#Brexiteers – how would we recover lost public spending?

Brexit fans are keen on the “£500 million” figure that would apparently be the annual saving to Northern Ireland of leaving the EU.

Of course, actually this is the proportion by population of the UK’s contribution, which does not then take account of the rebate, CAP, CFP, infrastructural funding, peace programmes and cross-border project funds. Then there is the point of “Brexit” – our “own” border control and trade deals – all of which the UK would now have to administer alone, meaning the recruitment and training of lots more bureaucrats. That is before we get to the cost of tariffs – which would take up to £1.5b out of the Northern Ireland economy (three times more than the initial but not actual “saving”).

But none of that is the question. The question concerns the fact that the UK as a stable EU economy can currently borrow money over 10 years at an interest rate of under 2%. However, ratings agencies have clarified that the uncertainty of leaving the EU would see this rise. Already more of our tax goes to repaying interest than to policing. This gap would rise further.

Northern Ireland would not gain from any “saving” (there is no saving in our case, and anyway Europe is an excepted matter so there is no reason to believe this would go to devolved administrations), and would of course lose considerably from the withdrawal of payments, infrastructure grants and programme funding. But on top of that households, already forced to pay more for goods due to tariffs, would need to contribute more in tax to maintain public spending at current levels because the cost of government borrowing would rise.

Actually there isn’t a question here. “Brexit” would cost every man, woman and child in Northern Ireland. End of.


One thought on “#Brexiteers – how would we recover lost public spending?

  1. A big flaw is the assumption is that the net contribution and efficiency savings (from a lower economy of scale really?) will mean some sort of windfall and non-existent security from being outside the EU.

    What is causing the Moody’s devaluation is not just the possibility of a Brexit, but the lack of confidence in the Leave sides policies to be not just logistically and diplomatically possible but more so clear.

    Here’s my thoughts on the “savings” :

    1. Cuts to things the European Union funds and withdrawal from EU bodies. The biggest victim is likely to be agriculture, and the spin will be cutting EU red tape, the red tape needed to get money DEFRA won’t provide.

    2. Tarrifs … A possibly money maker but also a cost EU nations may avoid staying within themselves. This would be more profitable with a trade surplus than a trade deficit. You got to hand it to the Leavers they spun a deficit into a good thing.

    3. Tax rises and working harder and developing better enterprises… Goes without too much explanation. Effectively British people will feel more positive about paying tax and their work if they lose their obsessions with the EU. I doubt this very much.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: