 37% ran o'r bwrth cyfraith Gwpen, yr unigai yw'r Bryddon, sydd yn ei gennydd ar bobl 37% i'r cyffanfa, i'r hyffan iawn i'r gyfaith yma, ac mae'n holl fawr yn sicr o'r dyfansi iechyd y Llywodraeth rydyn a rydyn ni i fydd y dyfansi iechyd gyda'r syniad ariadau ymwneud o ein cyfraith yma, Not only the stupidity, but the divisiveness of the issue in terms of class, in terms of the growth of insecurity and the growth of austerity with the government. The government was asking for a remain when they were pursuing policies of austerity which were increasing the insecurities. This is relevant for our later discussion because it's happening in other parts of Europe. If you have your citizenry becoming more and more insecure and feeling aggrieved, then the government says vote for us for a remain. Don't be surprised of a large number of them, a revolt against that. I think we also have a terrible situation because David Cameron, the Prime Minister at the time, has said recently that he doesn't regret calling the referendum. He regrets the outcome. That seems to me an exercise in semantics that I don't appreciate. We don't have a tradition in British democracy of a referendum. We are a representative democracy. We believe in Edwin Burke's principle we elect people to represent us even if we may not agree with them. I think we are in danger of repeating some of these errors that has taken place in Brexit today. There is one other issue I would like to mention at the beginning because it affects every single democracy today. We are seeing a corruption of democracy dominated by plutocratic donors and owners of the media who can manipulate opinion. This is an unprecedented situation which is incredibly powerful. We know in Britain that the Brexit vote was influenced by Cambridge Analytica using all sorts of trickery and very big plutocratic money went into the Brexit campaign. Ironically, many of the leaders of that Brexit campaign are now rushing to leave Britain. The richest man in Britain has promptly gone off to live in Monaco, a tax haven, because he doesn't want to pay British taxes. Big company Ratcliffe, he's just been knighted and then he rushes off and he moves to a tax haven, openly saying it. The same with Dyson, the most dramatic entrepreneur who led in the Brexit thing, he's now moving his company to Singapore. Very interesting choice of place, a tax haven. He says it's got nothing to do with Brexit but it's very strange. One of the titles that's being used to describe the prospect of Brexit in Britain is Singapore on Thames, which is rather appropriate given what he's done. We have a whole string of people rushing to take out residency in France like Nigel Lawson and Nigel Farage making sure that his children have German passports and so on. We have a very split situation and I think the bitterness in Britain is going to last for a very long time. Whatever happens, whether we have a second vote, which is the route I prefer, or we have the maize deal which is very controversial but a lot of the no deal people are desperate to clamber on to that or some other compromise, we're going to have a bitterness that stretches for decades I believe. Jules. I confess I looked at this slightly differently. When I was thinking about Europe after Brexit, whilst there's a huge amount I don't know, I was thinking, well, Europe after Brexit, let's imagine that there is less uncertainty. For me seeing this from London, I can see two trends that come with less uncertainty. The first is I think a really large resurgence of human relationships that have found uncertainty to be quite a blocker. Now I mean there has been a really large amount of pragmatism beneath the politics that I have seen in my daily engagements with entrepreneurs from across the continent, particularly our digital entrepreneurs for whom many issues are global, not regional anyway. But for each chink of clarity that I think we get, I think we'll see that pragmatic energy grow. And the reason I say that is I think it reflects the many interdependencies that we have, and this is not to underestimate the importance of frameworks that go with it. But the interdependencies that we have in terms of finance, talent, tech across our European continental ecosystem are really significant. I mean we are a powerful ecosystem of powerful cities. And actually the report that came out on Monday at the start of Davos that had the 10 most powerful cities in the world and four of them are European. London remains a city that attracts more FDI projects than any other city in the world. We see so much city to city collaboration that I and others are working incredibly hard to promote. But I think our entrepreneurs have been itching for certainty and clarity. And I've actually been quite struck by the levels of confidence that there will be ways through. So I take reassurance in that level of pragmatism that when uncertainty starts to reduce we will start to see that collaboration come through from the factors that pull us together. The second thing that I think will be positive from a reduction in uncertainty is to all the energy, effort, brain power that has gone into this issue, particularly on the UK side, but actually across European countries, has been significant. At a time when again sitting in Davos you have a time to lift your heads up and think about the fourth industrial revolution, the shared opportunities, but goodness shared challenges. Much of which I think is integral into why these issues are facing us from Brexit in the first place. But there are so many shared values that we have that I think for many people actually there was a lot that we took for granted that perhaps we now appreciate a little bit more. But when we talk about our shared liberal values, our shared diversity as a European continent, the importance we put around equality, these are things that when we talk about the future of AI and ethics, Europe needs to be firing on all cylinders right now. It's really important that our voice is heard at the global table and so for me the reduction of uncertainty, the reduction of finance going into contingency planning but actually being put into issues where we all really need to be fighting together when we share so much. That for me is something that I look forward to. Martin. OK, I'm nobody said anything I disagree with so it's a bit disappointing