Customers will know, for example, that their data is safe under GDPR.
Potential employees will know the company respect their rights more than the Peruvian immigrant with a plummy voice who hasn't done a hard days work in his deceitful sad little life.
It will also go a long way to annoying the people who sought to damage our standards.
Finally, by defining an EU industrial standard, we instigate a very visual campaign to re-join.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The problem with the regulatory argument is that the invention that leads to regulation tends to be regulated at the national level before the EU level. The EU then provides a European forum for regulatory convergence and a dominant power to represent it internationally.
There is also the inconvenient fact that the regulations are put together working with industry, and in this case it will be the same companies.
Essentially leading to very similar regulations in the same sort of time frame as other EU countries, only we won't get any input into the European recognised regulations or have the same weight in the global forums.
In terms of how we're here on fish, the list goes on and on. There are a multitude of complex reasons which get over simplified to "It's the EU's fault".
And I don't believe in saying "fishare just x of the economy", the government should be doing their best to set policy to support all business no matter the size.
If we take exports, and a very simplistic view. We're looking at ~64% of our exports go to countries we don't trade with on WTO rules and ~40% of exports go to countries we do.