Whatever the outcome, the UK referendum on EU membership will profoundly affect the European Union as a whole and all its Member States.

In 2013 the European Union grew to 28 Member States with a total population of 508 million. Every Member State joined because its government, and usually its population in a referendum, believed that it was in its national interest to do so. Notwithstanding the increase in the Union’s competences over the past 58 years, the EU remains focused on the long-term prosperity of its citizens. No country joined because it believed in some abstract ideal. Countries joined because they saw it as a real advantage to be in the Union.

As befitting a Union whose membership is completely voluntary, in 2007 another clause was added to the EU Treaties – providing the mechanism for Member States to leave the Union if they no longer consider it to be in their national interest to remain. On Thursday the population of the United Kingdom will decide whether to trigger this mechanism.

In reality, like all referenda, the decision goes beyond the question on the ballot paper. Yes, British voters will decide whether the UK will remain in the EU and in its Single Market of 508 million, and whether their country will in future speak – economically and politically – with the backing of 27 other Member States or on its own as a medium-sized State in a world of emerging giants. They will, however, also decide on the future of their own union, which is the UK, as well as the future of their Prime Minister and his government.

I still think that the most likely outcome is a vote to remain in the EU, but this is only because the British electorate still appears to have a common sense approach to poli­tics and a healthy scepticism of politicians. It is certainly not because of the way the campaign has developed. Most of the traditional media seem to have joined the so-called post-factual society wholeheartedly – a society where facts are almost irrelevant and where opinions of experts are given less weight than those who can spin a good yarn. We shall see.

If Britain votes to remain in the EU, the immediate predicament will have passed but the Union will still have to change. A crisis of confidence exists within the popu­lations of various Member States, and it will have to reduce the risk of other referenda being called. Expect a reduction in the matters being decided in Brussels and the transfer of some of these to Member States – a discussion on VAT has already started.

I still think that the most likely outcome is a vote to remain in the EU

Simultaneously, expect initiatives on matters that require European action – like the security of the Union’s external borders – to increase. Malta will have concerns here but if this is linked with a rolling back of the immigration pull-factors put in place, notwithstanding Malta’s principled opposition between 2007 and 2012, then they must be considered within this wider agenda. Today, all the immigration proposals of the Lawrence Gonzi administration are now back on the table – obviously years late in our opinion, but the larger countries thought they knew better and most of the smaller States thought that immigration would only hit the periphery.

The Dublin Regulation, which allocates responsibility for asylum seekers to the country of entry, is being re-examined. The compulsory relocation of refugees – burden sharing – is being implemented. The assistance that newly arrived irregular migrants are entitled to is being reassessed. The conditionality of EU non-humanitarian aid on the fulfilling of existing treaty obligations by non-EU countries to accept their own citizens back is being actively considered. At the end of the process, on the international stage the EU will act more like a State and less like an NGO handling development aid; a State that puts its citizens first but that is fully committed to fulfilling its humanitarian and other international obligations.

If the British people vote to leave the EU the shock to the Union will be profound, although it is the UK that will have to make immediate adjustments to prepare for the changed international scenario. Some EU Member States will come under pressure to call their own referenda but the UK will have to start the process to negotiate its exit from the EU at the same time as it will need to push for its own agreements with all the countries of the world on matters that today are the responsibility of the EU, including trade, fisheries, air transport and customs.

The EU will certainly not be willing to give the UK the privileges of membership without the obligations – if only not to encourage others to follow the UK’s lead. For example, it would have to pay for access to the Single Market, as Norway does. These negotiations would take years and major investment decisions are likely to be on hold during this process. Whatever the make-up of the UK’s post-referendum government and notwithstanding this government’s obvious commitment to a ‘Leave’ result, the key business, financial and economic leadership of the country is likely to regret a ‘Leave’ result for the foreseeable future.

In terms of the day to day work of the European Union, the UK contribution will be missed. The UK’s emphasis on value for money and the cutting of red tape has led to more efficient EU institutions. The UK is probably already underrepresented in the European Commission – successive British governments had introduced rules that discouraged British civil servants from taking up European posts – but their total absence will impact on the quality of the proposals made, particularly those than impact on business.

As far as Malta is concerned, the UK’s absence would be felt mainly in the Council of Ministers. Malta has often been on the other side of the debate to the UK. However, there are a number of subjects where a group of smaller Member States, including Malta, and the UK share specific concerns and interests. These include taxation, social security charges, working time restrictions and other initiatives that impact on the efficiency of business as well as justice and home affairs issues. We can expect the UK’s departure to weaken Malta’s voice in these areas.

Richard Cachia Caruana was chief negotiator for Malta’s EU accession negotiations 1999-2003, and Malta’s first Permanent Representative to the EU 2004-2012.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.