THE BREXIT AND ITS ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hossein Ataei ◽  
Farnaz Taherkhani
Keyword(s):  
Construction Industry ◽  
Public Funding ◽  
Private Investment ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Skilled Workers ◽  
Capital Projects ◽  
The Government ◽  
Private Investors ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

In June 2016, the United Kingdom voted to depart from the European Union (EU) with 51.9% of the votes versus 48.1%. A short-term increase in the overall construction project costs is anticipated due to shortage of less-expensive skilled workers and more costly construction equipment imports from the EU. This may result in slower growth for commercial and residential industry sectors. The long-term issue of Brexit will affect private investment in British infrastructure. As demand increases globally on construction of new civil infrastructure or rehabilitation of existing systems, the global investors and Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) firms will be more mindful and conservative in investing in UK projects. The UK government will seek more private financing for the country's capital projects as easier access to the EU funds-as existed prior to Brexit-may no longer be an alternative. The UK will be a riskier destination for private investors or Public-Private Partnerships (PPP's) because of the developing instability and complexities in the new post-Brexit econo-political environment. As a result, a slower turnout in major infrastructure projects is anticipated. This paper investigates the economics of the post-Brexit UK and the opportunities and threats to the construction industry. It addresses the role of the government and the availability of public funding and how construction regulations and standards will be impacted as a result.

PULLING A TRIGGER OR STARTING A JOURNEY? BREXIT IN THE SUPREME COURT

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-223
Author(s):  
David Feldman
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
The Government ◽  
Article 50 ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

FOLLOWING a referendum on 23 June 2016 in which 52% of voters (38% of the total electorate) had expressed a preference for the UK to leave the EU, the Government announced that it would start the process of withdrawal, in accordance with Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (“TEU”), by notifying the European Council of the UK's decision, exercising the Government's prerogative power to conduct foreign relations. A number of legal challenges were fast-tracked to the Supreme Court. In R. (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (Birnie and others intervening) [2017] UKSC 5; [2017] 2 W.L.R. 583 after an expedited hearing, the Court decided two issues: (1) whether the Government could exercise its power under the royal prerogative to give notice, or needed an Act of Parliament to authorise the giving of notice; and (2) whether the Government required the consent of devolved legislatures in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales before giving notice or introducing to Parliament a Bill authorising the giving of notice. The Court sat unprecedentedly with all 11 serving members. On issue (1), the Court, by an 8–3 majority, held that an Act of Parliament would be required in order to authorise the giving of notice. On issue (2), the Court unanimously held that there was no legal requirement for consent by the devolved institutions.

scholarly journals THE SUPREME COURT'S JUDGMENT IN MILLER: IN SEARCH OF CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Elliott
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Formal Process ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Constitutional Adjudication ◽  
The Eu

AbstractIn R. (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the Supreme Court of the UK (1) held that the UK Government had no prerogative power to initiate the formal process whereby the UK will withdraw from the EU and (2) declined to recognise any requirement that the devolved legislatures’ consent be obtained in respect of legislation authorising the Government to commence the withdrawal process. This article critically examines Miller, arguing that the majority's analysis veers between unwarranted muscularity in relation to the prerogative issue and unnecessary conservatism as regards the devolution issue. The article goes on to argue that while the majority judgment's restrictive approach to the prerogative may be viewed as a progressive victory for constitutional principle, such an evaluation can be sustained only if a set of relatively traditional constitutional premises are adopted to begin with. The article also contends that the general approach adopted by the majority is problematic, given its willingness to invoke arguments of constitutional principle without adequately engaging with questions about what the pertinent principles are, and argues that such an intellectually lackadaisical mode of constitutional adjudication is to be deprecated.

