Im talking about the interest of the United Kingdom. It is in the interest of the United Kingdom to regain our freedom. Mario monti, for whom i have a high regard, referred to democracy. He suggested that we werent really democratic because ministers were appointed by the Prime Minister and not by the people. That is ridiculous. What democracy means is that if the people are fed up with the government, they can kick it out. And laws which have been passed can be changed by the subsequent government. You cant do that in the European Union. Francine i think he was talking about house of lords. 1999, maybe lord olson was not in europe at that time, the European Parliament dismissed, i. E. Sent home, the executive chair of the european. Ommission so that can happen in europe as well. Im not saying the u. K. Is not democratic. Im saying that i dont see much reason for the u. K. To take a high moral ground these of the vis the young, flourishing, new form of democracy, the only form of democracy in a constellation of states that is there in the world. Many of the institutions to which the u. K. Would like to continue to be long, the imf, the wto, they are all very good, they are composed just of bureaucrats, but they dont have any form of democratic briefing. Said heer, mario monti was not in favor of european Political Union. Now hes talking about the young democracy of the European Parliament. Willuropean parliament acquire more and more power. Britain has Something Like 10 seats in the European Parliament, 8 of the votes in the council of ministers. This is moving in the direction of Political Union. We are a very small part of it. I do not believe democracy can be exercised over 28 countries. There is not a european people in that sense. There is a french people, a german people, a british people. Ut you do not have a 28 country democracy. We are getting more remote and more interventionist. I want to come back to the economic aspect. I think that when you are speaking about leaving europe, you believe that things will stay as they are. You mentioned that things will go much better because we will be in the driving seat. I think nothing could be more wrong than this assessment. You are simply forgetting one single aspect, which is the anger of all the European Countries which will react. You believe that it is a soft belly, that europe is really something which has very little strength, and will not react, that we just accept the consequences. This democratic institution, the European Union, is going to get angry because the people of one of its members through a democratic election decide to withdraw. That is a very poor advertisement for the European Union. Is it fair and democratic that one out of the 28 is allowed to ask its citizens, whereas the 27 of us the alternative to that is, britain is compelled to remain within the eu whether it citizens want to or not. The reason they are angry and nervous is because they know very well that if britain thatraws, there is a risk other countries will begin to think about it. That is for each country to decide. I think it is a shameful argument to say there would be anger. There ought to be respect for the vote of an individual country. Francine weve heard that from finance ministers. I would like to make my point very clear. You are believing that all the countries will accept that things will go as if nothing has changed if there is a brexit. I think nothing would be more wrong than this. People will protect their own country, their own businesses. This will be a fight, a bitter fight, and you cannot believe that people will accept simply that you are putting at risk europe and that you will continue to benefit from everything europe has given to u. K. I think this would be wrong, simply. Francine caroline . Getting back to this pragmatic case really does matter. Without necessarily talking about anger, freetrade deals are really difficult to do. What i havent heard, our members say they havent heard, is what the alternative will dealsike to the train being had with europe and those deals around the world and why you are so confident there will be a blossoming of free trade when we know it is incredibly difficult to do and it will not be in the interest of several of our trading partners to do those deals. I will tell you very briefly what the alternative to being in the European Union is. The alternative is not being in the European Union. It may surprise you, but most of the world is not in the European Union. It may also surprise you that most of the world is doing a lot better than most of the European Union. Francine but not necessarily better than the u. K. The u. K. Is doing better than most of the European Union. Francine but also better than most of the world. First of all, you actually would do quite well if we didnt get any fresh trade deals. There would be more impact on europe than on the u. K. They would lose more jobs in europe if there was a brick wall between here and the eu. Only 10 of their tray comes to us and 50 the fact of the matter is, we had a trade deficit with them. The magnitude of the total is Something Like we would lose 270,000 jobs in the u. K. And europe would lose about 450,000. Out of 500 million people. The reality is there are people losing jobs. Damagetral thing about to the u. K. Economy on leaving, which is the main argument, isnt the trade agreements will take forever to get sorted. They dont matter that much. Fair point. His, why would it take longer than the Second World War to get some reasonably functional trade agreements in place . Weve never had to do it in a rush. Two years is a long time. We could get most serviceable agreements in place. We wouldnt get full agreements. We wouldnt deal with