Sir Peter Scott, Emeritus Professor of Higher Educational Studies at the UCL Institute of Education, outlines the implications which Brexit will have for UK universities. Although noting that much is uncertain, he outlines four areas in which negative impact is identifiable: student exchanges (largely through the Erasmus programme), the recruitment of students from other EU countries, the employment of academic and research staff from the rest of the EU, and research grants and income from EU programmes. He argues that Brexit could undermine both the financial sustainability of UK univerisities, as well as the overall quality of their scholarship.
Some of the implications for higher education of the UK’s decision to leave the European Union can already be identified. Others are more difficult to identify, but may be even more important. This means that the long-term consequences for UK universities, colleges, and research establishments of the decision to ‘leave’ will be a slow-burn affair.
In a speech on 13 March, Nicola Sturgeon outlined her intention to call a second Scottish independence referendum. Paul Anderson, Canterbury Christ Church University, writes that while the announcement was not surprising given recent speculation, it was nevertheless a bold move on the part of Sturgeon. Only time will tell, however, whether she will be remembered as the First Minister who presided over the independence of Scotland or the leader who got it spectacularly wrong. Note: This article first appeared on the LSE EUROPP blog and is reposted here with permission.
Nicola Sturgeon’s announcement that she is to seek a second independence referendum to be held between autumn 2018 and spring 2019 is a bold but unsurprising move from the Scottish First Minister. She has spelled out that first she will seek the approval of the Scottish Parliament which, with a majority of pro-independence MSPs (the SNP and Greens), should prove no obstacle.
In Berlin, Brexit is not at the top of the agenda. EU challenges will loom large in the upcoming German elections. But Germany’s main concerns on Europe range from Russia’s behaviour to the impact of Trump, France’s presidential election, and unity, or not, amongst the EU27. Kirsty Hughes, Senior Fellow at Friends of Europe and a member of the UCL European Institute Advisory Board, discusses the impact that Germany’s competing priorities could have on the Brexit negotiations.
Mechthild Herzog, University of Luxembourg, draws comparisons between the socioeconomic situation the EU faced in the 1970s with that of today. Both periods followed extreme economic crises and were defined by rapid technological transformation. Looking to the past as a guide, Herzog argues that there is a potential for today’s socioeconomic crisis to actually lead to the strengthening of social and employment rights for EU citizens.
The European Union, which the UK voted to leave on 23 June 2016, is in some respects quite similar to the one the UK joined 43 years earlier: then and now, the member states face(d) a number of comparable issues in the area of social policy and employment. Following the famous quote dedicated to Mark Twain that history does not repeat itself, but it rhymes, this post dares to draw parallels, and to show what the EU and its institutions might learn from a time not so very long ago.
The bill authorising the Prime Minister to trigger Article 50, enabling the UK to leave the EU, has cleared the Commons. In this post Lords expert, Professor Meg Russell, Director of the UCL Constitution Unit, discusses how the second chamber is likely to treat the bill. She suggests that this illustrates important dynamics between Lords and Commons, which are often disappointingly misunderstood both in the media and inside government.
The European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill is a simple two-clause measure to authorise the government to trigger Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union and thereby begin negotiations on the UK’s exit from the EU. This follows the ‘Leave’ vote in last June’s referendum, followed by the Supreme Court ruling that parliament’s authorisation was required. A previous blog considered the bill’s likely reception in the Commons, where it completed its initial stages on 8 February. Today the bill begins its consideration in the Lords, where it is due a two-day second reading debate, followed by two-day committee stage next week, and a day spent on remaining stages the week after that.