Control immigration
Immigration is out of control. Being part of the EU means accepting the
free movement of people without being able to limit it in any way.
Too many people arrive from EU countries - 250 thousand in the last year
- and represent an excessive burden for public services, transport and
health. Many EU migrants either take advantage of the British public
subsidy system or agree to work at low cost, pushing wages down and thus
harming British workers. Furthermore, the number of immigrants will only
increase. Other countries have gone from 8 to 28. Now on the waiting
list to join the EU there are Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and
especially Turkey, which has a population of 72 million people.
Leaving the EU is the only possible way to limit arrivals and regain
control of borders.
Protect security
The security of the country must be protected.
The free movement of people means free field and easy movements for
weapons, criminals and terrorists within the EU.
The immigration emergency has demonstrated the impotence of the EU.
Britain will be able to guarantee the safety of its citizens only by
closing the borders and regaining the right to make checks at the
entrance.
Regaining national sovereignty
National sovereignty must be regained. Half of the laws in force in
Britain have been approved by EU bureaucrats that no one has elected.
The European Court of Justice regularly imposes its judgments
against the wishes of the British courts and the Government.
Leaving the EU, Britain will be able to return to being a sovereign
country, subject to laws that it has approved and master of its own
destiny.
Spend less
The EU costs too much. Britain pays £350 million a week to
Brussels, £20 billion a year and has no control over how it is
spent. Leaving the EU, this money could be invested for the good
of the country, to strengthen public services and in particular
the national health service.
Avoiding the European bureaucracy
The EU is cumbersome and bureaucratic. In addition to being
inefficient, not transparent and undemocratic, the EU has an
excessive bureaucracy that imposes restrictions and rules in all
areas, slowing down times, increasing costs and stifling
businesses, especially small and medium-sized ones.
Leaving it, Britain will be able to revive the economy by freeing
it from the laces imposed by Brussels, and will be free to
negotiate bilateral trade agreements with growing countries such
as India and China.
Results
Less immigrants from Europe
In the months before the referendum, the number of UK citizens of other
European countries was at historic highs.
In the following months this has much decreased, especially
regarding people from Eastern European countries.
Protect security
The IS managed to strike in big British cities, eluding controls
and causing many victims. Some example can be the attack at the Ariana
Grande concert, in Manchester or the one in front of the London Houses of Parliament.
Regain national sovereignty
This can not be verified yet, since the Brexit process has not ended
yet and Britain has not left the European Union yet.
Reduce spending
The economic growth of the United Kingdom is expected to slow down.
At the beginning it seemed that their fears were excessive, instead
the slowdown was there.
According to Eurostat data, a month after the Brexit, the
United Kingdom was replaced by Germany in the first place in the G7
countries' ranking with the fastest economic growth; economic growth
in the United Kingdom is similar to Italy's, which among the G7
countries is in last place.
Avoiding EU bureaucracy
With Europe, customs duties will be added to every single product and
as a result trade with Europe will decrease.
As for the other States, the European Union is currently negotiating.
Among these, with years-long negotiations, standard for commercial
treaties, we have Japan, India, Australia, New Zealand and large
markets such as the South American one, in particular Brazil and
Argentina.
After Brexit, it is easy to imagine that these states give precedence
in the negotiations to the larger market, the one that offers a wider
commercial outlet and that can guarantee greater benefits deriving
from its greater measure. So the interest in dealing with the
United Kingdom would certainly not take precedence. Everyone has
expressed their interest in doing so, but not immediately, first there
is the European Union.
Countries with which Europe has no agreements (or has them to a
minimum extent) and with which it has not officially open
negotiations include three giants: China, Russia and the USA.
China is an ever expanding market that is tempting to all Western
countries. A free trade treaty could, however, have a "boomerang"
effect on the domestic industry, which could not support competition
with the cheap labor of the Asian giant.
Russia, too, could be a very valid counterpart on which to enter into
major negotiations to facilitate a free trade path. However, dealing
with a trade agreement of this size could undermine future good
relations with the European Union, given the trade sanctions that
followed the Crimean question.
The United States, on the other hand, is the one that historically
could extend its hand to the historic ally. Historical reasons,
shared but above all geopolitical cultures.