Professor Gavin Barrett:

There was concern about fairness for non-eurozone states, such as the UK, and whether what is indicated in the five presidents' report would make the case more difficult for Britain staying in. Being outside the eurozone puts countries at a disadvantage compared to the states that are inside. Either one is at the table and participating in the negotiations or one is not. Although the UK is fighting a great rearguard action seeking justice and equality for the states outside the eurozone, if one is not at the table, it is very difficult to defend one's own interests. For example, the Eurogroup meets the day before the ECOFIN council. A 19-member subgroup of a 28-member European Union is well capable of deciding in advance what is going to happen at the ECOFIN council. Britain is, and will continue to be, disadvantaged. As the eurozone continues to integrate, Britain will be more disadvantaged as time goes on.

In so far as we relate it to the Brexit debate, the question is whether the UK will be more disadvantaged outside the EU, and the answer is that it will. There is no ideal position. Would a European system of competition authorities and a low wage commission pull in different directions? The first point is that these would be advisory bodies. While it is possible that they would pull, to some extent, in different directions, we definitely need to pay attention to both competitiveness concerns and low-wage concerns. There are concerns about both and it is vital that they both have a voice in our political spaces. At the end of the day, it is up to the Government to balance the concerns.

Could COSAC have a more powerful role in the European semester process? Returning to the debates that occurred before the constitutional treaty, although the opportunity was there for national parliaments to achieve a stronger collective role, they did not want it. As a result, COSAC is largely a networking opportunity. I have heard it said that the most useful aspect of COSAC was the dinners that were held afterwards. That was not meant in a cynical way, but to point out that it was useful for members to get together, talk with each other and compare the problems they were all facing.