Tightening immigration policies and labour market impacts

2008 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 653-664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonia McKay ◽  
Tessa Wright
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Market Impacts ◽  
Undocumented Status ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Employment Rights ◽  
Opening Up ◽  
The Eu

The opening up of the European Union has encouraged a shutting down of borders to third-country nationals and in almost every Member State measures have been put in place to restrict such immigration. The consequences, as this article demonstrates, will be first to drive more people into undocumented status, with an accompanying worsening of employment rights and secondly, to racialise migration, through entry rights being denied primarily to those from the developing South. The UK is introducing a points-based system that limits entry from outside the EU to the highly skilled, and the government is at the same time targeting ‘illegal working’. Based on recent interviews, this article demonstrates the immediate and negative impact of some of these measures on migrants already working in the UK.

scholarly journals BREXIT FROM THE LEGAL POINT OF VIEW

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 141-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
И. Чернышова ◽  
I. Chernyshova
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Political Process ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Political Life ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Aspect ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

In June 2016 the referendum on the minimum majority of votes of British citizens supported a British exit from the European Union, from that moment began the formal process of so-called “Brexit” — a unique event in the political life of the EU and the UK. Apart the political aspect, Brexit also is a difficult challenge for legislators, academics and lawyers both in the EU and in the UK. Over the last forty years, the legislative system of the EU and the UK are closely intertwined and now constitute a single legal system. The notice of withdrawal from the EU has caused differences which led to the consideration of the functions and powers of the government in court. This article discusses how participants of the legal process of brexit (legislators, academics and lawyers) approach to solving this problem: background, development process, proposed legislation and the reaction to it from the professional legal community with the view of the political process and the preparations for the negotiations on the exit procedure and further cooperation. In the article, the procedure and consequences of the brexit are considered from the European and British points of view. The key legislative act defining the brexit consequences for the legal system in the UK will be the Bill on the Great Cancellation, which determines the order of separation of the British legal system from Europe. The article also includes a brief review of the brexit effects for individual areas of British law.

The Law & Politics of Brexit: Volume II

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Financial Settlement ◽  
The Eu

This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of the withdrawal agreement concluded between the United Kingdom and the European Union to create the legal framework for Brexit. Building on a prior volume, it overviews the process of Brexit negotiations that took place between the UK and the EU from 2017 to 2019. It also examines the key provisions of the Brexit deal, including the protection of citizens’ rights, the Irish border, and the financial settlement. Moreover, the book assesses the governance provisions on transition, decision-making and adjudication, and the prospects for future EU–UK trade relations. Finally, it reflects on the longer-term challenges that the implementation of the 2016 Brexit referendum poses for the UK territorial system, for British–Irish relations, as well as for the future of the EU beyond Brexit.

The rotating Presidency of the Council of the EU – Still an agenda-setter?

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 497-518
Author(s):  
Austė Vaznonytė
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Changes ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Issue Salience ◽  
Political Factors ◽  
Agenda Setter ◽  
Panel Model ◽  
The Government ◽  
Council Presidency ◽  
Over Time ◽  
The Eu

What role does the rotating Council Presidency maintain a decade after Lisbon? This article argues that, regardless of institutional changes, the rotating Presidency still shapes the Council agenda to a large extent. Based on an original hand-coded dataset of rotating Presidency programmes between 1997 and 2017, I show that some policies are ‘stickier’ on the Council agenda, while the others exhibit significant changes in salience over time. Since the magnitude of these shifts varies from Presidency to Presidency, the analysis focuses on domestic political factors and the country positioning vis-à-vis the European Union to determine their relationship with agenda volatility. By means of a panel model, the examination demonstrates that the government issue salience can best explain the levels of issue salience in the Presidency programmes.

Italy's politics without policy: Balancing Atlanticism and Europeanism in the Middle East

Modern Italy ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffaella A. Del Sarto ◽  
Nathalie Tocci
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Short Term ◽  
The Government ◽  
Specific Interests ◽  
Policy Shifts ◽  
The Eu

Focusing on Italy's Middle East policies under the second Berlusconi (2001–2006) and the second Prodi (2006–2008) governments, this article assesses the manner and extent to which the observed foreign policy shifts between the two governments can be explained in terms of the rebalancing between a ‘Europeanist’ and a transatlantic orientation. Arguing that Rome's policy towards the Middle East hinges less on Italy's specific interests and objectives in the region and more on whether the preference of the government in power is to foster closer ties to the United States or concentrate on the European Union, the analysis highlights how these swings of the pendulum along the EU–US axis are inextricably linked to a number of underlying structural weaknesses of Rome's foreign policy. In particular, the oscillations can be explained by the prevalence of short-term political (and domestic) considerations and the absence of long-term, substantive political strategies, or, in short, by the phenomenon of ‘politics without policy’ that often characterises Italy's foreign policy.