would you get past morning for the city . Some pass porting, i think. But pass porting isnt very important. One of the main reasons for being here. It is a benefit to existing large institutions to have regulation, to have a standing position. It is not a benefit to the rest of the economy. It dissuades competition. Francine why would you take the risk . We dont really know what any ade agreement would look like. The certaintyknow of what will come out of this. We will have some kickback from people going rotten swines. There will be fear in the eu that there will be other referendums. Theyve not fixed the treaty over the european bailouts because they didnt dare risk national referendums. Theres a fear among the ruling class that there would be other referendums. The balance of probabilities is the future is better out than in. You live in a country where growth is something which only the older generation remember. It hasnt succeeded for you. What, the European Union . Well the older generation remembers higher growth and there was throughout the world, but also remembers huge deficits , atich cost unemployment the time, to future generations. Future generations are now there. The effect of not having some fiscal discipline framework in a rather inventive and imaginative country in politics brought us to many bad things. Because you touched the point, eu and italy, i can assure you that if it were for original italian legislative initiatives balance,ea of gender antienvironment, antipollution legislation, and many other things, consumer protection, italy without the eu would now be 30 years back when. But may i make another point . Francine yes. Mario in many conversations i have, because there was an alternative, in many conversations i had when i was Prime Minister with David Cameron, george osborne, and also in the house of lords, the best part of which has joined us this morning [laughter] believe made, i forcefully, the following case. The u. K. Is more liberal oriented, more lover of single market, more lover of competition, then the rest of us. We desperately need a greater influence of the u. K. In the eu policy process. By the way, i was commissioner when the issue of the euro was put to the u. K. I never spent one word to try and convince the u. K. To join the euro. Now i think is a completely different story. What i said to my then british started a was, if you crusade, a proactive crusade in europe, by asking that the single markets be really taken seriously with the same instruments of enforcement that competition policy has, quick enforcement rather than taking three or four years for infringement procedure finally to be able to remove an obstacle created by member states, if you toe two or three conditions have a more open and competitive, broad single market, including for the digital professions, for services in general, you would put in great difficulty france, theme difficulty germany lands which are closer to a social market economy, but you would enthusiasm in northern europe, central and eastern europe, and you would be the winner of this transformation of the European Union, exactly like the brits would like to see. This was not done, and the nittygritty of things that are not very serious but can be sold to the electorate in order to persuade that the game have changed have been given preference. Francine for our viewers and listeners, i would like to reintroduce our panelists. Left, byed, from my mr. Lord nigel lawson, caroline andbairn, norman lamont, maurice levy. Lord lamont. Trade is actually for mutual cooperation. It is to everybodys advantage. People want trade deals. The idea that it is difficult to negotiate trade deals, i dont entirely accept. I dont accept that it is easier through the eu. If you look at small countries like chile, like singapore, like korea, theyve negotiated freetrade agreements far larger than those of the eu. If you had a the gdp of the countries with which switzerland has freetrade agreements, it is larger than the combined gdp of the countries with which the eu has freetrade agreements. The freetrade agreements of many countries outside the eu include to some extent Financial Services, which the eu freetrade agreements have not been able to do. I dont think that is right. If you talk to people negotiating trade deals, because they benefit consumers but damage producers in the short run, they take a long time. Nowhere nearl is conclusion. The swiss trade deals took years. Deal took seven years. The evidence is that it takes a long time. In theory, they are good over the long run. I think that is what we would see if the u. K. Left the European Union. Your examples were eu trade deals. You said the deal with america, then switzerland. The fact that the eu x a long time doesnt mean it has to take a long time. Carolyn the same is true of the this is bureaucratic nonsense. Helpful, but in the overall scheme of things, we do an enormous amount of trade with the united states. We have no bilateral trade deal with the united states. We live in a world of relatively freetrade policed by the world trade organization. Dont need trade deals. If anybody in this Assembly Goes , you are probably all too busy, but if you do, you see goods from all over the world. There are many more important things than trade deals, and the regulatory problem is a huge problem, and it is crippling for Small Businesses which are not really represented by the cbi had all. Francine hold on one second. You were shaking your head. In disbelief, when nigel said there were more important things than freetrade deals. The point hes making is correct. There are countries outside the eu that sell more and whose growth and exports to the eu is faster than that of