Home General Discussion

What would an European exit mean for the UK games industry?

13

Replies

  • pior
    Offline / Send Message
    pior grand marshal polycounter
    Sure, but couldn't it be argued that such plan should be prepared by the gouvernement in place at the time (and after) the referendum ? I keep hearing of Cameron stepping down, but this alone I don't quite get the logic of.

    But then again I also tend to assume that both the gouvernement and the shadow should behave as responsible adults, and that's probably not quite the case :D 
  • RobeOmega
    Offline / Send Message
    RobeOmega polycounter lvl 10
    pior said:
    Sure, but couldn't it be argued that such plan should be prepared by the gouvernement in place at the time (and after) the referendum ? I keep hearing of Cameron stepping down, but this alone I don't quite get the logic of.

    But then again I also tend to assume that both the gouvernement and the shadow should behave as responsible adults, and that's probably not quite the case :D 

    It could be argued that the government should have a plan in place in case the referendum went either way. Then again. The government is a very large group of people. Of which who should be responsible for making said plan? I would argue that the large group of Tory MPs (some of which are cabinet members) that are for leaving the EU should at least present a comprehensive plan of what they want to bring to the negotiating table and what (if they will be lost) will replace EU grants that are currently in place. It is best in my opinion, for the people who believe in leaving the EU to be the one to create the plan of action.
  • Aabel
    Offline / Send Message
    Aabel polycounter lvl 6
    The UK is one of the most powerful countries in the world, I don't worry about them going fully sovereign at all. I worry more about how Germany is gonna keep the economic basket case EU members afloat all by it's lonesome self.
  • RyanB
  • teaandcigarettes
    Offline / Send Message
    teaandcigarettes polycounter lvl 12
    pior said:
    Well to be fair I don't really see why this journalist is being so surprised - this was a referendum, not an election, so no camp is supposed to have a "plan" nor is expected to come in power.

    Shouldn't the plan be to just apply whatever regulations are in place when it comes to a country leaving the union (article 50, and then negotiations/agreements with the EU) ?

    To put it into some context. When the result was announced nearly everyone involved in the campaign has suddenly disappeared. Then, the Brexit camp began backpedalling on some of the promises with Johnson himself claiming there's no rush to invoke Article 50 and start a formal departure straight away. Reading the news for these past few days paints a picture of complete and utter chaos. Suddenly all sorts of different issues keep popping out that weren't  fully addressed before the referendum. Northern Ireland and Scotland possibly declaring independence, Gibraltar, the status of more than 1 million Brits living in the EU and EU nationals living in the UK, etc. The more details emerge the more it starts to look like neither the remain or leave camp ever considered Brexit to be an actual possibility, with only the Scots  and BoE having any contingency plans. 

  • pior
    Offline / Send Message
    pior grand marshal polycounter
    I see I see. Maybe the silver lining is that this might force some much needed transparency as far as EU membership rules are concerned.

    I have to say that looking at it from the outside, seing the two camps campaigning as if it was an election was very odd. I was actually quite surprised to see that Cameron himself was touring the country to campaign for one side, while I would have (naively) expected that he should have assumed a position of neutrality.

    Without a doubt this is a very odd moment, but I am very curious to see how things will develop.
  • 0xffff
    Offline / Send Message
    0xffff polycounter lvl 3
    "How things develop" is likely going to be another 10%+ of our workforce migrating to canada. Again. 
  • littleclaude
    Offline / Send Message
    littleclaude quad damage
    I wonder if the UK will sign up to transatlantic trade and investment partnership "TTIP" now we are leaving the EU as I hear the EU is close to signing up to the agreement? I can't say I like the idea of eating growth hormone, GM foods, bleached meet, animal tested products, cloned cattle, fracking and many other customs that go on in the US. Maybe the banks and government will slow down the BREXIT to slip this one though the door before the BREXIT split.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4OQeekSD6s