Implications of Brexit for Skilled Migration from India to the UK

2021 ◽  
pp. 001573252110122
Author(s):  
Rupa Chanda ◽  
Neha Vinod Betai
Keyword(s):  
Transition Period ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Jel Codes ◽  
Decision To Leave ◽  
East European ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Take Back ◽  
The Uk ◽  
European Economies ◽  
The Eu

In June 2016, the United Kingdom took the world by surprise with the results of its referendum on whether to remain in the European Union (EU). With a 52% majority, the country decided to leave the bloc in which it had been a member since 1973. With this outcome began the long process of Brexit negotiations between UK and the EU. The UK officially ceased to be an EU member on 31 January 2020, with a transition period up to the end of 2020. The decision to leave the EU came on the back of rising bitterness among people. Membership in the EU was seen as expensive and not beneficial to the country. One of the major campaigning points of the leave camp was the issue of immigration. Given that free movement of people is an important part of being in the EU, the party argued that leaving the EU would help the country take back control of its borders. Immigration in the UK has been on the rise since the early 2000s. It shot up further with the accession of the eight East European economies into the EU. Figure 1 shows how, leading up to Brexit, immigration from the EU to the UK was constantly increasing. JEL Codes: F00, F30, F22, F23

Can the EU be a federal democracy? Assessing the horizontal and vertical dimension of the EU government from comparative perspective

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared Sonnicksen
Keyword(s):  
The European Union ◽  
Democratic Government ◽  
Eu Governance ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
Division Of Powers ◽  
Democratic Character ◽  
Comparative Federalism ◽  
The Government ◽  
Power Arrangements ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe European Union remains an ambivalent polity. This uncertainty complicates the assessment of its democratic and federal quality. Drawing on comparative federalism research can contribute not only to making sense of whether, or rather which kind of federalism the EU has developed. It can also enable addressing such a compounded, but necessary inquiry into the federal and democratic character of the EU and how to ascertain which type of democratic government for which type of federal union may be appropriate. The article first elaborates a framework to assess the dimensions of federal and democratic government, drawing on comparative federalism research to delineate basic types of federal democracy. Here the democratic dimension of government is taken as referring primarily to the horizontal division of powers (among ‘branches’) of government, the federal dimension to the vertical division of powers (among ‘levels’) of governments. The framework is applied to the government of the EU in order to gauge its own type(s) of division of power arrangements and the interlinkage between them. Finally, the discussion reflects on whether or rather how the EU could comprise a federal democracy, especially in light of recent crisis challenges and subsequent institutional developments in EU governance.

THE EUROPEAN UNION AND ITALY RELATIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF SUPRANATIONAL FISCAL REGULATION

2021 ◽  
pp. 208-221
Author(s):  
Dmitrii О. Mikhalev ◽  
◽  
Egor’ A. Sergeev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Budget Deficit ◽  
Stability And Growth Pact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Internal Factors ◽  
Growth Pact ◽  
Discretionary Fiscal Policy ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Stability ◽  
The Eu

The article presents a retrospective analysis of relations between the government of Italy and the European Union institutions in the context of supranational fiscal regulation in 2002–2019. The authors analyze the influence of external and internal factors on the state of public finance in Italy, note the reasons that made it difficult to meet the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact, study the main issues on the agenda in the EU-Italy relations and their evolution. The authors also come to conclusion that unlike the earlier discussions about correcting budget deficit in Italy, current focus of supranational fiscal governance is shifted to preventing it, what challenges the economic sovereignty of Italy and country’s opportunities to conduct a discretionary fiscal policy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document