Government
has also called for joint control of Gibraltar and Sinn Fein has demanded a vote to unite Ireland
and Northern Ireland. Jeremy Corbyn is now standing in a leadership contest against MP Owen
Smith, who has pledged to block Brexit if there is not another public vote.
Ukip has elected Diane James as its new leader after Brexiteer Nigel Farage stepped
down in order get his "life back" this summer. The Brexit victory sent economic shockwaves
through global markets and Britain lost its top AAA credit rating. The Bank of England has
cut interest rates and taken other emergency steps to help stop the UK from slipping into
recession There is ongoing uncertainty over what will happen once Britain leaves the EU
because it has to make new trade agreements with the rest of the world.

Research Methodology :

On June 23, people in the United Kingdom will vote on a referendum on whether to
remain in the European Union or to leave the Brussels-based institution, a decision that has come
to be called Brexit. The British go to the polls at a time when a new multi-nation survey from
Pew Research Center finds that Euroskepticism is on the rise across Europe and that about twothirds of both the British and the Greeks, along with significant minorities in other key nations,
want some powers returned from Brussels to national governments. Whether favorable or not
toward Brussels, most Europeans agree that a British exit would harm the 28-member EU. A
median of just 51% across 10 EU countries surveyed have a favorable view of the European
Union. A median of 42% in these 10 nations want more power returned to their national
capitals, while only 19% favor giving Brussels more power and 27% favor the status quo.
Nevertheless, a median of 70% in the nine EU nations surveyed that dont get a vote June 23
believe it would be bad for the EU if the UK decided to depart. Only 16% say it would be a good
thing. European publics are sharply divided along partisan lines on many of these issues.
Supporters of Euroskeptic parties especially in France, Italy, Poland, Spain and the UK are
much less likely than adherents to other major parties to have a favorable view of the European
Union.
These are among the key findings from a new survey by Pew Research Center, conducted
in 10 EU nations among 10,491 respondents from April 4 to May 12, 2016. The survey includes
countries that account for 80% of the EU-28 population and 82% of the EUs GDP.double dip in
EU favorability The British are not the only ones with doubts about the European Union. The
EUs image and stature have been on a roller coaster ride in recent years throughout Europe. In a
number of nations the portion of the public with a favorable view of the Brussels-based
institution fell markedly from 2012 to 2013 as the European economy cratered. It subsequently
rebounded in 2014 and 2015. But the EU is again experiencing a sharp dip in public support in a
number of its largest member states. The institutions strongest backers are the Poles (72%) and
the Hungarians (61%). In many other nations, support is tepid. Just 27% of the Greeks, 38% of
the French and 47% of the Spanish have a favorable opinion of the EU. Notably, 44% of the
British view the EU favorably, including 53% of the Scottish.
EU favorability is down in five of the six nations surveyed in both 2015 and 2016.There has been
a double-digit drop in France (down 17 percentage points) and Spain (16 points), and single-digit

declines in Germany (8 points), the United Kingdom (7 points) and Italy (6 points). Young
people those ages 18 to 34 are more favorable toward the European Union than people 50
and older in six of the 10 nations surveyed. The generation gap is most pronounced in France
25 percentage points with 56% of young people but only 31% of older people having a positive
opinion of the EU. There are similar generation gaps of 19 points in the UK, 16 points in the
Netherlands, 14 points in Poland and Germany, and 13 points in Greece. The drop-off in overall
EU support in key countries in the past year has been driven by a fall in favorability among older
people in particular. In France, EU backing among those ages 50 and older fell 19 points. In
Spain it declined 16 points and in Germany 11 points. In each case this was larger than the
decline in support among those ages 18 to 34.

Types of Research
By Debra Goodell
While the ramifications of the United Kingdoms split from the European Union remain far from
clear at this point, research offices in and outside of the U.K. are preparing for the new reality of
research at British universities. Though the margin of voters that chose to Brexit rather than
Bremain in the E.U. at the national level was less than 4%, one group within the U.K. was
overwhelmingly against the secession: researchers. The University Research Forum took a
deeper look at the trouble facing researchers in the U.K. post-Brexit and what opportunities
could emerge for the future of research enterprises in the U.S., Canada, and other countries.
Funding is a big concern for researchers in the U.K.
Brexit brings with it new concerns about dissolving international research teams and
complications to collaborative projects. But a report in Nature published prior to the referendum
cited a more familiar fear among researchers with U.K. ties: a loss of funding. The U.K. receives
about 1.4 billion (about $1.6 billion) each year as a result of E.U. partnerships and direct
funding to research. Many researchers worry that the United Kingdom cannot afford to lose those
funds, especially not on on top of losses in domestic research budgets, which may be slashed to

re-allocate support to public programs that could also lose funding. Of polled researchers who
planned to vote in the Brexit referendum, 78% felt that Brexit would harm U.K. science, versus
just 9% who felt that it would be beneficial. U.K. and E.U. researchers also responded that an
exit would harm science in the rest of the E.U., though less severely than in the U.K. In June,
more than 100 vice-chancellors signed an open letter warning that Brexit would hurt the U.K.s
position as a global leader in science and the arts and limit opportunities for U.K. research to
take part in cutting-edge research, from medical and health care advances to new materials,
products, and services. Vice-chancellors have also voiced concerns that U.K. researchers would
lose the ability to contribute to collaborative, international grand challenges, such as climate
change. And U.K.-based nonprofit groups that fund this type of research, still recovering from
the 2008 recession, may not only experience funding difficulties but also limitations on the
impact of their grants due to restricted resources and talent pools within U.K. research. ProBrexit politicians have stated that countries outside of the E.U. can still partner with European
Union countries in research projects and that the U.K. can participate in the E.U.s Horizon 2020
Programme for Research and Innovation, but this will require the U.K. to negotiate the continued
free movement of people across E.U./U.K. borders.
Early ramifications
While the terms of Brexit still need to be negotiated, international collaborations are already
being restructured. E.U. research projects have started to lose British researchers as project
leaders decide that its too risky to wait for terms (which may take two years) that may not result
in British funding. An article in the Times Higher Education recently quoted Sarah Main,
director of the U.K. organization Campaign for Science and Engineering, on the ramifications of
the Brexit vote for scientists:Science is an area where the relationship between the U.K. and the
E.U. was particularly beneficial. Not least because scientists won billions of pounds of research
funding for the U.K., above and beyond what we put in (8.8B between 2007 and 2013.) In
addition, free movement of people in the E.U. made it easy for scientists to travel, collaborate,
and share ideas with the best in Europe and for companies and universities in the U.K. to easily
access top talent from Europe.Other U.K. university associations, such as the Russell Group and
Universities UK, also advocated against Brexit due to fears about its impact on research. Of
course, there are British researchers for whom life has not changed much with Brexit,

particularly those with multi-year research grants from U.K. agencies. But for others, future
research plans hang in the balance.
U.K. Post-Doc Scientist in Physical Chemistry
Changes for the rest of us
In addition to economic instability, some have suggested that ties between the U.S. and E.U.
countries may become somewhat strained due to cultural and economic ties between the U.S. and
the U.K. But despite larger economic concerns, there could be potential benefits for research in
the U.S.
International research partnerships
U.K. researchers emphasize that international research collaboration is vital to the health of U.K.
research. The small size of the U.K. provides universities with few options for domestic research
partnerships. In previous years, U.K. scientists have often used E.U. collaboration to enhance
their portfolios. Severed research ties between British and European labs may lead top
researchers from the U.K. to look to the U.S. to fulfill international collaboration goals. Further,
the U.K.s population of just under 65 million does not provide a large enough sample size to
conduct large-scale clinical trials, particularly for the treatment of childhood cancers and rare
diseases.
Our research brief provides more insight on strategic faculty recruitment
Recruiting top talent
U.K. universities also fear that Brexit will lead to a mass exodus of top graduates, researchers,
and administrators to other countries. As noted in a letter of opposition to Brexit signed by 150
Royal Society fellows, talented, young researchers from other countries in the E.U. often move
to the U.K. and bring funding with them. Now other E.U. countries may be poised to recruit
researchers and other professionals who seek to leave the U.K. Other E.U. countries have already
begun to recruit U.K. professionals in the financial sector, and recruitment will likely occur in
higher education should the terms of the Brexit negotiation further limit research and funding
opportunities.The Wall Street Journal reports that corporate and financial headhunters in the U.K.
predict a slowing of hiring across sectors as businesses try to determine the impact of Brexit, and

our contacts report that the same has been true for headhunters of higher education
administrators.
Long-term impacts
The instability of the future of U.K. research stemming from the Brexit decision will likely
remain a source of anxiety within the U.K. and the E.U. and a topic of conversation across
universities internationally for the next few years. The University Research Forum will be
keeping an eye on this issue as events unfold to determine its effects on the research enterprise
within and outside of the U.K.

