University of Alberta political scientist Lori Thorlakson told the Edmonton Journal that the economic warnings made by Brexit opponents "all turned out to be true" and that Britain "did lose a lot of money as a result of leaving."

Verdict? Overstated.

Thorlakson is correct that many economists believe Brexit imposed economic costs on the United Kingdom. But it is inaccurate to suggest that all of the dire warnings made before the 2016 referendum came true.

Before the vote, British voters were warned of immediate recession, soaring unemployment, financial collapse, and severe economic disruption. Then-Prime Minister David Cameron warned of an economic shock. The UK Treasury forecast a recession. Other analysts predicted dramatic declines in growth and living standards.

That isn't what happened.

Go Ad Free

Britain did not enter an immediate recession after the vote. Employment remained strong. London remained one of the world's leading financial centres. The UK remains the sixth-largest economy in the world and continues to attract significant foreign investment.

More importantly for Alberta, Brexit is not a particularly close comparison.

The United Kingdom voted to leave a political and economic union while remaining a sovereign country. Britain already had its own military, citizenship, currency, central bank, courts, borders, and foreign policy.

Ironically, the strongest lesson from Brexit may be the opposite of the one many federalists draw from it.

The Remain campaign focused heavily on economic warnings and worst-case scenarios. Brexit supporters derided that strategy as "Project Fear." Whether those warnings were ultimately right or wrong, they failed to persuade enough voters.

Even Thorlakson acknowledges that lesson, warning federalists not to rely solely on economic scare campaigns but instead to make a positive case for Canada.

If Canada is worth staying in, federalists should be able to explain why.