  • AtticusMars
    Offline / Send Message
    AtticusMars greentooth
    Trade agreements are extremely unpopular among the US electorate right now, Clinton is backing away from the TPP/TTIP and Trump wants to axe all of our existing trade agreements and start over. As it is, it doesn't look like President Obama will be able to get TPP through his own party. If things continue as they have, I wouldn't hold out high hopes for TTIP.
  • Kwramm
    Offline / Send Message
    Kwramm interpolator
    Supposedly this referendum isn't binding. They could still sit it out and do nothing, or at least use Scotland and NI as excuse. Without Britain doing the first step, the EU cannot kick them out anyway, even with people like Schulz being in such a hurry to get the process started. It would be a quite unelegant solution, but "STFU and sitting things out" worked for many other politicians in the past.
  • metalliandy
    Offline / Send Message
    metalliandy interpolator
    These are my personal opinions and not those any company I represent.
    Kwramm said:
    Supposedly this referendum isn't binding. They could still sit it out and do nothing, or at least use Scotland and NI as excuse. Without Britain doing the first step, the EU cannot kick them out anyway, even with people like Schulz being in such a hurry to get the process started. It would be a quite unelegant solution, but "STFU and sitting things out" worked for many other politicians in the past.
    That's entirely correct. Referenda in the UK are in most cases advisory and not legally binding in any way. I think the only exception to that was the Alternative Vote referendum in 2011 (which was legally binding and compelled Parliament to accept the result and legislate).

    I tend to agree with you in that I'm still not sure that we will actually leave as it seems that everyone is reluctant to press the button (either through fear or simply unwilling).

    On the morning of the result I think the only major politician I saw who was happy was Nigel Farage. Boris Johnson & Michael Gove both looked visibly shaken, worried and gave sombre, downbeat speeches in what was meant to be their crowning moment. I assume that was because none of the official leave campaign actually wanted to leave in the first place. They may have promoted to the contrary throughout the campaign, but in doing so they never thought they would actually win as they 100% knew what would happen if they did. It was a stupid but acceptable gamble in their eyes as statistically the UK was very unlikely actually leave as the English traditionally favour the status quo in such things. Better the devil you know...

    I expect that it was an awful attempt to usurp George Osborne or Theresa May to the premiership when the Prime Minister resigned before 2020 and to gain favour with the euro-sceptic & far right of the Conservative Party. In doing so they would almost ensure the nomination of Boris as party leader because "at least he tried to get us out" etc.

    In any case, in order formally invoke Article 50 MPs must repeal the 1972 European Communities Act by passing a new EU repeal bill. The Prime Minister does not have the authority to act alone on this matter as doing so would be illegal under UK law, and indeed under Article 50 itself, which states that a member can only leave in accordance with "its own constitutional requirements". Our constitutional requirements are such that there must be a bill, MPs must vote on that bill and then the Lords must be given the opportunity to question and challenge the bill for it to become law (assuming it gets to that stage).

    As I posted above a few days ago Parliament is sovereign and it's the job of MPs to do what they feel is best for their constituents.
    Seeing as that 450-500 MPs are pro-remain, and the chaos that has ensued in the past few days (and no doubt the coming weeks), I don't think many of them will find it morally objectionable or feel compelled by the 'democratic will of the people' to force a vote through knowing full well it will do massive harm to the UK.

    A nice quote from Geoffrey Robertson QC, who is a constitutional lawyer.
    Democracy in Britain doesn't mean majority rule. It's not the tyranny of the majority or the tyranny of the mob ... it's the representatives of the people, not the people themselves, who vote for them.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-loophole-eu-referendum-mps-law-legal-legislation-constitution-a7105181.html

    It seems probable that they are waiting for something that materially and fundamentally changes the circumstances of the vote (such as a new deal being handed to them or some emergency measure etc.) in order to accept new terms, drop the result or have a 2nd referendum (which is more likely to succeed given the events of the past few days).
  • Kwramm
    Offline / Send Message
    Kwramm interpolator


    A nice quote from Geoffrey Robertson QC, who is a constitutional lawyer.
    Democracy in Britain doesn't mean majority rule. It's not the tyranny of the majority or the tyranny of the mob ... it's the representatives of the people, not the people themselves, who vote for them.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-loophole-eu-referendum-mps-law-legal-legislation-constitution-a7105181.html

    That's in fact how many republics in Europe work - or are supposed to work. Also the reason why voters feel that they're not always getting what they voted for, because legally representatives are responsible towards, e.g. the common good or towards their own morals, not towards the voters. The reason they take voters into account is to get elected, so there is a strong incentive to try to do what they want, but otherwise they're quite free to go against the voters' directions if required.  Switzerland has a more direct model though, where the people's vote is binding, but it's also easier to poll people there and to change things.
  • RyanB
    Kwramm said:

    That's in fact how many republics in Europe work - or are supposed to work. Also the reason why voters feel that they're not always getting what they voted for, because legally representatives are responsible towards, e.g. the common good or towards their own morals, not towards the voters. The reason they take voters into account is to get elected, so there is a strong incentive to try to do what they want, but otherwise they're quite free to go against the voters' directions if required.  Switzerland has a more direct model though, where the people's vote is binding, but it's also easier to poll people there and to change things.
    Republics are designed to protect the powerful from the poor.  In the past, this was usually landowners. 