Brexit Hypothesis
by Francesco Capriglione
Abstract: This paper concerns the position of the United Kingdom in the framework of diversity
that characterizes the European Union, by focusing on the uncertainty caused by a referendum on
the Brexit hypothesis.The Author considers also the UKs will to base the decision on
remaining or not within the Union on a mere cost-benefit analysis, by underlining that the
relationships between European countries are now gradually carrying within a framework mainly
characterized by financial patterns (with obvious, consequent limited possibilities to refer the
abovementioned relationships to socio-political purposes). In this context, the Brexit perspective
increases the feeling of uncertainty, highlighting the difficulty of identifying a way out from
the impasse situation in which the EU currently seems to be stuck. This is why the Author shows
that the future fate of Europe should be characterized only by economic and financial
relationships aimed at increasing the common market, but not also adequate to support the
concrete realization of a political union dream, that risks to remain segregate in an unreal
wishful thinking.
BREXIT: the impact on the UK and the EU June 2015
For the majority of businesses in Britain the possibility the UK might leave the European Union
Brexit is a major source of concern. Both the break with the EU and the uncertainty associated

with it would be bad for business and damaging to the UK economy. A great deal has now been
written on the economic consequences for the UK of Brexit. Some of this is impartial; much of it
is partisan. Very little has been written on the consequences for the rest of the EU. This report
seeks to address this gap by systematically assessing the evidence on the impact of Brexit on
both the UK and the rest of Europe. At the heart of this analysis are ten distinct channels of
impact. For each we consider in turn the impact on the UK and on the rest of the EU. We also
assess the specific ways in which different member states are exposed through these channels.
We conclude that while the biggest impact of Brexit would be on the UK, there can be little
doubt that there will also be a significant impact on the rest of the EU. This report has been
prepared by Global Counsel based on our interpretation or the politics of Brexit and our analysis
of the best available economic evidence. Gregor Irwin Chief Economist, Global Counsel

Data Sources
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2761538
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brexit
www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32810887
www.express.co.uk News Politics
www.economist.com/Brexit
www.investopedia.com/terms/b/brexit.asp
In a recent analysis on the reasons behind the complex relation between politics and finance in
the EU, I stressed how a general tendency, observed in the European environment, towards a
Union with wider borders could practically lead to a weakening of the integration process; hence
an obvious, consequent surrender of the possibility of a political union, in which only the most
nostalgic of the European Dream continue to believe in . Electronic copy available at:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2761538 Actually, in describing the current de-escalation of the original
project of the founding fathers at the moment reduced to the achievement of a simple free
trade zone I underlined how the United Kingdom has to be included among those Member
States that, more than others, contributed in determining the conditions for a revision of the
political plan of an united and free Europe (proposed by Altiero Spinelli and Ernesto Rossi in
order to oppose the totalitarianism prevailing in the Old World during World War II). This
conclusion is coherent with the conduct of such State that absent from the initial phase of the
creation of the European Union started by six other States only in 1973 ended the negotiations
for entering in the common market, after having overcome the obstacles behind the transition

from a global context (to which it was traditionally connected to a regional one (in which it has
always wanted to participate in the decision making process). The agreements signed in
Bruxelles on February 2016 between Prime Minister David Cameron and the European leaders
grant to the United Kingdom a peculiar status among the EU. Those concessions extend from the
symbolic statement that the aforementioned State will never be a member of a tighter Union
to variegated facilitations (among those the possibility of limiting aid towards EU migrants has a
specific importance). Those agreements have an important meaning as they are the ineluctable
evidence of the difficulties met by the European Union and by its Members in overcoming the
logics of the mere economic benefit, that were at the base of the method used in order to realize
the project of the founding fathers, through progressive forms of convergence, all aiming at the
political union. This difficulty has been displayed during the most crucial political phases that the
Union had to face in the recent years, from the Greek crisis to the Libyan one and said difficulty
is at the root of the undeniable weakening of the reasons that led the United Kingdom to
participate first in the European Community and then in the European Union, (as is shown by the
fact that in the UK has been prevailing a policy that prefers the economic convenience over
value-driven motives shaped around cohesion and solidarity between Member States). The
difficult moment during which a decision on Brexit has to be taken characterized by
hypothetical suspensions of the Schengen Agreement, by a problematic definition of the division
of migrants between Member States and by an evident disparity between the level of growth
inside the EU could encourage other States to ask for a privileged treatment, with the
inevitable consequence of starting an opposite process compared to the one that, more than a half
century ago, persuaded the subscriber States of the Treaty of Rome to unite and to hope in a
common future. This would incite the mistrust in the construction of a common house, hence
the failure of the hope that it is still possible to search for another way to experience the
European Union! 2. To fully appreciate the range of the agreements mentioned above, intended
to influence the future relations between the UK and the EU, we have before to examine the
position of the first one in the framework of diversity that characterizes the second. In this regard
it must be stated that United Kingdom due to its cultural characteristics and its attitude towards
EU policies has often shown a sort of detachment from the rest of the continent, or, more
precisely, the intention not to become fully involved in European affairs, which it sees as foreign,
too distant from its domestic sphere, which is accorded a priority status to. The United Kingdom,

despite the image it gives of itself, was among the first European countries to realize the
importance, in the aftermath of World War II, of a process capable of leading to the gradual
integration of the nations of Europe. It is very important, in the second half of the 20th century, a
debate (in which a significant role was played by two important PMs, Harold MacMillan for the
conservatives and Harold Wilson for Labour) on topic accession (as membership) to the EEC ;
we have to remember also the French veto to repeated applications submitted by UK for
membership of the common market, vetoes ended only with the advent to power of M.
Pompidou (who succeeded to M. de Gaulle in 1969) marked the beginning of negotiations as
already mentioned in 1973, when the UK finally joined the ECC, this one so way looked for
reinforcing itself in the perspective to better confront the United States of America and the Soviet
Union. However, the British choice of Europe (endorsed by a referendum), has not been
accompanied by much empathy, and economic integration was not viewed as necessarily leading
to a political union. Support for the latter outcome has remained very low over the years, with a
preference for Community mechanisms based on intergovernmental decision-making procedures.
Its line of conduct is based on a traditional attachment to national sovereignty (to be intended in
its various components), which, although understandable by reason of the pursued economic
improvement (exports, occupation, etc.), nevertheless appears strongly contradictory, given the
strong opposition to the European policies which often arose in such Country (including, in the
1970s, such authoritative politicians as Sir Teddy Taylor, who resigned from the Heath cabinet as
soon as he was informed about the decision to sign the Treaties of Rome). What we are facing
here is a context in which even the decision to scrap the pound is viewed as a loss of
sovereignty! The United Kingdom, therefore, has kept out of the single currency and its policy
towards European affairs, from 1992 (i.e. from the Maastricht Treaty) onwards, is seemingly
oriented to protecting its national interests first and foremost. This, of course, entails frequent
requests for legislative adjustments (rectius: changes), as well as taking positions that are
inconsistent with the idea of an all-embracing membership, which, moreover, would be required
in view of a form of integration, in which the common prevails over the particular interests of the
EU member states. It is no accident that, in literature, the analysis of this situation contains
evaluations and references to the gatekeeper attitude of the UK government towards the
European Community (as a means for safeguarding national sovereignty) and to its obvious
semi-detachment from the construction of the EU. If such circumstances are rooted in the

differences that historically separate Sceptered the Isle from the Continent, cannot ignore that
they are also been fueled by a certain distrust of Franco-German axis which has from the
beginning influenced the destiny of the European project, not always in the light of the logics of
cooperation, mutual respect and solidarity that were at the base of such project. And this also due
to Italys secondary role, which for its old and continuous internal conflicts have not been
able for a long time to gain the political clout suitable to its socioeconomic position[13]. This
explains the positions assumed by the UK, with respect to certain of the main issues concerning
the measures for coordinating the EUs economic and banking policies. In relation to the above
has to be first considered the Report prepared by the House of Lords on the crisis in the
Eurozone and, in particular, on the proposed fiscal compact (and connected measures),
considered not compliant with the European Treaty structure; from such point the clear intention
of UK to avoid any form of responsible involvement in the affairs of the Eurosystem. At the
same time, the declaration according to which UK intends to submit the matter to the European
Court of Justice (which will be allowed to decide on the issue of whether the member states are
obliged to introduce in their domestic law the balanced budget rule) highlights its respect for the
EU institutions and orientations, which (although formally flawless) is hardly consistent with the
position mentioned above (being manifestly finalized at avoiding any possible marginalisation).
Moreover, further confirmation of this detachment (rectius: substantial separateness) of the UK
from the fate of the continent or, more precisely, from the pre-ordered processes for achieving
the highest possible degree of economic and financial stability of the EU countries can be
inferred from the statements released with regard to the revision of the rules regarding the capital
requirements of banks as per the well-known normative package (enacted by EU Regulation
518/2013 and Directive 2013/36/EU, known as CRD IV); the imprecise and indeterminate
arguments that have been used to justify the refusal expressed in such statements of introducing
legislative rulings aimed at ensuring financial stability (and the compliance with the EUs
international commitments in the field of banking regulation) represents the main evidence . The
UKs determination not to join the EBU also responds to this logic. In fact, despite certain
analyses carried out with reference to criteria founded on a cost/benefit ratio have
demonstrated that the UK and Sweden are among the principal beneficiaries of an eventual
adherence to the EBU, this countries have not submitted any request on this matter and there are
well-founded doubts that it may not be requested in the future, based on the first reactions to the

