Instigator / Pro

Leaving the European Union without an agreement would be bad for the United Kingdom


The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
Better sources
Better legibility
Better conduct

After 8 votes and with 52 points ahead, the winner is...

Publication date
Last updated date
Number of rounds
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Contender / Con

Leaving the EU without a deal (WTO Brexit, Clean Break Brexit, No-Deal Brexit etc.)

Round 1
Motion: Leaving the European Union the European Union without a deal would be bad for the United Kingdom 

This debate is a very contentious issue at the moment not just where I live here in the UK, but around the world. As the 2019 General Election looks to be held soon, this will be a key point of debate between the Conservatives, Labour, the Liberal Democrats, the SNP, the DUP, the UUP, Sinn Fein, Plaid Cymru and the Brexit Party along with other minor parties. I look forward to taking the PRO position on this proposition and wait with eager and anticipation to see CON’s response to my case. 

Burdon of Proof 
PRO has the burden of proof to provide evidence that leaving the European Union without a deal would be bad for the United Kingdom and CON has the burden to either disprove my evidence and claims or to give evidence and reason often as to why the leaving the European Union without a deal or both.  
European Union (EU) - “an international political and economic organisation of [the vast majority of] European countries.” [1] 

Without a deal” and “no-deal Brexit” - “the withdrawal of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU) without a withdrawal agreement [which, under] article 50, the Treaties of the European Union cease to apply.” [2] 

United Kingdom (UK) – “[a country] made up of the constituent countries England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and is an island nation in north-western Europe.” [3] 

Article 50 – Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty as a part of the Treaties of the European Union. [4] 

Bad – For the purpose of this debate, I find the definition of “having undesirable or negative qualities" to be a satisfactory definition, however voters should take the word as used in common parlance. 

1) Economy
1.1) Economic Growth 
According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), a no-deal Brexit will result in a 3% decrease to economic growth. [5] This is backed up by research from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) which gave the figure as “2-3%” [12] as well as the Centre for Economic Performance which puts it slightly higher at 3.5%. [15] 

1.2) Recession 
The OECD has also warned of a recession resulting from a no-deal Brexit. [6] This claim is labelled as “highly probable” by economists at KPMG as well as the Office for Budget Responsibility. [13] [14] [19] 
 Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chamber along with Sir Ivan Rodgers (former UK Permanent Representative to the EU) said “The anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years. [16] 
 “The government’s own statistics have estimated that under the worst-case no-deal scenario, GDP would be 10.7% lower than if the UK stays in the EU, in 15 years.” [16] [17] 

1.3) Trade 
Bloomberg has reported using OECD figures that “A no-deal Brexit would also impact the rest of the EU. Exports from the region to the U.K. are estimated to decline by around 16% as a result of higher trade costs, with the largest effects being felt in Ireland.” [11] 
The Centre for Economic Performance “estimates” that in a no-deal scenario would reduce the UK’s trade with the EU by 40% over ten years which would mean a fall in income per head of 2.6% per year. [15] 

2) National Security 

2.1) Criminal Databases 
In the event of no-deal, we will lose access to the Schengen Information System (SIS2), European Cenozoic Rift Information System (ECRIS) and the Europol database. Just the SIS2 database alone is checked by our police, border force and immigration officials over half a billion times each year – looking for wanted criminals, terror suspects, child sex offenders or dangerous weapons. [7] Both the Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee and the head of the National Crime Agency agree that “if the UK cannot have access to these tools, there is a risk that this country is less safe as a result.” [9] The Government themselves have admitted this is an issue. [10] 

2.2) European Arrest Warrant 
In a no-deal scenario, we lose access to the European Arrest Warrant meaning we would have to rely on the 1957 Council of Europe Convention on Extradition which, according to a joint written statement by Dr. Rachael Dickson of the University of Birmingham and Dr. Amanda Kramer of Queen’s University Belfast to the Home Affairs Select Committee, stating “[it would be] much slower, less likely to be successful, more expensive, and politicised.” They went on to describe the impact of this, writing “This could not only have an impact on the procedural justice rights for persons suspected of committing [a] crime, but also slow justice for UK citizens who have been victims of crime.” [9] 