britain. Francine i was shaking my head unless you get a worse deal out of the eu. Maurice levy. Maurice i think that when you are speaking about this kind of issue, you will always find reason to stay or reason to leave, and you will build your case, and you are not listening to the key issues, which are what the people in europe will feel about this. As you said, there is something much with an trade, which is being or not being a big european continent. , thatf you are an island we are now, with eternal connected. If you want to be part of this dream or not, and if you look at what europe has been doing for , you see50 or 60 years that theres a lot of issues which have been managed properly by europe. We have avoided wars. We have been building things together. Thinking solely about what u. K. Can do and how u. K. Can build a better deal than chile or singapore that is fine. It is not about trade. Our perspective is that we wish to be a selfgoverning democracy with a global outlook. We are hugely connected. London is the most International City in the world. That has nothing to do with the European Union. May i finish . You would probably not be the largest as you are in Financial Services in london. I would argue that without all the trade that you are doing with europe, you would not be where you are today. Nigel that is nonsense. Let me finish, mr. Levy. Also on the noneconomic side probably the most important member of nato after the united states. A long way off the united states, but the second most important. Permanent member of the Security Council of the united nations. The commonwealth contains a lot of the most exciting, emerging, not least india. We have connections, international connections, greater than any other european country. To talk about us as some island, geographically we are an island, but somehow isolated unless we are part of europe, that is nonsense. The question is a political one. I wish the European Union well. You say it is a dream. He is a dream. But unfortunately it has turned out rather closer to a nightmare. France r friends in i live in france. I love france. We wish our friends in france and italy well. But we think they are on the wrong track. We wish to choose our own destiny. That is what it is all about. Francine mario monti. Mario ive not heard a word on research. We know that research is a key driver of economic growth. There is at least one aspect where the eu is doing quite well, so well that much of its funds do go to british universities and research centers. , what would our british friends make of a u. K. Out of the eu . Finally,dly and everything i said, i want to stress this, this morning, is not whether brexit would be in the interest of the eu or not. I tried, because i have been invited here in london, to put myself in the shoes of british consumers, companies, and even of the u. K. Can i venture to say that there would certainly be some advantages for the eu if the u. K. Were to leave us, but there might also be one big and , which is not the one you are considering, namely no longer to have to deal with this rather difficult partner. But i, for one, would make the proposal that they, after the u. K. Leaves the eu, that the eu should finally shift to one official language only, english, because so far, it has been unfair to select it as the only , the languageage of a large member state. And of course ireland would so, but ient by doing believe that the dialogue with our u. K. Friends would be even stronger, which would not make fact that all the the renegotiations have to be made. Francine lord lamont. Norman both mario and our french friend have given the impression that the frenchman is maurice. Norman lovely name. The impression that we are going to drift off into the atlantic and all cooperation is going to stop with europe, i dont think that need heaven at all. The military cooperation britain has with france, which is extremely valuable, that absolutely would continue. And i think europe would want some military cooperation with britain. Take marios point about research. There are noneu countries that collaborate in the research and Development Programs of the eu, to which we contribute through the budget. Switzerland makes a small payment towards the Research Budget and collaborates on research. We could participate in the erasmus program. I dont think collaboration between universities should cease just because we leave the eu. Why therch, the reason british universities are in the forefront is because we happen to have more of the generally agreed best universities in the in then britain than rest of europe has. And that is why our universities attract Research Grants and research students. Theyve got nothing whatever to do with the European Union. What i do agree with is that one cannot be certain about the consequences of brexit. But one cannot either be certain of the consequences of remaining within the European Union. The European Union is changing all the time. Union isto political getting more pronounced. We know that your friend, president juncker, published . Ast year how did this go the creation of a single European Finance ministry with a single European Finance minister by 2025. Is that of the matter you cannot have a Monetary Union without a fiscal union and you cannot have a fiscal union without a Political Union. If you dont want to go to a Political Union and you were a bit evasive about that, mario, if you dont want a Political Union, then abandon the Monetary Union. Francine we are just running out of time. One more comment from carolyn fairbairn, and everyone can submit questions through the app that we talked about the four. Also, this is the right time to vote in the poll. I will be taking que