proposal formulated on the matter by the Commission. This is regardless of the further
consideration, whereby countries not concerned by European supervision will inevitably express,
in the competent European forums, votes and judgments that contrast with the success of the
initiative, or who at least are oriented to downscaling its scope, thus fueling the undesirable
development of a multi-speed Europe. What we are faced with here is an approach that appears
defensive, aimed at protecting the United Kingdoms financial independence. It is, in fact,
justified by a mindset based on the principle of separation of the supervisory mechanisms and,
therefore, on the possibility of continuing to manage banking supervision without external
interferences which is an essential prerequisite for the predominant role that the London
Financial Centre (which has always been the expression of an environment where operating
freedom reigns supreme) plays on a worldwide level with practically no competition. 3. The
recent political events, with the victory of the Conservative Party at the elections, have probably
worsened the so-called ambivalence that constitutes a hallmark of the UKs relations with the
EU, or, in any case, determines the prerequisites for establishing a different approach. Reference
is made, specifically, to the migratory and refugees crisis, in addition to the difficult definition of
certain general issues (relating to competitiveness, economic governance, the social security and
free movement). Despite the important signals sent out by the German Chancellor Angela
Merkel, and other EU leaders, aimed at intensifying the cooperation (rectius: the participatory
relationship) between the latter and the UK, signals remaining often without consequences. The
possible changing is questioned, first and foremost, by the firmness of the Prime Minister, Peter
Cameron, who reaffirms that his demand for restrictions on freedom of movement within the
EU, as observed by the British press. Once again the lack of willingness in accepting a unitary
logic (which the accession to Europe should be founded on) leads UK to apply for exemptions to
the requirements imposed to the majority of other European Member States! These requests
which express, inter alia, a decisionline distinctly diverging from the one that, within the
European Union, have been hardly carrying out on migration policies reflects the described
ambivalence of the behavior of this country towards the EU and, therefore, the limited interest to
maintain its permanence in the European regional context hence the conditioning that does not
hesitate to propose for the achievement of an unwarranted, privileged position (rectius: contrary)
to the egalitarian spirit that must characterize the relationships within the Union. The
abovementioned requests (that ought to lead to changes in the EU Treaties, a highly outcome,

especially at this moment in time, characterized by economic uncertainty and imbalance) could
express the latent threat of a final separation from the EU sanctioned by the in/out referendum,
which Mr. Cameron promised in 2013 and which he has confirmed after the recent Tory victory.
It follows that the concessions package now got from the English Premier (and, therefore, the
commitment of the UK contracted with European summits) has become in view of the
consultation to be held on the next June 23 presupposition to a strict comparison between his
position and that in favor of Brexit from EU (backed by some ministers and by the Mayor of
London). This new scenario is dominated by unpredictability and it is difficult to make certain
previsions. Obviously, we are going to observe a punctual evaluation of the various interests
involved and this comparison could be essential in order to identify the ultimate political choices
to be taken. More in particular, concerning the United Kingdom, the eventual economic and
financial advantages that could arise from an hypothetical exit from the EU should be compared
with the negative implications regarding not only the current accounts, the capital flows, the
stock market, the bond market, the British real estate market but also the pound sterling . Hence,
the necessity to consider, on the one hand, the various causes that could generate an economic
weakening of the United Kingdom (having to considerate in this regard the current negative
exposure of the balance of international payments, the high levels of the London real estate
market and the possible capital flights) , and on the other hand the serious political implications
that could emerge from Brexit, such as the awareness that Scotland will not leave the European
Union against its will , and the reactions of the United States, notoriously against the exit of
Great Britain from the European Union, as they are willing to use their long-standing
relationship with the UK in order to impose their influence on the EU. On the contrary, it seems
that the consequences of this way out could be less significant for the European Union as they
would be for Great Britain; this could be affirmed if we consider both the overall export amount
of the Member States towards the United Kingdom and the intrinsic difficulty in calculating the
negative effects of the decrease of the London financial center (thus, of the consequent
possibility for many British banking operators to continue interacting within the EU markets,
even if they allocate their products outside them) . As a matter of fact, the most remarkable effect
of an eventual exit from the European Union by the United Kingdom can be recognized in the
risk that other Member States, characterized by strong populist currents (such as France and
Italy), may promote initiatives for referendums that, regardless of their outcome, would lead to

undeniable repercussions on markets stability; therefore, it would become probable a loss of trust
towards certain Member States, with a consequent restart of the perverse spiral that, through the
fear of sovereign debts consolidation o restructuring, to the detriment of Member States
creditors, originates the spread difficulties (calculated looking at the yield differential between
the decennial State bonds issued by a country of the Eurozone and their German analogous).
Obviously this would generate the failure of certain Member States reliability and, more in
general, would increase the credibility of a separation of the European group. Unfortunately, this
referendum cannot clarify several uncertainties that could be created by this radical change, like
the innovative ways that the British finance will use to present itself to the single market
particularly, the terms of agreements under which the United Kingdom will participate in the
European Economic Area, contributing (even if to a lesser extent) to the Union balance sheet
and the existence (rectius: the identification) of remaining Member States reactive capabilities.
Actually, the increased autonomy and the diminished obligations that could be brought to the
United Kingdom by a positive result will barely compensate the operative contraction (that the
latter will have to bear), extended until now to 500 million customers in the European Union .
Consequently, it is obvious that the real risk (for all the parties involved) behind the examined
matter is that it has started a modification process that is going to directly affect the European
common destinies. In fact, analyzing the possible consequences of Great Britain way out, a
distinguished scholar affirmed that, compared with the founding fathers original project, had
come to light (and it seems that it is going to be confirmed) a federal structure, by now partially
acquired by the European Union, that does not automatically require a tighter union.
Therefore, Brexit accentuated the intervened, substantial failure of the aims that started the
European integration process; thus, it could become a facilitator in determining a new
institutional asset among Member States, probably more stable than the current one (and more
inclined in granting a higher level of autonomy to Member States) but obviously not in line with
the cohesion and solidarity forms than can be achieved only through a political union. 4. If we
want to analyze the methods that will be probably behind the evaluations that will guide the
British people in the difficult choice proposed by the referendum, we will come upon completely
opposite reasons. Actually, together with observations arising from the United Kingdom scarce
empathy towards the European Union, there are others that are otherwise founded merely on
economic convenience. More in particular, we are referring to the fact that, under the

methodological point of view, the UK summits action seems focused on forecasts based on a
microeconomic costs-benefits calculation, used to verify (through a comparison between
various elements associated with a growth program achievable together with other Member
States) the economic convenience of the adhesion to the EU (thus, if there are quantitative data
that could justify the UK remaining in the EU). In other words, it seems to be fundamental, for
Great Britain, a monetization of the overall net benefit determined by its stay in the EU; hence,
it has been taken into consideration the convenience of keeping the current status quo intact,
perceived by said country with increasing annoyance, as UK has always been scarcely prone to
accept outer interference since it is believed that they could be a threat to the preservation of the
high level of welfare acquired (with obvious negative consequences on the domestic social and
economic balances). So, reasonably, these are the authentic reasons behind the choices that Great
Britain will soon have to make on the continuation of a relation that said country would rather
maintain characterized only by economic features (because a further political integration is
perceived in contradiction with its history and with its traditions). Furthermore, different
positions should be expected between the British economic elite, which feasibly restricts its
evaluation focusing on costs-benefits aspects and, consequently, shows its propensity to remain
in the EU (in this regard, it is significant that the financial field is supporting the yes option)
and the rest of the British population. The latter, in fact, is often led by different estimations,
nationalistic and xenophobic, that head to support the no option, regardless of the economic
price that will be paid; this is also a consequence of the migration problem, perceived as foreign
invasion. Hence, the revelation of a discouraging reality, where there is no room for the
Europeanist spirit that should be instead at the base of a justified stay of Great Britain in the
European Union. So, we are observing a logic that is not ascribable to a pluralistic dialectic,
upon which the political debate, that should search for options of ideal democratic coexistence,
should be founded; a logic that should create solutions aimed at reinforcing the bonds with the
European Union, in line with a commitment that should end in a form of unity. In addition to
that, it is clear that the UK is lacking in having a political intent aimed at throwing the British
society (more efficiently than how it has been done until now) in an European framework that,
overcoming the national barriers, could create a supranational organizational model, built
according to behavioral standards (both qualitative and dimensional) suited for the needs of a
world that is facing global changes. On the contrary, we are observing an impetuous success of

an economic rationality that is establishing itself, in an auto referential way, as the only
parameter of coexistence regulation. Obviously, the aforementioned decisional criterion,
associated with a costs-benefits calculus, however in line with markets principles, should be
considered, at least theoretically, as an aid to accomplish an efficient allocation of the available
resources. Therefore, said criterion is related with neutral evaluations, that, being unsuitable for
analyzing the complex situation here depicted, emphasize the inadequacy of the aforementioned
method for solving socio political matters. This explains the reason why in Great Britain the
existence of externality (or, more exactly, the occurrence of unpredictable and unexpected
events, such as migrations of populations escaping from death, wars and famine), from which
negative consequences on expected economic benefits could derive, becomes the premise for a
policy aimed at promoting the exit from the European Union. In addition to that, it can be
deduced how rigid the application of the preceding evaluation method is. It can be understood,
then, how using said method in situations regarding relations between Member States, causes the
rejection of a recourse (considered to be a prerequisite of sub optimal balance) to a Member
States common action (if appropriate, based on solidarity principles, like the one required for
facing the above said migrant crisis) if the costs of the latter are considered superior than the
benefits arising from remaining in the European Union. This, regardless of the frequent use of
said analysis method to verify the validity of a project, after having tested its capacity to create
an economic value for the community. Therefore, the positive use of this method from States
that would use it in complex economic situations in which an integration between different
factors is necessary must not disregard the correlation between the before mentioned
evaluations and the general nature purposes, towards which public interventions have to be
oriented. It is clear how the overcoming of national interests should be founded on a level of
cohesion (or on a motion in that way) between Member States unlikely realizable in the
European regional framework, a level of cohesion that should lead to the perception of the
supranational general wealth as its own (and that should lead to the willingness of taking charge
of said supranational general wealth, without expecting any advantage, either political or
economic, for the domestic citizenry). Therefore, a first conclusion can be drawn, both on the
identification of the cases in which the aforementioned operative criterion could be used (namely
when there are great juxtapositions, if necessary also reconciling diametrically opposed
situations) and on the modalities that should characterized its performance (avoiding to sacrifice

