[9. Economic security]

The Government pamphlet’s main economic claim is that remaining in the EU guarantees our full access to its single market. I have no problem with that statement, but it does not follow that that is the best option and it fails to make the case or present comparative facts.

Voters need to understand that being in the EU prevents the UK from entering into direct agreements with countries outside the EU and that the EU places tariffs on imports from our traditional suppliers from the commonwealth.

It is undeniably true that our European neighbours will still want to sell their produce to us. What has not been explained, is that after exit, our EU suppliers will have to compete with free trade from other countries, so the prices of imports of food and goods will be at lower world prices.

This can be further emphasised by the fact that EU tariffs and subsidies for European farmers prevent African farmers supplying to us at competitive rates, which they will be able to, should we leave the EU, so claims of an increased cost of living if we leave, do not stand up to scrutiny.

The second plank of the Governments economic case is that it will take years to renegotiate trade deals, which is the opposite of the truth.

A report by some of the most eminent legal experts on the EU, states that all the existing trade deals will still be in place when we leave.

This is because the European Council (EC) negotiates on behalf of all EU member states (see EU structure and Treaty). Furthermore as a full member of the World Trade Organisation, we would automatically regain our seat on the WTO and be able to negotiate for ourselves.

[WTO UK]

It is of interest to note that even the EC recognise that over the next 10 to 15 years, 90% of world demand will be generated outside of the EU.

[EU Trade Policy Countries and Regions]

Global trade at the end of 2015 was worth (USD) 74,000 (US Billion – rounded down). The EU, less the UK’s Nominal GBP is (USD) 13,200 billion.

[ https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html ] – Link Removed

The Government’s claim the our EU membership magnifies the UK’s ability to get its way on issues is simply not true, because the change in voting structure means that our voice is lost by the protectionist interests of the other members.

The UK is the world’s  5th largest economy and already a member of the G7, so we would be more successful in concluding our own trade agreements with expanding economies after exit and we would be able to negotiate them far more rapidly than the EU, because their negotiations are always made difficult by the protectionist interests of a number of EU member states.

[World-gdp-ranking-2015-data-and-charts ] [http://www.lawyersforbritain.org/articles.shtml ] – Link Removed

This particular topic is of huge international interest and while I am writing this, I am part listening to the daily roundup of Asian business news and they have just announced a list of countries including many Commonwealth countries, China, India, Singapore and Malaysia that are expressing an interest in having trade deals with a free UK.

‘Dear reader, you will need to check this yourself, otherwise I will never finish.’   

The other false argument that does not satisfy the basic economic laws is the claim that the shock of exit would put pressure on the pound and risk higher prices. I am finding it hard not to be derisory, as the truth is the exact opposite.

Allow me to explain. The Euro area is on the verge of another recession and many of the Euro member states are struggling.

Germany and the UK are the main contributors and although we are not in the Euro zone, our contributions are linked to how successful we are and we have the highest growth, so as they fail and we grow our contributions will grow too.