"There seems to be a persistent lack of neutral information with worrying concerns on the impact of Brexit"

Posted by ap507 at May 23, 2017 09:45 AM |
Dr Simona Guerra discusses repercussions to the UK following Brexit in an interview for La Razón

Think: Leicester does not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Leicester - it expresses the independent views and opinions of the academic who has authored the piece. If you do not agree with the opinions expressed, and you are a doctoral student/academic at the University of Leicester, you may write a counter opinion for Think: Leicester and send to ap507@le.ac.uk

Dr Simona Guerra from our School of History, Politics and International Relations has been interviewed in Spanish publication La Razón about financial repercussions to the UK following Brexit. The interview, translated into English, is available below:

1. According to the Financial Times, the cost of Brexit for the United Kingdom would be 100,000 million euros. A figure much higher than the one previously stipulated. Is this a exaggerated figure or does it fit the reality of the divorce?

We cannot really say by no, as there are no official figures from the European Commission. This may also vary depending on the exchange, the amount is provided in Euros.

2. What aspect of this "UK check" requires more money from the United Kingdom?

The UK is expected to respect its financial commitments, which have developed through the tears participating in different programmes and activities at the EU level, with a planned rebate (share of EU assets). Although the UK is completing its payment by 2019-2020, its contribution would still cover its liabilities and annual payments expected. This would definitely be agreed before formally leaving the EU within two-years' time.

3. Can the UK handle this $100 million payment? What consequences would it have on the economy?

Talking about the cost of leaving is definitely not helping the negotiation process and the perception that public opinion is having about it. The leak of the dinner with Jean-Claude Juncker in London has already affected a mixture of reactions, triggering on the one hand the perception that the EU is not offering any opportunity for negotiation and on the other, in Juncker's perspective, the perception that there is no actual strategy. This can further affect public opinion, as explained with Theofanis Exadaktylos and Roberta Guerrina and can challenge further required agreements.

4. Can it be seen as a punishment of the United Kingdom by Brussels?

Definitely the narrative in some of the media would point to that frame. We have seen the impact of the media in the referendum campaign, and as stressed in my latest co-edited book 'Caiani and Guerra, Euroscepticism, Democracy and the Media. Communicating Europe, Contesting Europe' there seems to be a persistent lack of neutral information with worrying concerns on the impact, now, of the negotiation process.

5. What future do you foresee for the other two key points of the breach: the protection of citizens and the border of Northern Ireland? Will UK-Brussels reach a good agreement in that regard?

One of the most important points for the EU is now protecting EU citizens, in particular British citizens in EU countries and EU citizens in Britain, about 4 mill, with a willingness to ensure a soft border in Ireland, both protecting the EU citizens' rights in North Ireland, the protecting the external border of the EU and free movements of goods to and from the UK and Ireland, as Michel Barnier said. At this stage, after the June pre-term elections, the negotiation process can start by looking first at these three priorities and away, at the moment, by the (possibly premature debate on the) payment deal.

Share this page: