Temperatures ran high last week during the debate over Britain’s place in the European Union.

While those who work in the travel sector will have to weigh up a great many factors when they go to vote on June 23, how it could impact the industry – and their livelihoods – is something else to consider.

TTG gathered a panel of heavyweights (see below) with differing views to assess the pros and cons of a potential divorce – and with such an emotive issue on the table there were plenty of disagreements.

Much has been made of speculation by the likes of easyJet chief executive Carolyn McCall that holiday prices would likely rise if the UK left the EU, with even the prime minister suggesting this could happen. But interestingly, even those in the pro-remain camp on the panel said this was unlikely.

“I’d love to sit here and say as part of the remain campaign that I firmly believe travel prices will go up,” said Tui’s Fraser Ellacott. “[But] I think you’ve got to look at the overall position. They’re [holidays] affected by many factors, many variables, of which we just don’t know the effect of a leave vote.”

Little impact

Monarch boss Andrew Swaffield agreed: “Probably prices will stay the same because broadly speaking we’ll end up with the same deal that we’ve got today, only we won’t be part of the EU anymore, which doesn't seem like a sensible place to me.”

Unlike some of their pro-remain peers who have been notoriously outspoken in the national press, including McCall and Tui’s former chief executive Peter Long, both Swaffield and Ellacott refused to hype up any potential impact of a Brexit.

But unsurprisingly, Richard Patient, London chairman of Business for Britain, which is affiliated with Vote Leave, took a different view. He attacked those who had suggested travel could potentially return to the days of being only for the rich, insisting that this was “absolutely ridiculous scaremongering” and “utter rubbish”.

His comments echoed those of many enthusiastic Brexiters, who have criticised others that have highlighted potential dangers of leaving the EU. But Abta’s Stephen D’Alfonso said any scaremongering was simply due to the lack of a coherent blueprint from those advocating a split.

“It’s very difficult to articulate a unified credible view about what the UK’s relationship with the EU will be after a leave vote and that's why no one has done it,” he said. “It’s easy to label every question or concern that's raised as scaremongering, yet it’s much more difficult to address those questions and concerns.”

Peter Healey, founder of the Vertical Group, is one of the few travel bosses publicly in favour of leaving the EU. He believes that the horror stories about what would happen if the UK went its own way are misplaced.

“Germany is still going to want to sell its cars to us, people are still going to want to sell their hotels to us; we’re still going to be in that market buying those things,” he said.

Healey also emphasised the sovereignty point, insisting that the UK has “no choice” when it comes to rules and regulation. However, Abta’s D’Alfonso hit back, stating that the EU never receives any credit for its many successes.

“How often do we have UK politicians standing up and thanking Europe for having done brilliant things for the UK? When was the last time anyone in the audience heard that? They do not give Europe any credit on any part of the political spectrum.”

Mass exodus

Ever since it was revealed that the UK would have a referendum on its membership of the EU, there have been murmurs from big businesses that they could be forced to move out of the country should the Brexit side win.

However, those on the panel, even the pro-remainers, suggested this was unlikely to happen. “From a Tui perspective, regardless of the way the British people vote, we view it as irrelevant to the future success of our business,” Ellacott admitted.

“We have no concerns either way, [but] we’d rather remain.”

Patient also pointed out that when the UK was toying with the idea of joining the euro, certain businesses issued the same threat to leave then, but “they haven’t left yet,” he added.

For Swaffield there were bigger concerns: there’s a risk that if the UK, as one of the most powerful countries in the world and one of the most powerful countries in the EU leaves, it will trigger similar votes in other EU countries, which could precipitate the end of the EU. I think that's the bigger political risk.”

He added: “Whatever we think of the EU, the reality is that Europe has had a much more peaceful period since the creation of the EU, than it had in the previous 200 years.”

Swaffield’s view neatly captured the pragmatic approach of those on the panel that want the UK to stay in Europe. There was little outright enthusiasm for the EU, but for them the alternative is worse.

For the ardent Brexiters, the motivations were different. They view the referendum as a once-in-a-generation chance to regain some control – a view that seems to come more from the gut than the head.

For the audience, the remain side seemed the most convincing. Moderator Sophie Griffiths polled attendees before and after the debate to see which way they were leaning, or if they were unsure. While most raised their hands in favour of remaining in the EU prior to the debate, there were still a few undecideds and a number that were in favour of a Brexit.

Immediately following the debate, this number was significantly fewer, with more hands raised in favour of remaining or stating that they were unsure.

The real test though will be on June 23. It is only then we really find out who won the argument.

On the Remain side

On the Leave side

What do you think?

Air your thoughts in the comments section below.