The View of Brexit From UK CompaniesThe general consensus among the regulatory and PV professionals that we spoke to about Brexit was that the UK’s departure without a deal is “needless” and detrimental to UK manufacturing and the overall reputation of the United Kingdom as a business location. One attendee who agreed to be quoted, without attribution, said ” The UK’s position as a leader in the sector has been thrown onto a bonfire to fulfil Boris Johnson’s political ambitions”. Strong sentiments indeed. However, they were echoed time and again by attendees from the UK that we spoke to at the TOPRA Symposium. Turning to the anticipated impact of no deal, there were many examples, over the 3 days of people who highlighted the issues that their companies were and are experiencing in identifying and recruiting suitably qualified regulatory staff. Many of those that we spoke to attributed this to the uncertainty of Brexit and the issues that had arisen regarding residency and the ‘right to settle’ in the UK after the departure from the EU. It must be noted that much like the results of the referendum, there is a significant group of attendees at the UK who voted to leave the EU and believe that such a move will be positive for the UK. Many that we spoke to feel that the UK will now be better able to compete against countries like Ireland to win new life science investment. The possibility that the UK might, in time, lower its corporation tax rate to match that of Ireland, is seen by those in the ‘leave’ camp as something that will ‘turbo charge’ the UK’s life sciences sector and lead to significant investment from multinational corporations. Unsurprisingly, the views of UK residents and nationals attending the TOPRA Symposium, was mixed on the benefits of Brexit.
The View of Brexit from EU (and non UK) CompaniesThe EU based companies that we spoke to at the Dublin event fit broadly into 3 categories:
- that it was a disruption and had caused them/their companies to move MAH’s and other ‘instruments’ (such as EU Authorised Representative) to enable them to continue trading after Brexit
- that it had significantly compromised the bandwidth of their departments by taking their time in Brexit related activities whereas they previously would have spent that time on ‘more productive’ activities
- that it brought about uncertainty about how interactions with regulators (particularly the MHRA) is going to work