Former Lib Dem MP and Foreign Office Minister Jeremy Browne is lobbying institutions and countries on behalf of the City of London Corporation, trying to explain why the UK should stay in the EU. He told Vanessa Macdonald that, although London would undoubtedly adapt to leaving, staying in was clearly the better option.

You were appointed for three years. But the referendum is going to be held on June 23. Will you be out of a job?

The referendum is the biggest political event in the UK context in my lifetime. It has more fundamental implications than a general election.

It will have more of a dramatic impact on Britain if we decide to leave than if we vote to stay. An affirmation of the status quo is inevitably less profound in its consequences than a big change.

The role will differ depending on the scenario but there is an important role either way.

The debate that takes place in Europe matters to the City of London and we need to have a regular dialogue with partners across Europe, whether they are businesses or finance ministries or foreign affairs ministries or central banks or media. That strong partnership arrangement with all the interested parties across all 28 member states would exist whether or not there is a referendum.

If we vote to stay, which appears the more likely scenario, there is a big agenda around European competitiveness, growth and job creation, the development of the single market, the capital markets union, the digital and services markets and even free trade agreements – most immediately with the Americans.

There is a real opportunity to add dynamic power to that agenda, with the City of London as part of that debate. If the UK votes to leave, the City of London will need to define what it is to be Europe’s pre-eminent financial centre without being in the EU.

The City of London will not disappear if we vote to leave the EU. There is a whole range of reasons why businesses have chosen to locate and expand in London, reasons that will not change, from the fact that we are English-speaking to a wider political, cultural, legal and economic culture in favour of flexible labour markets, competitive tax rates.

Opinion polls show 45 per cent want to stay but there are still 13 per cent undivided…

There is still three months to go. Our general election campaigns are normally a month long, formally. So there is still a long way to go.

There is quite consistent reason to believe that young people have a high propensity to support Britain staying in the EU, while older people are typically more in favour of Britain leaving.

This is interesting because in every election I have followed the attachment to the status quo gets greater the older people get, rather than looser. It may be that older people have an attachment to the previous status quo – from 40 years ago!

The City of London will not disappear if we vote to leave the EU

It is also hard to know what the turnout will be. In general elections, younger people have a much lower propensity to vote. So if there were compulsory voting, the majority would probably vote to stay in but in a low turnout scenario, the ‘Leave’ campaign would possibly win as those who want us to leave are more motivated to go and vote.

There are quite big differences between different parts of the UK: London is much more supportive of staying in the EU than the rest of the country.

Some factors are particular to Britain. The fact that we are an island country and that we were not invaded for centuries affects the psychology of our country compared to many in the EU. On the other hand, there are some factors that are more general.

Across the Western world and mature democracies, there is increased alienation between people and the governing elite and less willingness to take on trust the judgment of the governing elites – a gap between the governed and the governing.

There is a sense of anxiety about the effects of economic change and globalisation, and about the effects of social change… There are people who feel that power is unaccountable and that their living standards are not rising in a way that they hoped or expected.

All of these factors are in play. That makes it hard to predict the outcome.

If you lined people up in traditional positions of authority – CEOs of big businesses, vice Chancellors at big universities and other high-status roles – the strong majority of opinion is that we should stay in. But in a referendum all votes are equal…

What is the relationship between the City of London Corporation and Greater London mayor Boris Johnson. He recently said: “London would continue to flourish outside the EU and flourish mightily”. Doesn’t that undermine your arguments?

(Long pause) We have a perfectly good relationship with him. He is the mayor of Greater London for the next few months. He is a charismatic spokesman for the whole London metropolis and is very well known internationally.

The City of London takes the opposite view from Boris Johnson on the referendum. We are a vibrant longstanding democracy, and the whole point of having a referendum is that arguments on both sides can be examined. I don’t think it undermines our arguments. He puts forward his and others put forward theirs.

What would happen in the event of a ‘Leave’ vote? Would it mean the end of the City as we know it?

A partial or total lack of access to the single market is a factor that weighs heavily on the minds of businesses and persuades most of them that we would be better staying in the EU.

Some businesses are anxious about what they see as the excessive inclination of the EU to regulate beyond what is necessary to make the market operate effectively. And maybe some businesses feel that the EU’s political culture is too willing to go down the path of greater regulation and bigger government and more protectionism.

But the prevailing dominant view is that if you balance these factors, then the benefit would come from staying the EU.

What would Brexit cost in the short term?