    James Madison on the United States' constitutional republic and the senate:

    The man who is possessed of wealth, who lolls on his sofa or rolls in his carriage, cannot judge the wants or feelings of the day-laborer. The government we mean to erect is intended to last for ages. The landed interest, at present, is prevalent; but in process of time, when we approximate to the states and kingdoms of Europe, — when the number of landholders shall be comparatively small, through the various means of trade and manufactures, will not the landed interest be overbalanced in future elections, and unless wisely provided against, what will become of your government? In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place. If these observations be just, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability.




  • Biomag
    Offline / Send Message
    Biomag sublime tool
    You do realise that most constitutions are younger than that statement by 100 to 200 years? -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_constitutions This statement also has absolutely no meaning to anyone outside the US.

    There is enough corruption and stupidity in polictics, there is no need for such wannabe conspiracies. Most consitutions are very well meant, just poorly executed and their weaknesses abused by political factions.

  • thomasp
    Offline / Send Message
    thomasp hero character
    Trade agreements are extremely unpopular among the US electorate right now, Clinton is backing away from the TPP/TTIP and Trump wants to axe all of our existing trade agreements and start over. As it is, it doesn't look like President Obama will be able to get TPP through his own party. If things continue as they have, I wouldn't hold out high hopes for TTIP.
    TTIP appears to be finally dead in the water on this side of the pond now: https://www.rt.com/news/348499-valls-france-eu-ttip/
    of course, if previous attempts at pushing these trade pacts through are any indication at all then the nasty bits that are part of this one will be included again in anything coming our way in the future. if at first you don't succeed...

    as for this referendum it really sounds like they intend to follow through with it and split, even though nobody on their side seems to have an idea how to proceed. that must have been the easiest-to-avoid economic disaster zone in human history. poor britain, they really should have known their voters better after boaty mc boatface. ;)

  • RyanB
  • Ruz
    Offline / Send Message
    Ruz polycount lvl 666
    nigel mc popcorn face
  • littleclaude
    Offline / Send Message
    littleclaude quad damage
    This is from TIGA and makes for an interesting read.



    How the UK Video Games Industry can Survive, Revive and Thrive Outside of the EU

    TIGA, the trade association representing the video games industry, today published Brexit: Priorities for the UK Video Games Industry. The 20 page reports sets out a policy agenda for Government, Parliament and policy makers to consider as the UK begins the process of leaving the EU. For a copy of the report, please contact: suzi@tiga.org
     
    Dr Richard Wilson, TIGA CEO, said: 
     
    “We must all strive to ensure that the UK survives, revives and thrives outside of the EU. The high technology and creative industries, including the video games sector, can power ahead in a post-BREXIT world – provided that Government takes the right policy decisions and businesses rise to the challenge.
     
    “TIGA’s Report sets out a practical, pragmatic and positive agenda for ensuring the UK games sector is a leading player in an industry that is     predicted to be worth almost $100 billion by 2018. If the UK creates a favourable tax environment with an enhanced Games Tax Relief and R&D Tax Credit, increases availability of finance and improves access to talent, then the UK video games industry has everything to play for.”
     
    The UK video games industry already contributes £1.1 billion to UK GDP. This will increase with the right policy environment in place.
     
    A Summary of Brexit: Priorities for the UK Video Games Industry
     
    1. The UK needs a favourable tax environment to encourage businesses to invest in the UK. The Government should consider:

    • reducing the rate of corporation tax to 17 per cent in 2017;
    • enhancing Video Games Tax Relief and the R&D Tax Relief.

     
    2. Access to finance: The UK Government should:

    • introduce a Video Games Investment Fund to enable more studios to grow; and
    • increase the amount of money that a company can raise via SEIS investment from £150,000 to £200,000.