3) Northern Ireland 

3.1) Border with ROI 
A no-deal Brexit would result in a hard border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. [22] The Chief Constable of Northern Ireland “has repeatedly said that a hard border would be damaging for the wider peace process.” Going on to explain it further, he said it, “creates tensions and challenges and questions around people's identity, which in some ways the Good Friday Agreement helped to deal with.” He has said that any new border infrastructure would be seen as "fair game" for attack by dissident republicans. [23] It’s clear to anyone with knowledge of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) that a hard border with Northern Ireland is a massive public safety risk which must be avoided at all costs. 

3.2) Crime 
The Organised Crime Task Force (OCTF) has warned that there is substantial evidence that OCGs will exploit any new tariffs or other arrangements leading to a significant increase in the risk of the safety of citizens in the border area and for crime in Northern Ireland in general. [8] 

3.3) Trade across the Northern Irish border 
A study produced by the Economic and Social Research Institute for InterTrade Ireland “shows that dairy products account for about 15% of all Northern Ireland goods exported to the Republic of Ireland. In a no-deal scenario, those exports would be clobbered with an average tariff of 64% as well as facing new costs from non-tariff barriers. The research suggests that could reduce Northern Ireland to Ireland dairy exports by up to 65%.” [24] [25] This is just one example of how post-no-deal Brexit tariffs have the potential to destroy entire industries. 

4) Science, Technology and Research 

4.1 Research Funding 
According to written evidence submitted by the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS) to the Science and Technology Select Committee, “EU grants are an important component of astronomy, space science and geophysics resource funding” with “at least 30% of resource grant funding for astronomy and space science comes from [..] EU programmes.” with the RAS finishing their evidence with a summation saying “The Society believes that a no-deal Brexit will inevitably be bad for science” [20] Evidence submitted to the same inquiry by the Royal Academy of Engineering supports the claims of the RAS. [21] 

4.2 Immigration 
According to evidence submitted by Universities UK (UUK, the collective voice of 136 universities in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.) the “European Temporary Leave to Remain only provides immigration leave for a 36-month period, meaning EU students who arrive in the UK after a no-deal on courses lasting longer than three years will not be covered for the full duration of their study.” which means “a no-deal Brexit would seriously damage science and research in the UK by removing resources, causing instability and undermining the UK’s reputation in the field.” [26] 

They also said “the UK could lose out on talented research staff, assistants and technicians from the EU. Many universities’ technical staff are on salaries below £30,000, making them ineligible for sponsorship through the Tier 2 system as it is currently structured. Students from EU member states may be deterred from studying in the UK if it is easier for them to study abroad in another EU country, depriving UK institutions of the potential researchers of the future. Students from the EU who study at UK institutions often go on to pursue further study or careers in the UK, including in science and research. Any drop in EU student numbers would also have an adverse effect on university finances and consequently on university research budgets.” [26] 

Imperial College London also submitted evidence to support Universities UK’s evidence saying “Collaborating across borders with people from different backgrounds, cultures and nationalities is what drives the world’s best universities. Imperial has embraced the opportunities that EU research programmes provide through creating collaborative networks, facilitating the mobility of talent, and focusing on excellence.” and that this would be under threat in the event of a no-deal Brexit. [27] 
4.3 Animal Research 
Understanding Animal Research (with a membership of “the UK’s foremost animal research institutions such as universities, learned societies, government agencies, industry, veterinary schools and medical research charities.”) They have said their key issue with a no-deal Brexit is “in terms of biological samples […] there are no restrictions on movements between EU countries. Upon leaving the EU […] will require Export Health Certificates (EHCs) for each consignment. DEFRA anticipates needing to issue between one and a half to three times as many as at present, or up to 17,000 per month. It does not currently have the capacity to process these.” [28] 

[2]  (Wikipedia definition)
[3]  (Wikipedia definition)

Round 2
Carry arguments forward
Round 3
Carry arguments forward.
Round 4
Carry arguments forward