but it means I can't go over, don't need to go over the history of the referendum and which guy went through very well and some of the characters involved whom he described pretty accurately. I thought you were rather restrained actually and London and the cities and I've been in London as it were all my life and recently wrote about that so I can put that to one side. So let's focus on this. First I want to divide my discussion into what it means for the UK and what it means for Europe and I'll try and cover it very very quickly so it'll be very terse and there will be lots of points I can't elaborate. So the first point is the uncertainty will not be removed on March the 29th. Not then. It depends on the path we then follow but in many respects the uncertainty is bound to remain for years if not decades afterwards and I will explain why and I will go through the different paths. So first of all we don't know what parliament will or whether parliament will agree on anything and therefore we don't know what will happen on March the 29th. In the following respects we don't know where the Prime Minister's deal will ultimately be passed. I think that's still quite possible and it's clear that the Brexiters are moving that direction as you expected. So the chance of that are significant. It is quite possible that no deal will be reached by parliament and then in theory we crash out. I'll come to that and it is also possible that parliament will agree and seek and gain an extension to the article 50 vote number of European policy to the article 50 exit possibly or probably in order to have a second referendum. These are all possible outcomes and they will obviously have completely different implications for subsequent uncertainty. If the Prime Minister deal goes through the uncertainty is in a sense least but all we've decided is the withdrawal. We have not decided and indeed have not begun to negotiate quite deliberately the post Brexit trade deal. It's clear that that will be very difficult. The Brexiters will want to go back to Canada and Canada is incompatible. We don't know how that will be resolved if we have a change of government which is possible. It is very likely that what the Labour Party would pursue in government will be a very different trade deal from what the Conservative Party would see. So there is total uncertainty even with the Prime Minister's deal about the subsequent trade relations of the UK with the EU and the rest of the world. Not trivial and it could take years to resolve those. I won't go through the timetable is granted is currently only a couple of years but it could be extended. If there is no deal nothing is resolved because no deal is meaningless. There will be a huge number of deals that would have to be agreed after no deal on almost everything including how we treat Ireland, how our aviation works, important regulatory areas which are important for the UK and Europe. I can't go through all of them. So we will immediately start negotiating a whole lot of new things in a completely different environment which will be a mess. That is clear and our future trading policy outside in this no deal world will be also completely uncertain because we would have to re-establish WTO membership and a whole lot of other things which will be very very complicated. And of course if we have another referendum nobody knows what will happen in that referendum. It could be any one of the possible outcomes nor even what will be on the table of this referendum. So the important point to understand we have signed ourselves to a multi-year mess which in my view and this is where I part company with my colleague on my right will create enormous ongoing costs for the UK and its trading partners and the only description for this process is one of insane psychodrama. But this important thing is there is no post-Brexit EU because we are nowhere near the post-Brexit world. The insoucience of the British elite in holding this referendum and having it carried through in those conditions is astounding. So that's us. So what does it mean for Europe? Well the uncertainty will be costly for Europe because uncertainty is costly for Europe. In general I take the view since the EU is six times as big as the UK, its trade relations, its breakdown of its trade relations, it is very rough already, in all dimensions will be on average a sixth as big for, but it will be as big across the whole EU as it will be for the UK. Pretty well not quite because there are much more alternatives and there are less, so make that. But of course by head it will be much much smaller. I do think that Britain's exit will change the EU in important ways and I'd just like to find a part from the uncertainties and so forth. Some positive and some negative. The positive way are twofold. It's made clear that exit is really quite costly. That's quite encouraging. And two, because it's made clear that exit is quite costly, it has pushed the whole EU together. So my favourite joke is that the Great Nightmare, and I know it should stop now, the Great Nightmare of Britain throughout history, is that it should have a united Europe and Britain with Brexit has united Europe against it. The other point though is its economic culture will change somewhat in a less liberal direction. I might like that, but I think it will be an important development and of course it will be smaller. And it will be seen in some parts of the world that a quite significant country has left, a country which is particularly visible because of its language and history, and they will say, well if the British really think the EU is dying maybe there's something in that. So all round a complete total comprehensive disaster from which nobody important will gain, except in my view Mr Putin. OK. Thank you. There's a lot to think about there and unpack. I'm just conscious of time and we do want to answer some of your questions. So as you were all talking there, I was thinking about various elements. I want to talk about, and actually one of the guests in the audience has brought this up with a question on Slido. If we're looking ahead to what life is like after Brexit given the fact that we've got years and years of uncertainty and everything else and all the questions we can't answer, can we talk about what this means for the future of the labour market? So this question, what