Britain need to stay in the EU single market for goods and services, otherwise the economy would risk being at less of an advantage trade-wise, and the effects of this will be further accelerated economically. The UK should be seeking a soft Brexit to at least maintain a good relationship with the EU, and continue the inflow of a necessary skilled and unskilled European labour force to keep the economy afloat and address any labour shortages. This decision may well deal a powerful blow to the economy, so measures should be taken to minimise the negative economic effects of Brexit.
However, Theresa May's chequers deal is currently lacking a good enough trade policy to be accepted by Brussels, and this is undoubtedly the most important part of negotiations for Britain now, in order to minimise economic damage. The main problem is with customs and trade, May's Chequers deal is seen as asking to pursue an independent trade policy while retaining all the benefits of formerly being an EU member. The EU thinks this is unworkable as other nations may pursue a similar exit-with-benefits strategy.
May has repeatedly delayed the House of Commons vote for fear of rejection of her exit plan, something that became true as parliament have repeatedly overwhelmingly rejected her plans. Many other policy issues remain vague, with indefinite dates or even unaddressed completely as the government continue to discuss the destabilising potential of a re-vote, the possibility of revoking article 50 and the grave danger of not making a deal. It is now urgently important the a "plan B" goes to vote soon, as the longer she holds out the less time there will be to make a deal and the more likely a economically catastrophic “no-deal” Brexit looks.
Regardless of immigration, or how hard or soft a Brexit May pursues, what Britain stands to lose is the access to a good trade relationship with its closest geographical neighbours, and some of the largest markets in the world, so some deal is at least better than none. But as the governments indecision makes the reality of a no-deal Brexit seem ever more present the implications of such an exit from the EU, considering the large amount of world financial services based in London, could have big repercussions for markets worldwide. However the short term economic predictions were wrong and with the right move swiftly made before the 29th March deadline, maybe the long term economic impact could be turned around too.
Dealing with repercussions and preparing a solid plan for the future should be the British government’s main aim as the deadline draws nearer, as opposed to considering extending article 50 to extend the deadline. There are inescapable economic problems the UK faces that go further to address, along with its ties to the EU, that the country will have to face up to and should do so during planning a Brexit stratergy. How to address the growing signs of a labour shortage in the country and to not make it worse, as indeed many countries with an ageing population and strict immigration policies have for example Japan, the country needs a solid plan to replace the free movement of people inside the EU. Therefore dealing with repercussions by planning for an orderly well planned exit should be on all MP’s minds moving forward, especially considering the International Monetary Fund’s prediction that “Britains economy [could] grow by 1.5% IF a broad Brexit agreement is struck” .