The United Kingdom is better off leaving the EU.

In this section I will argue against the points provided by my opponent and provide one argument for the UK remaining a part of the European Union. My arguments will be structured as follows:1. Response to Opening Statement2. Response to 'Democracy Deficit'3. Benefits of Single Market4. Notes and References 1. Reponse to Opening StatementMy opponent states in his opening statement that the 'recent advancement of society can be attributed to many things: lassiez-faire capitalism, rational discourse and democracy', and then goes on to argue that these are being disrespected by the involvement of Britain in the European Union. This debate is concerning the role of Britain within (or without) of the European Union, but I have a few short remarks to say about this statement: The role of Laissez-faire capitalism is very disputable in the context of the advancement of society. In fact, many economists and political analysts argue that the lack of regulation of banks and corporations was one of the main reasons for the 2008 Wall Street Crash, which has in fact crippled society in the last half-decade, preventing the innovation, investment and enterprise we seek within our economy. My Opponent states 'Although it [the European Union] was an organisation forged in order to unite Europe through democracy, its only achievement to date has been to divide it [Europe] through bureaucracy'. In fact the European Union has had many notable accomplishments to date, such as boosting trade between its members, helping the economies of all involved, leading the world in terms of climate reform, as emphasised in the recent G20 meeting, and allowing Europe to better respond to international crises such as the conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo through the use of European combat forces to co-ordinate missions, as well as countless other victories that will be covered later in the debate. 2. Response to 'Democracy Deficit'The European Union is a Union of Countries to promote trade and co-operation between those countries. As part of the nature of any such organisation, to remain effective the organisation must be able to act. Any organisation that expects to be able to act effectively is not a pure democracy-there are countless examples of this, such as executive action in the US. In fact, organisations based purely on democracy are rendered unable to act: one merely needs to look at the Weimar Republic in 1929-32. Because of the system of proportional representation used, arguably the purest form of democracy, the government was not able to take any actions against the economic crash in Germany, leading to extremism and a dictatorship, the complete opposite of what was desired.My opponent also states that 'The president of the European Commision is elected undemocratically, with the European Council proposing a candidates to be voted on by the European Parliment'. How is the European Parliament, elected by the people, having the power to vote in the president undemocratic? This seems to be a blatant contradiction. My Opponent also refers to the European Commision as a group of ' unelected beaurocrats', when in fact they are nominated by the government of the country they represent (this government being elected), and they are voted on by the European Parliament concerning their suitability as a whole before the election. Yes , the European Union's Structure is not purely democratic, and yes, steps should be taken to address this in the future. But because the system is not perfect does not mean that the UK should leave it; instead the most constructive thing to do is to work with other members in order to fix this lack of democracy (though nowhere near as large as my opponent suggests). Thus I do not consider this a valid reason at all for the UK to leave the European Union. 3. Benefits of the Single MarketThe European Union is a single market. A single market is a free trade area (for goods) with some common policies on product regulation, and freedom of movement of the factors of production (capital and labour) and of enterprise and services. This brings huge advantages to the United Kingdom. By leaving the European Union the UK would no longer benefit from those advantages. The first of these advantages is increased competition. The huge expansion of the market for UK firms means that they have huge more numbers of potential consumers, but they also have increased competition from firms all the way across Europe. This brings with it all of the advantages of competitive markets, such as greater innovation, higher quality goods and lower prices for the consumer. It also results in greater stimulus for the UK to become Internationally competitive. This increase in competition will also force underperforming firms to either improve their performance or fail, freeing up resources for other more advantageous uses. Another advantage of the single market is specialisation. By having such a large market countries are able to specialise and benefit from absolute advantage, allowing more to be produced at lower prices for the consumer. This also allows the UK to concentrate on producing services and goods that it excellent at. These benefits far outweigh the unemployment caused by the specialisation, because hardly any structural unemployment was caused by the transfer into the EU. In fact unemployment steadily decreased for the first 5 years after Britain joined the EU. By leaving the EU Britain would no longer be able to benefit from the increased specialisation, meaning workers from the newly built up industries would have to go back into jobs producing goods that could be made with higher quality and cheaper prices in other countries. Leaving the EU would also result in restrictions on the movement of labour. UK firms use workers for labour when there are no UK workers available, and leaving the EU would result in less availability of Labour for firms. My opponent may argue that this labour is in fact resulting in higher unemployment for the British Economy, but the workers from Europe entering the country have skills and qualifications that the unemployed do not; otherwise they would not be chosen over the British workers. In fact, migrant workers within the UK have a much higher unemployment rate than British-born citizens, so that is obviously not the case. Being within the European Union also results in higher rates of FDI (Foreign Direct Investment), because of the attraction of the large market and potential number of consumers to foreign(non European) investors. These investments, such as using the UK for manufacturing plants, bring employment and new industries to the UK. If we left the European Union these investments would be withdrawn and placed in another country still a member of the EU, resulting in structural unemployment within the UK, a very serious type of unemployment that could not easily be combatted. Therefore, for all of these reasons and more (such as lower protectionism, resulting in lower costs and making it easier for UK firms to trade and compete internationally) the single market reprsents a huge asset that the Uk asset that our economy is now reliant on. If we left the EU we could no longer benefit from all of these positives, and the Economy would be significantly weakened because of the interdependence between the UK and other members of the EU. 4. Notes and ReferencesWithin several of my quotations of my opponent you may find spelling mistakes. Those are not mine; I left them in for completeness. You will find them within his original piece. References:https://en.wikipedia.org...https://en.wikipedia.org...https://en.wikipedia.org...http://ec.europa.eu...http://www.bbc.co.uk...http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk...http://www.eubusiness.com...