We are going to structure this session on Brexit around the following points: first we will talk about the origins of the referendum; then we will focus on the campaign and the results of the 2016 referendum; We will explain how the negotiations were activated under the umbrella of Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union; We will discuss the content of the Withdrawal Agreement; We will talk about the current situation, a transitional period, and then we will explain a series of final reflections to discuss what the implications of Brexit may be, both for the United Kingdom and for the European Union. Looking at the origins, we have to bear in mind that David Cameron, former prime minister, promised the Brexit referendum in 2013. At that time he could not organize it because the Conservative Party did not have an absolute majority. They governed in coalition with the Liberal Democrats, who are the United Kingdom's political force, probably the most pro-European and, therefore, their minor coalition partner did not allow the organization of this referendum. The referendum was held in 2016 because in 2015, completely unexpectedly, in the elections, the Conservative Party obtained an absolute majority and, therefore, David Cameron against his will, was forced to fulfil the promise that he had made to the British, and therefore organized a referendum on the United Kingdom's exit from the European Union for the following year. In the months preceding June 23, 2016, the date chosen for the referendum, the campaign focused on four major issues. First, the economy. It seemed that in this area the supporters of remaining were going to be the clear winners. But this was not the case because supporters of the exit were able to spread an idea that later turned out to be false. They said that the UK contributed 350 million pounds a week to the budget of the European Union. The true figure is less than half, but even so, that figure of 350 million pounds a week appeared in a multitude of advertisements and was one of the main themes of the campaign. Another big issue was immigration. The supporters of the exit, were able to persuade, for the most part, public opinion. Despite the fact that the data and reports tell us that immigration from the rest of the European Union countries has contributed more to sustaining the British welfare state, que no ha supuesto una o que which has not been an excessive burden due to the arrival of these immigrants. Desite this, British public opinion understood or perceived that immigration was a great burden, above all, for the National Health System, which is one of the great points of pride of the British citizens. It must be said that, the refugee crisis, peaking in 2015, had a decisive influence on public opinion. Another important point during the campaign was the question of sovereignty or nationalism, especially English, and certain ideas, of nostalgia, regarding an imperial past. Let us remember that the main slogan of Brexit was Take Back Control, and that referred, above all, to that loss of sovereignty that occurs when a country enters, remains and is a member of the European Union. Another issue has become essential for many analysts, not only in the discussions about Brexit, but also, in many other political discussions, in other western societies, and they are the anti-establishment ideas. In other words, a significant part of British voters considered and still consider that they have been the losers of globalization, that they have been forgotten by the elites, by the establishment, by international organizations such as the European Union. And although perhaps they did not trust that leaving the Union would suddenly or significantly change their living conditions, they did see in the Brexit referendum the opportunity to strike, the opportunity to protest against the elites and against the establishment. This has been picked up by many analysts, the most famous of which has been David Goodhart, with his book The Road to Somewhere, in which he analyzes the Brexit referendum from this perspective. The results are widely known but there is an issue that deserves to be highlighted and that is the idea of division. Division not only by the results themselves, just 52 per cent in favour of leaving with 48 per cent in favour of permanence, therefore, a very tight result. Division, also, from a territorial point of view. We see a great divide between the different territorial entities that make up the United Kingdom: England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. While Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to stay, England and Wales voted to leave. This division is not only territorial, because it has or could have very important consequences. We also refer to the generational division. The younger generations voted overwhelmingly in favour of permanence, while the older generations voted in favor of the exit. And there is the paradox that the generations that will probably suffer less from the consequences of Brexit were the ones who decided on Brexit against the will of the younger generations, who will experience the consequences of that decision. Once the United Kingdom decided to leave the European Union and after the resignation of David Cameron and the coming to power of Theresa May, after a few months, in March 2017, what is known as the article 50 clause is activated. Article 50 of the Treaty on the European Union, which was introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon, in force since 2009, allows any member state to leave the European Union. The UK sends a letter to the Council in March 2017 to start withdrawal negotiations. Those negotiations, should have concluded in two years, but the article itself foresees that there may be extensions during those negotiations, and, in fact, this is what happened. At the end of 2018, the British Government and the European Union reached a Withdrawal Agreement, setting the terms of the divorce, the terms of the withdrawal, but not setting the future conditions of the commercial relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union. An agreement was reached at the end of 2018 but it could not enter into force because the British Parliament was not able to reach a consensus and approve that agreement. After months of unsuccessful attempts, Theresa May resigned as prime minister and Boris Johnson comes to power promising to renegotiate that Withdrawal Agreement and return it to the confidence of the chamber. Boris Johnson promotes some changes to the Withdrawal Agreement but is also unable to get the British Parliament to approve it and is forced, at the end of 2019, to organize early elections. After the December 2019 elections, in which the Conservative Party and, therefore, Boris Johnson's proposal, received a very wide acceptance by the British people, the new Parliament approves the withdrawal agreement and in January 2020 and, officially, the United Kingdom leaves the European Union. What is the current situation? The Withdrawal Agreement entered into force in January 2020 setting a transitional period that will last until December 2020. Certainly, some extensions could have been activated to extend this transitional period, but, in June 2020, the British government and the European Union decided that there will be no further extensions and, therefore, the transitional period will end in December 2020. This transitional period does not alter the situation. The United Kingdom is no longer a member state of the European Union, it no longer participates in decisions, but European rules continue to apply in the United Kingdom and, therefore, citizens and companies do not see any big differences, at least formal and legal. It is in this transitional period that we have to prepare the future trade relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union. It is not yet known what this commercial relationship will be, but everything seems to indicate that the British do not want to remain in the internal market, they do not want to maintain the customs union and they intend to achieve a free trade area in which taxes, tariffs and quotas for merchandise are eliminated but there is no free movement of workers and there is no contribution to the internal market, in any case, this has yet to be decided. One aspect of the content of the Withdrawal Agreement that may have major implications for the UK is the Irish question. How does Northern Ireland remain, even after the end of the transitional period? The Withdrawal Agreement established that, at least until 2024, Northern Ireland would remain subject to European rules. Why? To avoid the emergence of a border between Nothern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. This requires certain border controls in Northern Ireland and the rest of the country. This can lead to a process of convergence between Northern Ireland and Ireland and, therefore, a very significant risk of disintegration for the United Kingdom. Boris Johnson managed that, from 2024, it can be unilaterally suppressed by Northern Ireland. The previous agreement required an agreement with the European Union, but this is one of the great consequences that Brexit has in the United Kingdom, the risk of disintegration caused by the convergence between Northern Ireland and Ireland. And there is also a great risk of disintegration in reference to Scotland and the possibility of organizing a second referendum in Scotland. It must be said that Brexit means for the European Union the loss of a net contributor, a nuclear power, a very consolidated and effective diplomacy, the main European army, and the transatlantic relations are weakened. On the other hand, the European Union may be able to gain internal cohesion.