the respect of value-driven scopes, first of all the solidarity, according to which public
institutions initiatives should be adapted, in favor of the mere economic rationality principle). In
consideration of all of the above and analyzing once again the evaluations that will be probably
made by Great Britain regarding the European Union it is evident how using the costs/benefits
method could be limited to a short-sighted and restrictive microeconomic vision; with the
consequence that the latter will not consider adequately all the different interests connected with
the implemented interventions (interests that are inevitably destined to be neglected if the
primary aim of common good is ignored). 5. The foregoing leads us to reflect on the meaning of
the adhesion of Great Britain to the European Union and, more precisely, on the political impact
attributed to it. The utilitarian intent that as has been said is identified on the base of the
participation of that country in the regional context and hinges on an economic plan the
adherence to the constitutional process which the Communitys founding fathers intended to
create; this, with inevitable negative consequences as regards the possibility to enable
appropriate forms of integration between such country and the plurality of different subjects
(often moved by different interests) with which it has to compare in the pursuit of an (organic)
union design. Such intention causes a remarkable reversal of the order that traditionally
characterizes the inter-state relations, identifying in the politics a prius respect to the economics.
Therefore, it is hard to acknowledge in this case the natural position of the financialeconomic determinants in the decision-making policy, in line with the logic that to the first is
ascribed an essential role in the development of projects preordained countries willing to be open
to innovative forms of modernization Consequently, in the relationship between UK and
European Union, becomes difficult, if not even impossible, to find the shared reflection of an
acute scholar that recognized the primacy of politics in the design that modern subject (does
of).its destinity ; reflection which, as it is to be resized with regard to the European realitycharacterized by Powerful and efficient technostructures and by a very powerful and invasive
technocratic bureaucracy cannot be a postulate in the evaluation of the methods (rectius: the
liberal democratic mechanisms) through which people seek optimal conditions for the fulfillment
of their basic needs. It is evident, conversely, as a relational context in which it detects in
prevailing way the verification of interest (involved in its traceability to the market logic) may
have resulted in the configurability of a new. Leviathan , symbol of the power whose roots,
breaking free from the dialectic of political legitimacy, they appear hinged in the sacredness of a

utilitarian culture that takes as its own epicenter the economic rationality. Returning, then, on
the particular issue of Brexit, it can be said that we are certainly in the presence of a behavioral
line guided by the well-known pragmatism of the British people! Therefore, despite the British
public now seem divided on the issue concerning the outcome of the referendum, it is
conceivable that will not take long to establish itself the reasons for demonstrating the prevalence
of the advantages (compared to the critical) for the British economy to remain inside the Union.
Of course, this result from the point of view of the English electorate postulates a level of
information and a rationality of the choices which is not always natural to the decisions of the
electorate, that in the case of Great Britain will also have to reach a conviction grade so high as
to enable it to win the lack of empathy for the continental countries, which previously have been
mentioned. Intuitively, in fact, emerges the rational search of optimal conditions in the vital
relationships of the country to be achieved through the practical occur of behavior, in a logical
due to the teaching of W. James s for identification of processes to achieve the desired ends -will
end with the rise on deterministic settings that have their roots in the deep-seated hostility of the
British media and large parts of the political elite against the European Union ; deep hostility
that has found its political expression in the movement to promote Britains exit from the Union.
That said, based reasons lead us to believe that the referendum will express a favorable vote to
the consecration of the permanence of the U.K. in the European Union. Remain united for mere
economic gain: this is the justification the British people will give to itself to accept the surrender
of a own full sovereignty. The Great Britain will continue , then , to be part of EU, with all its
reserves, and with the traditional little empathy towards the old continent; the desire of exit will
remain for a large part of the population, together with the hostility of those who have lost the
referendum, since, as was correctly pointed out, it will not reduce their ambition to bring back
full sovereignty to the United Kingdom . Conversely, it seems poorly justified the EUs interest
in maintaining, right inside, a state that clearly manifests its opposition to the community acquis
and, therefore, it is configured to be oriented to firmly maintain attitudes that undermine the
cohesion. The favor for the hypothesis of a Great Britain held with concessions and
blandishments in the Union has a ratio only if, as it will be said in the next paragraph, credit is
given to an evolution process of the latter intended to revisit the project which had been drawn
to the origins. More specifically, the referendum to be held on next June 23th identifies a
strategic move in line with the current legal framework, since the use of popular vote (that would

reflect the popular unwilling to remain in the European Union) must be considered as a proper
application of decision-making procedures recognized in modern democratic systems. However,
even if this measure is going to certify the prevalence of the national sovereignty over the
European regulatory approach, it is worth remembering that the referendum could support Prime
Minister Cameron in order to achieve particular benefits from the political campaign against
Brexit. Hence it is enough to realize that we are dealing with an improper use of referendum,
which although there could be specific socio-political reasons and it could be in line with the
(voluntary, unilateral or negotiated) exit right provided by art. 50 EU Treaty is actually related
with political and economic issues that are going to change its real function! .Given this scenario,
it is worth remembering the words of the President of the European Central Bank, intervening
just few days ago in political debate surrounding Britains EU; and, in particular, the precise
statement, I cannnot say which of the two sets of arguments is stronger, the economic or the
political ones, neither am I going to enter into a domestic policy debate, but what I can say Is that
Europe needs blackberries in European UK as much as the UK needs a British blackberries
Europe. This is a wish that is common to all those who, despite the mentioned skepticism,
continue to believe in the profitable cooperation between Britain and the Eurozone; moreover,
Mario Draghi has further stated: with such deep interconnections, the UK and the euro area
share a common interest: the stability in the functioning of our economic system and Particularly
our economic system and particularly our financial markets. There is no doubt that higher forms
of relationship between the British and continental realities (that would be realized in a renewed
spirit of convergence) would enable all Member States to benefit from the cultural contribution
of a country (that is the British one) that is characterized by high levels of organizational
efficiency , social respect and, more generally, high civic sense, all together considered as
underlying values to the government common thing; hence the idea of a positive influence
exercised by UK within Eurozone, which it is good to recognize it in some ways still seems
far away from the advanced socio-political model that nowadays characterizes the British
Government. Unfortunately the European Council summit in which Camerons issues have been
discussed was a missed opportunity for all EU member States and, indeed, it represented a step
in the opposite direction. And this is the unfortunate, but not surprising, result caused by the
absence of a true European strategic plan and, furthermore, by the Unions political weakness as
a whole and its member States. 6. The most significant indication that seems to be deduced from

the aforementioned Brexit issue concerns the general implications that can be inferred from it
regarding the future fate of Europe. First it has to be considered that the above question has to
be set within the specific historic phase that the Union is experiencing, characterized by its
substantial absence in the definition of common social policies (highlighting, therefore, an
inability to respond to the urgent need to seek uniform decisions to resolve the several issues on
the table). We now have, therefore, a situation in which the EU is not able to take tough
decisions in view of global events; in this respect, it comes out to ou r attention, in addition to
the migrations which it has been said of, the fight against terrorism and those interventions aimed
at tackle the winds of war that, in the last years, involve the Middle East and the north Africa.
Dealing with a general necessity of cohesion and solidarity which should confirm the idea of a
free and united Europe, born during the full raging of World War II the Member States show
insufficient sense of political responsibility, often rise walls and refuse to deal with the
humanitarian emergency that characterizes the present times. It is not considered that countries
with a high level of civilization shall not remain unconcerned to the cries of pain coming from
people who reassert the right to have their dignity respected. It must be added to the above the
ambiguities of a difficult convergence with Turkey, which intends to require (on the basis of an
exchange of its availability on accepting migrants) to play a greater role in the EU, regardless of
the delays (rectius: lacks) that, in such Country, mark the process of democratization. In such
context, it appears extremely hard to compose the articulated puzzle that represents the
relationships between Member States of the Union are now contained; hence the diffusion of
skepticism in the continuity of the latter, depending inter alia on its growing inability to
communicate ideas based on values. Unavoidable the consequent consciousness that, perhaps,
the time to overcome the doubt, expressed by several parties, that the Europe of people and
nations of the last decades has been replaced by the one governed by technocracies and financial
capitals, is not ripe. Thence, in the scenario analyzed above, the Brexit perspective increases the
feeling of uncertainty, highlighting the difficulty of identifying a way out from the impasse
situation in which the EU currently seems to be stuck. The aforementioned considerations on the
cost-benefit analysis, on the base of which the UK seems to base its decision on remaining or
not within the Union, underline that the relationships between European countries are now
gradually carrying within a framework mainly characterized by financial patterns (with obvious,
consequent limited possibilities to refer the abovementioned relationships to socio-political

purposes). It is clear that according to what already clarified above the future fate of Europe
will be characterized only by economic and financial relationships aimed at increasing the
common market, but not also adequate to support the concrete realization of a political union
dream, that remains therefore segregate in an unreal wishful thinking (to use a common
English phrase). This is the important message resulting from the UK behavior, a message of
sadness more than of wonder! See CAPRIGLIONE SACCO GINEVRI, Politics e Finance in
the European Union, Wolters Kluwer, 2016, p. 105 ff. Here can be recalled the reflections
contained in the famous Manifesto written in the August of 1941 in a small island in the
Mediterranean Sea, Ventotene, where some anti fascists were confined published (after the first
edition went lost) by Colorni, in 1944 in a book titled Problemi della Federazione Europea, with
the annex of two essays by di Altiero Spinelli (Gli Stati Uniti dEuropa e le varie tendenze
politiche and Politica marxista e politica federalista) written between 1942 and 1943. [3] See
among others BUSSI, Brexit, braccio di ferro finale, in Milano finanza, February 19 , 2016,
where Camerons declaration is quoted if we will reach a good agreement, I will sign it, but I
am not going to sig n an agreement that is not in line with our needs; GILES, What are the
economic consequences of Brexit?, in Financial Times, February 22 , 2016; ROMANO, Brexit
forza la mano allEurozona, on IlSole24Ore, February 23 This is the theoretical orientation
inspired by the functionalism of Mitrany (see A working peace system, London, 1943) and by
the neo functionalism of Haas (see The Uniting of Europe Political, Social and economic
Forces, 1950-1957, London, 1958; Id. Beyond the Nation State, London, 1964) and Lindberg
(see The Political Dynamics of European Economic Integration, London 1963) according to
which the beginning of a functional integration process (where some States combine together
certain activities and economic resources) would encourage other type of integrations (in line
with a leaking mechanism, the so called Spill Over) also with a political value.