     
    3. Access to talent: The UK Government should:

    • ensure that EU workers already working in the UK are protected so that they can continue to work in the UK with the confidence that they are not going to be asked to leave the UK in the future.

     
    4. Exports, trade agreements and tariffs: The UK Government should:

    • negotiate a trade deal with the EU that to the greatest possible extent avoids quotas, tariffs and other barriers to trade.

     
    5. VAT: The UK Government should:

    • negotiate an EU wide measure to exempt small businesses from EU VAT regulations.

     
    6. Intellectual Property: The UK Government should:

    • consider introducing arrangements for the conversion or extension of a EU trademark or registered community design to cover the UK.

     
    7. Data Protection: The UK Government should consider:

    • adopting the General Data Protection Regulation to ensure that companies based in the UK and doing business in the EU can continue to smoothly transfer information and data.

     
    8. Higher Education: The UK Government should:

    • make up any short-fall in funding following the UK’s departure from the EU.

     
    9. Fiscal policy: The UK Government should consider:

    • increasing investment in infrastructure to cushion the UK from the shock of Brexit.

     
    10. Skills and Training: The UK Government could consider:

    • extending the life of the Skills Investment Fund to maximise investment in skills in the creative industries.

     
     
    Notes to editors:
     
    About TIGA
    TIGA is the network for games developers and digital publishers and the trade association representing the video games industry.


    Get in touch:


    Tel: 0845 468 2330
    Email: info@tiga.org 
    Web: www.tiga.org
    Twitter: www.twitter.com/tigamovement
    Facebook: www.facebook.com/TIGAMovement
    LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/company/tiga  


    For further information, you can also contact:  Dr Richard Wilson, TIGA CEO by email: richard.wilson@tiga.org


     


     

  • thomasp
    Offline / Send Message
    thomasp hero character
    to me that reads like a veiled recommendation to join some kinda european club - err .... union. :)

  • Ged
    Offline / Send Message
    Ged interpolator
    seems like a list of objectives, its unclear to me whether those objectives are possible but I hope so :)
  • Aabel
    Offline / Send Message
    Aabel polycounter lvl 6
    So Tiga wants taxes cut just for them and increased spending just for them? Who winds up paying for that? Shouldn't the state have higher priorities than funding the entertainment industry?
  • AtticusMars
    Offline / Send Message
    AtticusMars greentooth
    They want tax cuts for all corporations (if I'm reading this correctly) coupled with spending increases on all sorts of shit (infrastructure, education, and setting up a creative skills fund). Oh also they want the same trade policy they had as an EU member but not necessarily accepting the same immigration policy they had.

    All I can say is good luck with that.
  • fdfxd2
    Offline / Send Message
    fdfxd2 interpolator
    Can someone please explain to a non european/brit all the details of this in an Unbiased manner, no "britain becoming independent" or "britain destroying its economy" hyperbole if possible.
  • AtticusMars
    Offline / Send Message
    AtticusMars greentooth
    fdfxd2 said:
    Can someone please explain to a non european/brit all the details of this in an Unbiased manner, no "britain becoming independent" or "britain destroying its economy" hyperbole if possible.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/03/everything-you-need-to-know-about-britain-leaving-the-european-union/
  • Ged
    Offline / Send Message
    Ged interpolator
    Hey fdfxd2 that's a good article on washington post but I wouldn't say that article is unbiased, its very hard to find any completely unbiased information on this topic as a lot of it has to do with different experts interpretations of data and the public's own personal convictions and predictions for the future.  Its very complicated and I couldnt even sum it up in a few words without sounding biased one way or another. I literally studied all the information for about a month before voting.

    These websites demonstrate just how complex the issue is:
    Heres the bbc eu reality check where people are asking some of the big questions and getting some answers: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35603388
    or fullfact which also has a lot of information on various eu topics. https://fullfact.org/europe/
  • Millenia
    Offline / Send Message
    Millenia polycount sponsor
    The games industry itself would feel a pinch with 100% certainty if there is any limitation to the free movement of people, as it relies heavily on imported workforce. Our studio is probably about 1/5th European workers as there aren't enough local people to fill all the positions (particularly more specialized ones).

    I personally got hired from Finland without even applying at the studio, that's how dire the need for workers is. They were happy to hire me based off portfolio + single phone interview, and even chipped in towards moving costs.
13
Sign In or Register to comment.