Some say the transitional impact of leaving the EU would be very damaging but others think it will not and that it might not have a big impact on us at all in the medium term.

But in the first two, three or even 10 years, there will be added effort and costs associated with the transition and the new arrangements that have to be put into place.

Some people may feel that this is not a reason in itself to stay in. But it is a big consideration and businesses are trying to make contingency plans now. But it hard to do that when you don’t know what the ‘out’ scenario will look like in practice.

The London Stock Exchange is going through its third attempt to merge with Deutsch Bourse. This is clearly not just a reaction to Brexit but is it a way for the financial activity to keep a foothold in Frankfurt?

You would be better off speaking to the LSE as I don’t want to put words into their mouth.

But I think there is a danger of seeing things too much through the prism of the referendum. The activity in the City of London has not been put on hold until after June 23 although, having said that, as we get closer to the date, companies could hold off on decisions which are not that time-sensitive, waiting to see what happens.

The difficulty is that you are not choosing between two prospectuses. The EU itself is evolving so there is not absolute certainty about what ‘Remain’ will look like in 10 years’ time. But there is a lot more certainty about what ‘Remain’ looks like in 10 years’ time than what ‘Leave’ looks like in two years’ time.

People are not making a fully informed decision as the facts about ‘Leave’ do not exist in absolute form as that would trigger negotiations.

There are some irritating aspects of EU membership. But the dominant – and not just the majority – view is that the benefits of being in the EU substantially outweigh the minuses

The Lisbon Treaty envisages a formal decoupling process taking two years. But how many of the EU arrangements when the UK was a member would apply if the UK were no longer a member? Would we have to negotiate every single agreement made through the EU in the last four decades from scratch?

If that were the case, then two years doesn’t feel like very long at all.

Wouldn’t there be any advantage for the UK to distance itself from the EU, being told what to do with its VAT levels, tax rates and harmonisation and so on?

There are some outspoken businesses and businessmen who support the view in your question. There are some irritating aspects of EU membership. But the dominant – and not just the majority– view is that the benefits of being in the EU substantially outweigh the minuses.

When we had the referendum in Scotland, I never accepted the argument that it could not survive as an independent country. The question was not whether it was possible but whether it was preferable.

In the UK context, is it viable for Britain to have a viable future as an independent non-EU country? Yes, it is. We are the fifth biggest economy in the world and we have a lot of global reach which counts for a lot. We have one of the biggest militaries in the world and one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. We have a significant global role.

But the question is whether it is preferable. The dominant view in the City of London is “No, it is not”. This is also true in terms of our outlook as a country and what it says about our desire to have strong binding friendships with other people in our own continent – rather than signalling retreat from the wider world.

Britain is traditionally an outward looking country and within the EU, we make strong arguments for a less protectionist, more free-trading, outward disposition than many other member states.

It would be harder for us to sustain our capital city as Europe’s pre-eminent global hub city if the host country, the UK, is retreating from the supranational organisation on its own continent.

Europe has a very big competitiveness and growth challenge. We have seven per cent of the world’s population and it is shrinking rapidly. And we have 20 per cent of the world’s economy and that is also shrinking rapidly.

We have some fairly big problems in some parts of Europe with low economic growth, high public debt and high unemployment.

That obviously also matters to the City of London. And it is important for us to talk to other like-minded people about how we can drive that agenda forward.

The City of London is built on foundations of centuries of consistent impartial application of the rule of law, which gives solidity and reliability to all of the business that takes place there at the moment.

London has a constant capacity for reinvention and making itself relevant to the issues of the time. In the 1980s, the City of London was much more parochial and inward looking. It has undergone fundamental change in a generation and there is no reason to think that it cannot adapt to any situation that arises.

Brexit in figures

• 75 per cent of the CFOs from FTSE 350 and other large private companies backed ‘Remain’ in Q1, up from 62 per cent in Q4 of 2015. (Deloitte)

• 83 per cent of CFOs thought the level of uncertainty facing their business was above normal, high or very high (64 per cent end 2015), the highest level in over three years. (Deloitte)

• 26 per cent of firms have contingency plans for Brexit, with 53 per cent making no plans and the rest declining to answer. (Deloitte)

Polls on April 1 showed 45 per cent in favour of ‘Remain’ and 42 per cent for ‘Leave’, with 13 per cent undecided. (FT)

• Brexit could cost the British economy €126 billion and 950,000 jobs by 2020. (Confederation of British Industry)