See DE

GRAUWE, Why the European union will benefit from Brexit, in Social Europe, February 24 ,
2016, on http://www.socialeurope.eu/2016/02/why-the-european-union-will-benefit-from-brexit;
see also the editorial Niente Europa, siamo inglesi: il governo si spacca, published on Il Fatto
Quotidiano, February 21 , 2016. th nd rd th st .We would like to recall here the important speech
by Winston Churchill, in Zurich, on September 19 , 1946. On this occasion the outstanding
statesman, while expressing hopes for the establishment of United States of Europe as already
mentioned above

gives indications as to the institutional framework of this supranational

organization; maintaining above all that both the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union should
be the sponsors but not members of this new Europe, for the realization of which Churchill
promoted the establishment of a Council, which as we all know will see the light many years
later; see Churchill Commemoration 1996. Europe Fifty Years on: Constitutional, Economic and
Political Aspects, edited by Thurer and Jennings, Zurich, Europa Institut-Wilton Park, Schultess
Polygraphischer Verlag, 1997; see also, Winston Churchill, His Complete Speeches 1897-1963,
edited by R. James, New York-London, 1974, vol. VI; Fondazione Europea Luciano Bolis, I
movimenti per lUnit Europea 1945-1954, Proceedings of the international Conference at Pavia
in October 1989, ed. by Pistone, Milano, 1992.

See PARR, Britains Policy Towards the

European Community. Harold Wilson and Britains World Role, 1964-1967, London, 2005;
TOOMEY, Harold Wilsons EEC application: inside the Foreign Office 1964-7, University
College Dublin Press, 2007.See GOZZANO, Lingresso dellInghilterra nel Mercato Comune
Europeo, available at http://www.cvce.eu/ content/publication/2007 /11/12. See CHARTER, Au
Revoir, Europe: What If Britain Left The EU?, London, 2012, where it is underlined that The
organisation that Britain joined in 1973 was very different from the European Union of today and
therefore, at that time, the true political and constitutional implications of the Treaty of Rome
were not clear. See CACOPARDI et al., Ingresso del regno unito nella CEE. La Gran Bretagna
nella CEE/UE, which can be viewed at. See, among others, GEORGE, Britain and the European
Community: The Politics of SemiDetachment, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1992; MORAVCSIK,
Preferences and power in the European Community: a liberal intergovernmentalist approach, in
Journal of Common Market Studies, 1993, n. 4, p. 473 et seq. [12] See CAPRIGLIONE
SACCO GINEVRI, Politics e Finance in the European Union, cit., p. 216 et seq. [13] Significant,
to this regard, the document of the Italian Ministry of Economics and Finance entitled A Shared
European Policies Stratgegy for Growth, Jobs and Stability, February 2016, where it is pointed
out that we have gone a long way towards more integration, but now Europe is at a crossroads:
if we were to keep muddling through an uncertain recovery, progress in growth and job creation
would fail to emerge and the Euro area would remain exposed to shocks, undermining its
sustainability, requiring a main role. See HOUSE OF LORDS, European union committee,
25th report of session 2010-2012, The euro area crisis. This is the draft of regulation relating to
prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms, as well as the Directive
on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions

and investment firms (amending Directive th 2002/87/EC relating to the supplementary

supervision on credit and insurance institutions and investment entities included in a financial
conglomerate). See Council of the European Union, April 2 , 2013, 7748/13, ADD2 (Addendum
2 to note I). In particular, is pointed out the fear of failure to conform such rules to the complex
Basel 3 Accord and to the outcome of an impact assessment on remuneration provisions; an
argument that, by circumscribing its support to the EU initiatives, essentially reveals the intent of
delaying the realization of common programs. This intent is unquestionably contrary to the
participatory spirit that should underpin the members of the Union and raises concerns as to the
actual will to remain in it for a long time.

See, among others, SCHOENMAKER

SIEGMANNB, Efficiency Gains of a European Banking Union, Duisenberg School of Finance

VU University Amsterdam, January 31 , 2013, p. 17. [18] See ONNO RUDING, The Contents
and Timing of a European Banking Union: Reflections on the differing views, Ceps Essay30
November 30 , 2012, p. 4, available at http://www.ceps.eu., where it is outlined that the UK has
already declared its intention to opt-out, even if its first signal was that it would not block the
proposal as such. See ONNO RUDING,, op. cit. [20] In line with this policy is the tendency to
block the EU directives viewed as contrary to the interests of the UK financial sector, cfr., on this
topic, the editorial by CAVALLITTO, Mercati finanziari, il muro della vigilanza britannica
contro le riforme UE, at http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/ 2013/08/31mercati_finanziari. [21] See
the editorial EU referendum: Merkel will work with Cameron on EU but will Tories let
him?, in theguardian of 9 May 2015, at The press has highlighted the support by the EU
Commission President, Jean-Claude Junker, for the implementation of an emergency
mechanism for the definition of a refugee quota plan, forcing the states to share the burden of
the migrant crisis, cfr. the editorial Mogherini allOnu: ecco il piano UE sui migranti,
published on laRepubblica.it, accessibleat http://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2015/05/11/news/
mogherini_all_onu_ecco_il_piano_ue_ sui_ migranti; this project, forcefully sponsored by the
President of the European Commission, is opposed by the UK Government, as illustrated in the
editorial Cameron chiude allimmigrazione: insorgono i Paesi est europei , published in
ilGiornale.it on May 11 , 2015 and available at http://www.ilgiornale.it/news/mondo/ cameronchiude-allimmigrazione- insorgono-i-paesi-est-europei -1127007.html. [23] See in this regard,
the editorial Cameron plant EU-Referendum schon fr 2016 published in the Frankfurter
Allgemeine Zeitung of May 12 , 2015, available at www. faz.net/aktuell/politik/europaeische-

union/cameron-plant-schon-2016-referendumueber- eu-austritt- 13588429.html. [24] See, inter

alia, CAVALERA, Cameron, referendum il 23 giugno. E punta la carriera sul s allEuropa,
published

in

Corriere

della

sera

of

February,

20th,

2016

available

at

http://www.corriere.it/esteri/16_febbraio_20/ cameron -lancia- referendum-punta-carriera-si-alleuropa- 70269e9a-d7c6-11e5-afdf-d68b3faa1595.shtml; Gessa, Brexit, ora Cameron affronta i
rischi di unuscita nd st th th th dallUE. e cinque ministri voteranno per dire addio allEuropa,
on IlFattoQuotidiano.it of February 20th, 2016; the artiche Brexit, il sindaco di Londra gela
Cameron:

Io

voter

per

luscita

dallUnione

Europea,

http://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2016/02/21/news/brexit_appello_di_cameron

available

at

_a_boris_johnson

_appoggia _permanenza_in_ue_-133909283. [25] It has to be mentioned that according to some

scholars (see CAMPOS CORICELLI, Some unpleasant Brexit econometrics, on
http://www.voxeu.org/article/some-unpleasant-brexiteconometrics), regardless of the next in-orout referendum outcome, the relationship between the United Kingdom and the European
Union will change substantially. [26] Significant, to this end, is how the specialist press reacted
(see, among others, GIUGLIANO, Brexit, i timori di una moneta pi debole e i risparmi sui
sussidi dei migranti: ecco i cinque scenari, on http://www.repubblica.it/ economia /
2016/02/21/news/il_dossier_i_timori_di_una_moneta_piu_debole_e_i_risparmi_sui_sussidi_dei
_migranti _ecco _i_cinque_scenari) to the speech of Mark Carney, Governor of The Bank of
England,during a parliamentary audtion held in January (according to whom) Brexit
could lead to a risk premium increase on British assets, an event that could originate capital
flights; see also MAISANO, Brexit, Carney a fianco di Cameron, on IlSole24Ore, March 9 ,
2016, where it is stressed that according to Camey the uncertainty regarding the future of the
United Kingdom in Europe is one of the reasons behind the pound sterling weakness. See the
editorial Brexit: la Scozia si schiera con lUE al referendum del 23 giugno, on
http://it.euronews.com/2016/02/29/brexit-la-scozia-si-schiera-con-l-ue-al-referendum-del-23giugno, where it is specified that the premier, Nicola Sturgeon, has already bounded the
referendum outcome to the Scotland stay in the United Kingdom. [See among others
GABELLINI, Gli Stati Uniti contro il Brexit, on http://www.lindro.it/gli-statiuniti-brexit, where
the vetoes imposed by De Gaulle on the entrance of the United Kingdom in the European
Economic Community, based on the certainty that London would have immediately become an
United States Trojan horse inside the old world are recalled and where it is underline that the

recent opinions of John Kerry seems to confirm the De Gaulles worries, since the US Secretary
of State has always interfere in British internal affairs as long as this could be helpful in order to
mitigate the Brexit tendency that is spreading like fire. The analysts have esteemed an
inevitable decrease of the City of London if the referendum would approve the Brexit, resulting
in a transfer of the Citys activities carried out in euro zone centers, see on this the editorial
published by Milano Finanza on February 24 , 2016, entitled Limpatto della Brexit in cinque
punti,

on

http://www.milanofinanza.it/news/l-impatto-della-brexit-incinque-punti-

201602241209213060. A concurring opinion with this stance is expressed by the distinguished

economist Krugman, see the interview by Haas and Tost entitled PAUL KRUGMAN: Whats
going on in China right now scares, on http://uk.businessinsider.com/paulkrugman-interviewchina-greece-brexit-2016, in which to the question Turning to Europe, what do you think about
Brexit? an peremptory answer echoed: For Britain to be pulling out of that is a bad thing
economically. A dissenting opinion has been instead expressed by another eminent economist
Stigliz during an event organized by The Labour Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell, see the
editorial