are the potential consequences in regards to the labour market? If you could keep your answers short and can you talk about labour market in the UK and then labour market in Europe? Yeah, I'm going to be very brief. I wrote a book called The Precariat just before the referendum and before the election of Donald Trump. And I said a large part of the precariat of less educated parts will be voting for Brexit and will be voting for Trump. And I think we've got to be as Europeans looking in the mirror at this issue because we shouldn't divorce what's happening in Britain from a fact that there's a crisis in Europe as well. The crisis of insecurity, the growth of the precariat. I get invited all to every single country in the European Union to talk to precariat groups and they're all very angry. Gilles Jaune in France is just the latest symptom of a fundamentally festering inequality, insecurity, stressful set of circumstances. And we've got to be self-critical because the European Union has also failed to address the growth of these phenomena. And I think that part of it is much to do with the labour market but it's much more to do with what I call rentier capitalism. More and more the returns to economic growth go to the plutocracy and to plutocratic corporations. More subsidies from governments are going to those corporations. More austerity cuts for living standards and benefits are intensifying this insecurity. If we continue to go down this course, we will move from a situation where today one in four voters across the European Union is voting for a populist party or populist politician to a point where half will be doing so. And that, of course, will spell political dangers that we don't need to elaborate because we've been there before, we're seeing what Trump represents. And I happen to be an economic adviser to one of the opposition leaders in Britain. And I said, I wish you could come out and say, Cain's famous remark, Cain's was asked, why have you changed your mind? Why are you being inconsistent on this issue? And he said, sir, when the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir? And I think we've got in Trump a fundamental shift in the geopolitical situation where Europe has to address its own problems and challenges and forge a new identity in the context of an emerging China and a fundamentally different United States, whether it's America first and all the other stuff that goes with it. So I think it is something to do with the labour market, but it's much more to do with the breakdown of our income distribution system, where disproportionately large amounts of wealth and income are going to a tiny plutocracy and an elite. And those people are represented here in Davos and the precariat, the group that I'm writing about and talking to are not represented here in Davos. So I think that we do have a fundamental challenge and it's not just to do with the labour market. Jules, your thoughts on what this Brexit process, whatever it looks like, means for the labour market in the UK and in Europe? I think the one, I mean it is very difficult to answer and of course this is such a critical question where we really don't know what's going to happen. But I think the things that from trying to balance political and economic arguments that have come out certainly on the UK side of things, I think the one thing that has come in quite clearly has been the issue around not skills-based movement but just free movement. So I do think it is quite likely that the UK will adopt a skills-based system, that's what all the kind of white paper advisory has been talking about. But again, I think that Europe as a continent, it will be far more hit by automation, by the need for reskilling, the digital economy, the changes in the way that we work and travel anyway, that I think that this is something that the agenda is moving on so quickly, that it's something that we need to pull our brain power. So I know that's slightly avoiding the question but I think it's very hard to predict and it's not just about the arguments that we're having at the moment. I think there are arguments we haven't even thought of that the digital economy will dictate. Martin, something that Guy mentioned earlier was that James Dyson's moving to Singapore. James Dyson's argument for going there is to find the right skills for his company and what he does. He says it's not about Brexit, not about tax. But there is this discussion about skills where they are and how the system is working education and everything else that Europe is lagging behind the likes of Asia, the US. I can't obviously comment on Mr Dyson's business affairs and I wouldn't dream of doing so. But I think the points have already brought up. The most obvious change that one can expect if we leave and if we have a government, anything like the present one, both of which I think are open to question, is that immigration policy will change. The instinct of this government will be to try and reduce numbers very substantially. It will fail. I think that's about as predictable as anything. I can go with the reasons why, but it will certainly make life difficult. And again, it's perfectly clear that it will try to pursue a policy which is trying to deal with that very problem, which is oriented towards taking in skilled labour as they define it, which at the moment they seem to be defining by how much they're going to be paid. I understand the last one was $30,000 a year. Somebody can correct me. So if you're going to wear more than £30,000 a year, you can come and in and if not, you can't. That removes an awful lot of people who are very important to us, like pretty well all our nurses and pretty important. So you can see the screens already, hear the screens already. So that will be our effect. Now, what would it mean? That will of course be a mess because all our immigration systems are a mess and changing them will make... That is certain. There will be under the Home Office, which is by a long way the worst department. Now, I think that's a non-controversial statement in Britain. It might be the worst. Well, but then on the European side, obviously export of labour, there have been a very significant immigration to the UK. A lot of talented, wonderful people have come. I think the costs to Europe will be real, though not massive, because most of the people who would