EGDF in a post-Brexit Europe

Dr Simon Adderley, Senior Lecturer in Entrepreneurship from Oxford Brookes University, facilitated a discussion seeking the views of delegates on the implications for EGDF after the UK leaves the European Union (EU), ‘Brexit’.

At the time of the conference, the UK parliament was holding a series of votes to seek consensus about the way forward.

It was still unclear whether a withdrawal agreement would succeed, whether the UK would leave without a deal, not leave the EU at all or somewhere in the middle of all that.

The main concerns expressed were:

• If the headquarters of EGDF continue to be in the UK we may lose the opportunity to receive EU funding and we won’t exist as far as the European Commission is concerned. We may need to reincorporate in another member state.
• Concerns that disability discrimination laws in the UK might not be as favourable in the future because improvements have emanated from the EU.
• If the UK is not in the EU, it takes a powerful voice away from that lobby and that would leave fewer powerful voices for Europe.
• Will there be restrictions for dogs travelling from the UK into and out of the EU?
• Money transfers into and out of the UK may become more expensive.
• If it is the case that the UK is a net contributor to the EU then there might be fewer funds for these sorts of projects. Funds may be harder to access.

In response, on the issue of EU funding:

• EGDF hasn’t received any funding from the EU since 2013.
• EGDF could move the headquarters to another EU country – Ireland, Belgium, Netherlands, and Estonia were mentioned. EGDF is currently set up as a company and a charity in the UK. A move to Belgium would mean EGDF would need to be a company and not a charity and would be treated the same way as a company in respect of payment of taxes.  It may be possible to set up in the Netherlands as ANBI status (non-profit tax designation) so if people donate they can deduct it from their taxes.
• There may be other avenues, other organisations in Europe outside of the EC that support our cause.
• Delegates from Estonia, Sweden and Germany shared their experience of applying for grants from the European Social Fund, suggesting that the admin process can be onerous for a small voluntary organisation. Another deterrent is that larger grants may need self-financing in the region of 10-15% of the project budget. One delegate found a grant programme aligned to her project goals and received enthusiatic support in the application process.

In respect of disability discrimination laws:

• David Adams gave an example about a taxi refusal in Berlin, where there is no obligation for drivers to accept assistance dogs, to illustrate his view that the UK is way ahead of some other European countries.

Travel with dogs:

• Judith Jones said that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) in the UK, had advised EGDF that there would be no change to the arrangements for getting back into the UK after this conference with their guide dog, if and when the UK left the EU.

Peter Gorbing summed up by saying that of the 47 countries in Europe, 46 are in the Council of Europe (Human Rights etc) yet only about half are part of the EU.  Countries that have never been part of the EU might be wondering what all this is about? Let’s not lose this perspective.