Brexit

better

for

Britain

than

toxic

TTIP,

says

Joseph

Stiglitz,

http://www.rt.com/uk/334409-brexit-ttip-stiglitzth th eu/, in which the following clarification is

quoted I think that the strictures imposed by TTIP would be sufficiently averse to the
functioning of government that it would make me think over again about whether membership of
the EU was a good idea. See CAPRIGLIONE, Mercato regole democrazia, Torino, 2013, p.
115. In this regard see also, among others, GIUGLIANO, Brexit, i timori di una moneta pi
debole e i risparmi sui sussidi dei migranti: ecco i cinque scenari, cit., where it is underlined that
the Brexit consequences for the European Union would surely be less significant than those
experienced by the United Kingdom: for example, proportionally, Member States as a whole
export less to Great Britain than the United Kingdom exports to them. See PADOA SCHIOPPA
A., Un accordo ambiguo. Ora pi poteri allEurozona, on IlSole24Ore February 23 , 2016. In this
regard see among others SEN, The Discipline of Cost-Benefit Analysis, in Journal of Legal
Studies, 2000, 931-952; CAGLIOZZI, Lezioni di politica economica, Napoli, 2001;
CAMPBELL BROWN, Benefit-Cost Analysis. Financial and Economic Appraisal using
Spreadsheets, Cambridge, 2003; ADLER POSNER, New Foundations of Cost-Benefit
Analysis, Cambridge, 2006; Boardman et al., Cost-Benefit Analysis: Concepts And Practice,
New Jersey, 2011; SINDEN, Formality And Informality In Cost-Benefit Analysis, in Utah Law

Review, 2015. p. 93-172. [34] On the tradeoff between efficiency and equity that leads to
second-best solutions see the classic work of LIPSEY LANCASTER, The General Theory of
Second Best, in Review of Economic Studies, no. 24, 1956. It should be recalled the
quantification of the environmental features in the researches for evaluating the environmental
sustainability of a project, from where the required aims of the financial analysis are defined; see
for example the indications published on http://www.ecbaproject.eu/it/analisi-costi-benefici.html
regarding the Ecba Project (Environmental Cost Benefit Analysis), aimed at supporting public
institutions and private operators in realizing projects that are economically efficient, socially
acceptable, environmentally sustainable and financially feasible. See ADLER, Well-Being and
Fair Distribution: Beyond Cost-Benefit Analysis, Oxford, 2012Cfr. CAPRIGLIONE SACCO
GINEVRI, Politics e Finance in the European Union, cit. p. 25. Cfr. MONTEDORO,
Democrazia rappresentativa e mercati finanziari, in Il giudice e leconomia, Rome, 2015, p. 23.
Cfr. COCCO, LEuropa dei tre disincanti, in Politica del diritto, 2000, p. 200 ff. [40] Significant,
in this regard, is the classical philosophical reflection that leads the political to the entity which
owns the major expression of power, identifying the essence in the absoluteness of sovereignty;
See, among others, BODIN, Les Six Livres de la Rpublique, published in 1576, a work in
which it is argued that a cohesive society is based on unified and orderly management of power
by the State expressed by royalty; HOBBES, Leviathan or The Matter, Forms and Power of a
Common Wealth Ecclesiastical and Civil, published in 1651, where the problem of the state form
and legitimacy is faced. rd [41] See. JAMES, Pragmatism, a new name for some old ways of
thinking, New York, 1907, for an historical reconstruction of the ideology characterized by
seeking to make the expanding rationality and behavior see the essay of Kloppenberg. See DE
GRAUWE, Why the european union will benefit from Brexit, in Ivory Tower of February 22 ,
2016, published also in lavoce.info on February 26 , 2016 with the title E se la Brexit facesse
bene allUnione? [43] See DE GRAUWE, Why the european union will benefit from Brexit, cit.
We have to remember that the fundamental rights of the person are expressly recognized by Art.
1 and ff. of the European Convention on Human Rights as modified by the provisions of the
Protocol no. 14 (STCE no. 194) and by Art. 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) in which
is pointed out that The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom,
democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons
belonging to minorities; it represents the legal basis which several cases decided by the

European Court of Human Rights and by the European Court of Justice, that significantly
contributed to the definition of such principles, refer to. Author Francesco Capriglione is Full
Professor of Banking Law and Financial Regulation and Dean of Law Faculty at Guglielmo
Marconi University of Rome. Besides, he is President of Fondazione Gerardo Capriglione Onlus
and Director of Master in Regulation of the Activities and the Financial Markets at LUISS Guido
Carli University. His research interest areas are European banking law, institutional assets of
financial top management, regulation of banking and financial markets, banking supervision and
operations of financial intermediaries. He is author of over 300 peer-reviewed scientific
publications and fifteen books
For the first time in a generation there is a serious prospect of a member state leaving the
European Union. In Britain, the Conservative government, led by Prime Minister David
Cameron, is committed to holding an in-out referendum by the end of 2017. This will be
preceded by a renegotiation of the terms of EU membership and a lengthy referendum campaign.
The opinion polls suggest that if a referendum was held tomorrow the outcome would be highly
uncertain. A vote to remain in the EU is far from assured. If the UK leaves the EU the impact
would depend on the new relationship between the UK and the EU. We consider five models.
Those at the extremes in terms of proximity to the EU are unlikely. The Norwegian model,
involving membership of the European Economic Area, would not give the UK the political
flexibility required to justify Brexit. By contrast, a much looser model in which the UK trades
with the EU on a most-favoured nation basis would give flexibility, but seriously jeopardise trade
and investment. The most likely models are either a Swiss-style series of bilateral accords
governing access to specific sectors of the single market or a comprehensive FTA. Either would
require prolonged negotiation followed by compromises and still impose sizeable costs. A lack of
clarity over what would replace EU membership is just one reason why the path to Brexit - and
beyond - would be long and uncertain, taking ten years or more. The impact of Brexit through
the trade and investment channels would be most severe in the UK. Regulatory divergence would
increase over time, affecting trade volumes and reducing the attractiveness of the UK for
investment. This would impact on European businesses invested or trading in the UK and supply
chains involving UK firms, but the magnitude depends on the specific Brexit model and is
impossible to predict. The rest of the EU would also feel the impact through several other
channels. The EU would lose an influential, liberalising member, shifting the balance of power in

the European Council. It would become harder to block illiberal measures. Moreover, there
would likely be a new regulatory dynamic with the UK outside the EU. The UK may seek to
undercut the EU on standards impacting on the business environment; but this in turn may create
a healthy regulatory competition by putting pressure on the EU from the outside to be more
liberal in its policies. There is little prospect of London being dislodged as Europes leading
international financial centre. This is sustained by inherent advantages and a large network of
financial and professional services that are hard to replicate. However, existing EU regulations
would make it harder for London to serve European markets, particularly (but not only) for retail
banking and euro trading. Some business would be likely to move to Eurozone financial centres
or be lost to Europe. Competition to take this business would be wasteful. While one or two
centres may ultimately benefit, businesses and households across the EU would bear the cost in
terms of higher charges and poorer products. Brexit would impact on the position of both the UK
and the EU in the world. In economic terms this would be most evident in trade policy. While the
UK would likely be free to strike new trade deals based on domestic priorities it would have less
leverage and be a lower priority than the EU for other countries. The UK would also face the
huge challenge of renegotiating the
The path to Brexit
Brexit will only happen if a majority votes to leave the EU in a referendum. The outcome is
highly uncertain as there are many unknowns including the timing of the vote and the outcome of
the renegotiation. If Brexit happens it will be a long and protracted process. While some points
on the road are fixed, others are not, creating additional uncertainty. The new Conservative
government has promised an in-out referendum by the end of 2017 after renegotiating the terms
of the UKs membership. A referendum bill is likely to be passed by the British parliament later
this year. This will specify the process but not the actual date for a referendum. The bill proposes
the question that will be put to the British electorate: Should the United Kingdom remain a
member of the European Union? The Conservative renegotiation priorities are vague. David
Cameron says he wants more controls on immigration from new member states, limits on
benefits for immigrants, more powers for national parliaments to block EU legislation, less red
tape, faster trade deals, power returned to member states and an end to ever closer union. His
ambiguity is partly tactical as he does not want to show his hand. The referendum date could be

brought forward to 2016 if Cameron judges this is politically advantageous. Cameron is highly
likely to support and in effect lead the Yes campaign. The majority of the political
establishment and British business will also support this. But the Conservative Party and the
cabinet will be split, with a large faction supporting the No campaign, along with some
opposition MPs and large parts of the media. If the UK votes to leave then the government
would have two years to negotiate a withdrawal agreement under Article 50 of the EU Treaty.
The government itself would be weakened and the PM may be forced to resign. This would add
to the uncertainty surrounding the long and complex process leading to Brexit.

