Hard Brexit - or soft Brexit?

The House of Commons is currently debating the pros and cons of the impending Article 50 negotiations, which the government hopes to start early 2017. I am very concerned both as an economist and a political scientist well versed on EU matters on the way it is developing.

The Remainers, several ex-Conservative Ministers and the new Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Kier Stamer have put forward strong arguments for the Prime Minister to take note of during the negotiations next year.

Already the economic and financial impact of a hard Brexit is evident in one of the biggest depreciations of sterling, over 18 per cent against the US dollar.

This is giving cause for anxiety in both financial circles and in the consumer sector, where soon the price of imported essentials will rise, leading to inflationary pressures on real incomes, in particular on fixed income wage earners, without assets.

I have noted in the national press, some real worrying fears on our financial sector, particularly the City of London. Sir Jon Cunliffe, a deputy governor of the BoE, responsible for financial stability, giving evidence to a House of Lords sub-committee, said much of the City business could migrate to New York.

Sir Jon went on to say that nearly 75,000 jobs were at stake, and revenues of more than £35 billion were in jeopardy.

Analysing the political debate in the House of Commons, it is fascinating to read the arguments both of prominent Leavers and Remainers. The former accuse the Remainers, bankers and some industrialists of negativity and not being democratic by being unable to accept the 23rd Referendum verdict.

The Remainers say that the Leavers won by a fear campaign, and the ordinary voter was seduced by a vision of waves of EU immigration pouring into the UK, especially from Turkey, should Turkey join the EU.

The Remainers say it is most ironic that the Leavers wanted the British Parliament to be paramount, but yet do not wish a vote to be given to the British Members of Parliament on the final treaty.

According to the Political Editor of the I-Newspaper, the Prime Minister, according to 10 Downing Street sources, said she 'is likely to give' the MPs a vote after the Article 50 negotiations are complete.

This U- turn is due to both the pressure of all political parties and also due to the High Court challenge now being heard.

I feel that should the Prime Minister give a final vote to Parliament, it would enhance the important convention of Parliament's sovereignty under our constitution.

However, I find the whole political debate about this issue is full of political posturing and nationalist rhetoric.

Luckshan Abeysuriya

Ulverston