Brexit will be too costly for Britain and the EU

Organisers expect 2.5 million people in the stadiums for the games, including 1 million foreign visitors, to watch 51 matches taking place in 10 venues across the country. For the first time, the Euro 2016 will include 24 participating teams, up from the 16-team format used since 1996. However, Britain’s vote to leave the European Union (EU) on June 23 could result in a last-minute Euro 2016 ban for England, Wales and Northern Ireland. This remains the most likely scenario, according to a recent Guardian poll, which points to a 52-48 split in favour of leaving the EU as the referendum campaign gathers steam. Still, the power of soccer is a strong one and shouldn’t be ignored, especially in the UK where sports remain a major driver at national and international level. After all, soccer has shown its power to swing UK election results in the past. The fear that more than 400 players in the UK could lose their right to play in the event, should Brexit go through, could be more effective in swaying popular sentiment than talks about economic risks. Even if these thoughts are equally terrifying.

Senior British government officials have warned about the economic risks of leaving the EU for months, but to no avail. A Brexit could create a funding black hole that the UK government alone may prove unable to fill. Britain’s border security and economy are better off in the EU because national borders are irrelevant to most of the “issues of our time”, such as security, energy, environmental sustainability, research, health and the globalised economy. 

Researchers at Cambridge University have also expressed “grave concern” for the future of universities and the country if results call for Britain to leave the EU. The only way for Britain (Cambridge) to remain in their foremost position in research and innovation is to combine their research resources “within a reformed EU”, they argued. This is also what the future economic growth of the nation depends on. Professor Stephen Hawking contends that in order to protect its scientific research from being undermined by the government’s austerity cuts, Britain will need to remain in the EU.

According to various sources, approximately 2,025 billion pounds of assets will be at risk, with an average of 81,000 pounds of invested assets per capita. It is believed that almost half of the investment at risk of value destruction is in the property market. Many expect their savings to be adversely affected by Brexit, and women are also expected to be more negatively affected in terms of the potential impact on the cost of living. By leaving the EU, Britain will be “drifting off into the mid-Atlantic” and becoming marginalised, because the UK’s interests are best protected by remaining a part of the EU in this globalising world. 

Leaving the EU would also bring about negative effects in terms of immigration, crime, trade, law, jobs, clout, finance, sovereignty, and defence. Britain turning its back on the EU would be counterproductive in terms of trade. Approximately 3 million jobs that are linked to the EU will be plunged into uncertainty, because businesses would be less inclined to invest if the country was outside of Europe. 

With threats from IS and a resurgent Russia, European countries should combine their powers and work together in order to overcome these challenges, and this effort would be undermined if Britain were to leave the EU. 

Brexit would weaken both Europe and Britain, who are stronger united than divided, and would more likely create a disorderly international environment.