Technique of analysis
SWOT Analysis for the UKs Brexit Decision to Leave the EU
Last week, the UK decided to leave the European Union after more than 40 years of
membership. The national referendum results were 51.9% to leave, while 48.1% to stay. The
decision was not only shocking for many people: it has also shocked the British and global
economy. The Brexit decision has a direct impact on the economy: stock markets fall, the British
banking sector has been hit, and the British pound sank 10%. How did the British people make
their decision? Many tools can be used to analyze situations and take decisions. In this article, we
explore the application of one of these tools, the SWOT Analysis, to the Brexit decision. The
final result of applying this tool do not suggest a right or wrong decision; rather, it provides an
example of applying similar tools to different decision-making processes. The tools that will be
used in this article is the SWOT Analysis tool. In a previous article, SWOT Analysis: Exploring
Innovation and Creativity within Organizations, we described the tool as A SWOT analysis is
one of the methods that is used to evaluate strength (S), weakness (W), opportunities (O) and
threats (T) involved in innovative ideas and strategies. It can be applied to products, services and
strategies. Those four factors evaluate both internal and external factors related to a specific
project, service or strategy.

The main four factors in the tool is described as below:

Strength (S) the strength point in the decision in association with the opposites that can
be gained when this decision is taken.

Weakness (W) the weakness of the decision in association with the threats that can be
faced by applying it.

Opportunity (O) the opportunities that can be offered or potentially offered by taking the
decision.

Threats (T) the threat that we will face if we take the decision.
SWOT analysis for the UKs decision to Brexit
The SWOT analysis for evaluating the British decision to leave the EU is based on four factors;
strength, weakness, opportunity, and threat. The below analysis is based on the opinions of both
pro-Brexit and pro-EU campaigners. These opinions are categorized based on the SWOT four
factors to identify if the decision to leave is right or wrong based on a balanced analysis. Each
reason to stay or leave was numbered in order to have an understanding of the reasons
highlighted under each factor. However, the number cannot be considered an indicator or
reflector to the final decision that should be taken because some reasons are more powerful than
others. For example, there is a general agreement that the economic and security-related reasons
have high importance when compared with other reasons such as British tourism in Europe.
The factors below are based on a number of resources that are listed at the end of this article.
Your feedback and comments about any further factors that can be listed in their analysis can be
added in the discussion area below:

Limitation of Brexit
Membership fee
Leaving the EU would result in an immediate cost saving, as the country would no longer
contribute to the EU budget, argue Brexiters. Last year, Britain paid in 13bn, but it also received
4.5bn worth of spending, says Full Fact, "so the UK's net contribution was 8.5bn". That's

about 7 per cent of what the Government spends on the NHS each year. What's harder to
determine is whether the financial advantages of EU membership, such as free trade and inward
investment (see below) outweigh the upfront costs.
Trade
The EU is a single market in which no tariffs are imposed on imports and exports between
member states. "More than 50 per cent of our exports go to EU countries," says Sky News.
Membership of the bloc means we have always had a say over how trading rules are drawn up.
Britain also benefits from trade deals between the EU and other world powers. "The EU is
currently negotiating with the US to create the world's biggest free trade area," says the BBC,
"something that will be highly beneficial to British business."
Britain risks losing some of that negotiating power by leaving the EU, but it would be free to
establish its own trade agreements. Ukip leader Nigel Farage believes Britain could follow the
lead of Norway, which has access to the single market but is not bound by EU laws on areas such
as agriculture, justice and home affairs. But others argue that an "amicable divorce" would not be
possible.
Investment
Inward investment was always predicted to slow in the run-up to the vote, due to the uncertainty
of the outcome and its consequences: that's what happened in before the Scottish independence
referendum in 2014. In the long term, there are diverging views: pro-Europeans think the UK's
status as one of the world's biggest financial centres will be diminished if it is no longer seen as a
gateway to the EU for the likes of US banks, while Brexit campaigners suggest that, free from
EU rules a regulations, Britain could reinvent itself as a Singapore-style supercharged economy.
Fears that car-makers could scale back or even end production in the UK if vehicles could no
longer be exported tax-free to Europe were underlined by BMW's decision to remind its UK
employees at Rolls-Royce and Mini of the "significant benefit" EU membership confers.
Likewise, Business for New Europe said tax revenues would drop if companies that do large

amounts of business with Europe particularly banks moved their headquarters back into the
EU.
Sovereignty For Brexiters, sovereignty was seen as a simple win: few disagree that EU
membership involves giving up some control over our own affairs. Labour MP Kate Hoey says
the EU is "an attempt to replace the democratic power of the people with a permanent
administration in the interests of big business". Those on the right of the Conservative party may
disagree with her emphasis, but they agree that EU institutions have drained power from the
British Parliament. "The trouble is that most of us have no clue as to how the Brussels monolith
works, or who's in charge," said Stay or Go, the Connell Guide to the EU referendum. But, it
said, we have only ourselves to blame. "We've made it that way" because too many of us "can't
be bothered to vote" in European elections.
Immigration
Under EU law, Britain cannot prevent anyone from another member state coming to live in the
country while Britons benefit from an equivalent right to live and work anywhere else in the
EU. The result has been a huge increase in immigration into Britain, particularly from eastern
and southern Europe. According to the Office for National Statistics, there are 942,000 eastern
Europeans, Romanians and Bulgarians working in the UK, along with 791,000 western
Europeans and 2.93m workers from outside the EU. China and India are the biggest source of
foreign workers in the UK.
Jobs
The effect of leaving the EU on British jobs depends on a complex interplay of the factors above:
trade, investment and immigration. Pro-EU campaigners suggested that three million jobs could
be lost if Britain goes it alone. However, while "figures from the early 2000s suggest around
three million jobs are linked to trade with the European Union," says Full Fact, "they don't say
they are dependent on the UK being an EU member."

Britain's place in the world

For Outers, leaving the EU will allow Britain to re-establish itself as a truly independent nation
with connections to the rest of the world. But Remainers fear that Brexit will result in the country
giving up its influence in Europe, turning back the clock and retreating from the global power
networks of the 21st century. Brexit would bring some clear-cut advantages, said The Economist
before the referendum. The UK "would regain control over fishing rights around its coast", for
example. But it concluded that the most likely outcome would be that Britain would find itself "a
scratchy outsider with somewhat limited access to the single market, almost no influence and
few friends".
Security
Former work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith, who was in favour of Brexit, said we
were leaving the "door open" to terrorist attacks by remaining in the EU. "This open border does
not allow us to check and control people," he said.

Literature review
The UK and the EU: What would a Brexit mean for the EU and other states around the
world?Edited with Almut Mller. DGAP Report, 120 pages, September 2014.
In summer 2014 when the notion of Brexit was merely a hypothetical exercise Almut Mller
and Tim Oliver asked 26 experts inside and outside the EU to give their national perspectives on
the impact of a potential British Exit from the European Union. The 117-page volume presents a
range of perspectives from Brussels, France, and Ireland to China and the Pacific rim, from
North and South America to the newer EU member states. This compilation examines what a
British Exit a Brexit from the EU could mean for the rest of the Union, its individual
members, wider Europe, and other states around the world such as the United States and Japan.
This publication gathers 26 views from research institutions and universities from sixteen EU
member states, nine non-EU countries, and a view from the EUs institutions in Brussels. It
brings together a range of national viewpoints on the direction of the UKs relations with the EU.

The contributions also give an insight into how the current EU debate in Britain is perceived in
other countries.
Europe without Britain: Assessing the impact on the EU of a British withdrawal. SWP
Report, 30 pages, September 2013.
The withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union has the potential to
fundamentally change the EU and European integration. On the one hand, a withdrawal could tip
the EU towards protectionism, exacerbate existing division, or unleash centrifugal forces leading
to the EUs unravelling. Alternatively, the EU could free itself of its most awkward member,
making the EU easier to lead and more effective. Despite these potentially significant
consequences, analysis of the implications for the EU remains quite limited. Most analysis of a
UK withdrawal has instead focused on the implications for the UK, or the implications for the
EU of a renegotiated UK membership. The threat of a withdrawal also underpins Prime Minister
David Camerons hopes to one day secure a renegotiation of Britains relationship within the EU.
If a UK renegotiation would profoundly change the EU, then a British withdrawal would also
affect it in a big way. As this paper sets out, a British withdrawal would require the EU to face
three sets of interrelated challenges. First, there will be the short-term challenge of negotiating
and managing a UK withdrawal. Second, as part of the withdrawal negotiations the EU will need
to reach agreement with the UK over a post-withdrawal relationship. The EU will then have to
live with that relationship. Finally, the EU will need to manage a series of changes to itself, such
as shifts in the balance of power within the EU, change brought to its relations with the other
non-EU parts of Europe, and the implications for the EUs security and place in the world. The
paper aims to begin discussion of these issues, setting out a series of questions the EU needs to
ask itself about a British withdrawal.
Written evidence on the geopolitical implications of a Brexit submitted to the House of
Commons Joint Committees inquiry into the next National Security Strategy. House of
Commons, London, UK. 84-88, 2014.
The purpose of this evidence submission is to address the question of the UKs national security
priorities out to 2035, so as to inform the 2015 UK National Security Strategy (NSS) and the
subsequent Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR). It does this by discussing the

security implications of and appropriate UK strategic responses to the return of great power
competition to the international system: a consequence of the ongoing relative economic rise of
the so-called BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India, and China). It recognises that this is not the only
national security concern that the UK faces in the next two decades but it will make the case
that it is by far and away the most important.
With Dan Hamilton, Evidence on US views of TTIP for the House of Lords EU SubCommittee Cs inquiry into the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. Pp264270. House of Lords, London, UK, 2013.
The AFL-CIO recommends that the United States (U.S.) and the European Union (EU)
incorporate a new approach to trade policy in the TTIP, one that prioritizes benefits for working
families, not simply benefits for multi-national or global enterprises (MNEs). To successfully
create a long-term approach to foster growth with equity, the U.S. and the EU must pursue a
trade model that includes the promotion of fundamental labor rights included in the International
Labor Organization core conventions; the preservation and expansion of public services; the
creation of high-wage, high-benefit jobs that will help to create shared prosperity; and the
maintenance of domestic policy space so that nations can conserve their natural resources,
stabilize their financial markets, ensure food, product, and workplace safety, and otherwise
promote the public interest without fear of investor-state lawsuits. If instead, the TTIP continues
the low-road, neoliberal model and substitutes MNE interests for peoples interests, workers in
the U.S. and the EU will continue to pay a high price in the form of suppressed wages, a more
difficult organizing environment, and general regulatory erosion, even as MNEs will continue to
benefit.