like to come have come. I mean, say the huge Polish immigration has happened. And clearly there will be lots of people leaving for very good reasons in this situation. But I do think finally there are a lot of firms I've been in contact with very different groups from guys for which the flexibility of moving labour around... And I'm talking skilled, medium skilled people around Europe is a very important part of their business operation. And if they're going to have to do with the Home Office on every one of those things, it's going to be a bloody nightmare. And basically they're going to run Britain as a completely separate island from the rest of the European business because they're going to have to. And that will be one of the many ways in which this will be costly. I've talked to a lot of company CEOs about lots of things to do with this, but two or three have said to me who run businesses in Britain who employ a lot of European workers that actually what they'll do is they'll just tap. They've already got their bases lined up elsewhere. They're moving there, yeah. In other Amsterdam, other parts of Europe, they've already got their sort of ducks in a row. We're almost out of time, but I just wanted a lot of people have liked this question and it's the top of my list here, so I'm going to put it to you guys for a quick response. What is the best argument against a new referendum guy? Further uncertainty, but I still think that it's the least bad option from where we are today. To have one. To have a second vote. I think a lot of the young precariat didn't turn out last time. We only had a 70% turnout and a lot of the younger people are tending to be much stronger remain. They see themselves as European and I think that having a second vote will be divisive, but any option is going to be divisive and I think this will be the least bad of the options available. We should enter that debate by saying that we should be critical remainers. None of us should be idolising the EU. The UK has always been that, hasn't it? Yeah, but don't worry about that. European audience or predominantly European audience. I think one of the lessons of Brexit should be the lessons for all of us. I live and work in Europe, so I think we all have lessons to learn. It may take different forms. The gilet jaune is a different form to what's happened in Britain and what's happening in the Eastern Europe is different for Western Europe, but the same phenomena have to be addressed. Jules. I think the argument against is that even if a result came out and is effectively for remain, it probably wouldn't do so in a hugely conclusive way. It's not going to suddenly be an 80-20 split. It's likely to still be very close and looking at the different polls. It's still very close. It does look like it's slightly shifted, but it's very close. The reason I think that could be very disruptive and divisive is I kind of draw parallels a little bit with any of the rest of you heard. David Attenborough talking about why isn't more done more quickly on climate change. He said, as humans, when we listen to things that are just of such complexity and enormity and very often put in a negative way, we naturally tune out. I think a lot of people have tuned out because it's just so complex. A lot of the discussion around it has been quite negative, so I think that would be an argument against. Little advertisement, this is the subject of my column, which will be up in about an hour. Well, the case for and against the next referendum, I think it's basically been described that it won't resolve the uncertainty because it won't decide Britain's position and that it will turn what is still manageable and civilized civil war. Into an unmanageable and very uncivilized civil war in which if the Brexiters lose, but by a modest margin, a very, very significant proportion of the British population will feel with some good reason that they have not been listened to, that they've been cheated over their democratic right to make a decision and that therefore the legitimacy of the political system as a whole, of which they are part, which is, I would say, the single most important asset Britain as a country has had historically and the thing that is striking about Britain compared with other large European countries. That asset will be destroyed. Unfortunately, in my view, that asset is going to be destroyed anyway. I remain person that would be precise because this is so important. I got my paper and myself support as the first best option if it can be done without risk, the Prime Minister's wretched deal for this reason. People disagree with me, but for this reason, if the Brexiters won't let that through, I am never going to accept a no deal crash out and we'll have another referendum, and then the Civil War has already got really serious. The irresponsibility of the Brexiters in the last month in not accepting victory and compromise is making a political resolution in Britain almost impossible and that is to me absolutely astonishing. And depressed. Of course. And we are pretty much out of time. But as you can tell, it's an extremely complicated and difficult issue to try and navigate and try and resolve so many problems come up as you try and discuss even the basic issues. Thank you so much for your questions. This was a very short session, so apologies we couldn't cover more of your questions, but you can continue the conversation. If you do that, use hashtag WEF19, hashtag Brexit on social media. Sally, can I? Yes. I feel like it's ended on such a negative note. Can I just put in a very short anecdote? Go on. A few years ago I was a British ambassador and I collaborated with my European colleagues in such a strong way, not because our capitals instructed us to or the commission instructed us to, but because there were so many things on which we agreed. We had shared priorities, shared interests, shared values. And I think let's not forget as we go forward. I'm not meaning to belittle the complexity, the fragility, but let's not forget what we represent as a continent, as a group of people who share values, because as I say, there are so many other things beyond our continent that are so important. And I think it's really important to remember that. And that's why Jules is a young global leader and an optimist. Thank you all for being on the panel. Jules Chaf.