Question and answer on Brexit

1) What does Brexit mean?
It is a word that has become used as a shorthand way of saying the UK leaving the EU - merging
the words Britain and exit to get Brexit, in a same way as a possible Greek exit from the euro
was dubbed Grexit in the past.

2) Why is Britain leaving the European Union?

A referendum - a vote in which everyone (or nearly everyone) of voting age can take part - was
held on Thursday 23 June, to decide whether the UK should leave or remain in the European
Union. Leave won by 52% to 48%. The referendum turnout was 71.8%, with more than 30
million people voting.
What was the breakdown across the UK?
England voted strongly for Brexit, by 53.4% to 46.6%, as did Wales, with Leave getting 52.5%
of the vote and Remain 47.5%. Scotland and Northern Ireland both backed staying in the EU.
Scotland backed Remain by 62% to 38%, while 55.8% in Northern Ireland voted Remain and
44.2% Leave. See the results in more detail.
3) What has happened since the referendum?
Britain has got a new Prime Minister - Theresa May. The former home secretary took over from
David Cameron, who resigned on the day after losing the referendum. Like Mr Cameron, Mrs
May was against Britain leaving the EU but she says she will respect the will of the people. She
has said "Brexit means Brexit" but there is still a lot of debate about what that will mean in
practice especially on the two key issues of how British firms do business in the European Union
and what curbs are brought in on the rights of European Union nationals to live and work in the
UK.
4) What about the economy?
The UK economy appears to have weathered the initial shock of the Brexit vote, although the
value of the pound remains near a 30-year low, but opinion is sharply divided over the long-term
effects of leaving the EU. Some major firms such as Easyjet and John Lewis have pointed out
that the slump in sterling has increased their costs. Britain also lost its top AAA credit rating,
meaning the cost of government borrowing will be higher. But share prices have recovered from
a dramatic slump in value, with both the FTSE 100 and the broader FTSE 250 index, which
includes more British-based businesses, trading higher than before the referendum. The Bank of

England is hoping its decision to cut interest rates from 0.5% to 0.25% - a record low and the
first cut since 2009 - will stave off recession and stimulate investment, with some economic
indicators pointing to a downturn.
5) What is the European Union?
The European Union - often known as the EU - is an economic and political partnership
involving 28 European countries (click here if you want to see the full list). It began after World
War Two to foster economic co-operation, with the idea that countries which trade together are
more likely to avoid going to war with each other. It has since grown to become a "single
market" allowing goods and people to move around, basically as if the member states were one
country. It has its own currency, the euro, which is used by 19 of the member countries, its own
parliament and it now sets rules in a wide range of areas - including on the environment,
transport, consumer rights and even things such as mobile phone charges
6) So when will Britain actually leave it?
For the UK to leave the EU it has to invoke an agreement called Article 50 of the Lisbon
Treaty which gives the two sides two years to agree the terms of the split. Theresa May
has confirmed this will be done by the end of March 2017, meaning the UK will be expected to
have left by the summer of 2019, depending on the precise timetable agreed during the
negotiations. Once negotiations officially begin, we will start to get a clear idea of what kind of
deal the UK will seek from the EU, on trade and immigration. The government will also enact a
Great Repeal Bill which will end the primacy of EU law in the UK. It will incorporate EU
legislation into UK law, after which the government will decide which parts to keep, change or
retain.
7) Who is going to negotiate Britain's exit from the EU?
Theresa May has set up a new government department, to be headed by veteran Conservative
MP and Leave campaigner David Davis, to take responsibility for Brexit. Former defence
secretary, Liam Fox, who also campaigned to leave the EU, has been given the job of
international trade secretary and Boris Johnson, who led the Leave campaign, is foreign

secretary. These men - dubbed the Three Brexiteers - will play a central role in negotiations with
the EU and seek out new international agreements, although it will be Mrs May, as prime
minister, who will have the final say. The government did not do any emergency planning for
Brexit ahead of the referendum - and it is now rushing to hire a team of skilled negotiators to
manage the complex business of negotiating withdrawal and ensuring Britain gets the best
possible deal.
8) How long will it take for Britain to leave the EU?
Once Article 50 has been triggered, the UK will have two years to negotiate its withdrawal. But
no one really knows how the Brexit process will work - Article 50 was only created in late 2009
and it has never been used. Former Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond, now Chancellor, wanted
Britain to remain in the EU, and he has suggested it could take up to six years for the UK to
complete exit negotiations. The terms of Britain's exit will have to be agreed by 27 national
parliaments, a process which could take some years, he has argued. EU law still stands in the UK
until it ceases being a member. The UK will continue to abide by EU treaties and laws, but not
take part in any decision-making.
9) Why will Brexit take so long?
Unpicking 43 years of treaties and agreements covering thousands of different subjects was
never going to be a straightforward task. It is further complicated by the fact that it has never
been done before and negotiators will, to some extent, be making it up as they go along. The
post-Brexit trade deal is likely to be the most complex part of the negotiation because it needs
the unanimous approval of more than 30 national and regional parliaments across Europe, some
of whom may want to hold referendums.
10) The likely focus of negotiations between the UK and EU
In very simplified terms, the starting positions are that the EU will only allow the UK to be part
of the European single market (which allows tariff-free trade) if it continues to allow EU
nationals the unchecked right to live and work in the UK. The UK says it wants controls "on the
numbers of people who come to Britain from Europe". Both sides want trade to continue after

Brexit with the UK seeking a positive outcome for those who wish to trade goods and services" such as those in the City of London. The challenge for the UK's Brexit talks will be to do enough
to tackle immigration concerns while getting the best possible trade arrangements with the Eu.
Some Brexiteers, such as ex-chancellor Lord Lawson, say that as the UK does not want freedom
of movement and the EU says that without it there is no single market membership, the UK
should seek to end "uncertainty" by pushing ahead with Brexit and not "waste time" trying to
negotiate a special deal.
11) What do "soft" and "hard" Brexit mean?
These terms are increasingly being used as debate focuses on the terms of the UK's departure
from the EU. There is no strict definition of either, but they are used to refer to the closeness of
the UK's relationship with the EU post-Brexit. So at one extreme, "hard" Brexit could involve
the UK refusing to compromise on issues like the free movement of people in order to maintain
access to the EU single market. At the other end of the scale, a "soft" Brexit might follow a
similar path to Norway, which is a member of the single market and has to accept the free
movement of people as a result. Ex-chancellor George Osborne and Labour leader Jeremy
Corbyn are among those to have warned against pursuing a "hard" option, while some
Eurosceptic Conservative MPs have put forward the opposite view.
12) What happens to EU citizens living in the UK?
The government has declined to give a firm guarantee about the status of EU nationals currently
living in the UK, saying this is not possible without a reciprocal pledge from other EU members
about the millions of British nationals living on the continent. EU nationals with a right to
permanent residence, which is granted after they have lived in the UK for five years, will be be
able to stay, the chief civil servant at the Home Office has said. The rights of other EU nationals
would be subject to negotiations on Brexit and the "will of Parliament," he added.
13) What happens to UK citizens working in the EU?
A lot depends on the kind of deal the UK agrees with the EU. If it remains within the single
market, it would almost certainly retain free movement rights, allowing UK citizens to work in

the EU and vice versa. If the government opted to impose work permit restrictions, then other
countries could reciprocate, meaning Britons would have to apply for visas to work.
14) What about EU nationals who want to work in the UK?
Again, it depends on whether the UK government decides to introduce a work permit system of
the kind that currently applies to non-EU citizens, limiting entry to skilled workers in professions
where there are shortages. Citizens' Advice has reminded people their rights have not changed
yet and asked anyone to contact them if they think they have been discriminated against
following the Leave vote. Brexit Secretary David Davis has suggested EU migrants who come to
the UK as Brexit nears may not be given the right to stay. He has said there might have to be a
cut-off point if there was a "surge" in new arrivals.
15) What does the fall in the value of the pound mean for prices in the shops?
Summer holidaymakers travelling overseas from the UK are finding that their pounds are buying
fewer euros or dollars after the Brexit vote. The day-to-day spending impact is likely to be more
significant. Even if the pound regains some of its value, currency experts expect it to remain at
least 10% below where it was on 23 June, in the long term. If they are correct, imported goods
will consequently get more expensive - that means food, clothing and homeware are all likely to
get pricier. These price rises might not kick in immediately. For example, all the big retailers
would have factored in the currency risk when organising their finances. In effect they have
insured themselves against a fall in the pound, but this will start to unwind next year leading to
price increases in the shops. Sellers of luxury items, such as high-end cars, have much bigger
profit margins, so may be able to absorb the extra costs without passing these on to customers.