As the Guardian has revealed today, a combination of government and opposition leaders together with senior civil servants and business representatives (but notably, apparently no trade unionists) have met together to discuss the future of the UK outside of the European Union. They are working on the premise that to UK has, so far, not found its way forward outside the EU. As working premises for a meeting go, that has to be one of the biggest understatements of all time.
There are three obvious conclusions to draw from this. Firstly, when both Michael Gove and Gisella Stewart, two notable leaders of the Leave campaign, are involved in such discussions it is reasonable to conclude that the awareness of failure has now permeated deep into the awareness of those who campaigned against EU membership.
Second, the presence of senior Labour shadow cabinet members, like David Lammy, suggests that this awareness must also exist within Labour, even if their presence was not sanctioned by the leadership (and this is not stated).
Third, neither situation is surprising. Not only is it glaringly obvious that Brexit has not worked, but it is also apparent that there is no plan to make it work. In fact, all that is known of any Brexit related plan at present is the legislative destruction that is currently being debated in parliament with regard to the ending of business regulation, employee rights, environmental protection, and many other issues, all solely because they were EU inspired.
In that case, I obviously welcome the fact that there is recognition on the part of senior politicians from both sides of this issue, and from both leading UK political parties, that their denial of the very existence of this problem is wrong. Recognising that a mistake has been made is the first, usually traumatic, step towards putting matters right.
However, meeting to discuss this issue is not enough. Nor is quietly recognising that the mistake has been made enough. First of all, that mistake has to be publicly acknowledged. I suspect that we are someway from that point as yet. I doubt that this will happen before the next general election, which might (we hope) be the last where the Leave / Remain mean divide will be influential.
Then a realistic appraisal of the options that are available to us must follow. Realistically that cannot, at present, include an immediate return to the EU because there is little or no sign that there is a desire on the EU's part for this to happen, and who can blame them? Instead, what is very obviously required is a pathway to realignment with the EU.
In the first instance, that would mean the restoration of all the legislation that the government is currently planning to abandon just because it was EU inspired.
Then there will be a need to talk about reinstating standards that allow the reintroduction of the single market, which is a necessary precondition of rejoining.
After that, the barriers to re-entry into a customs union must be removed.
Critically, such a move also requires movement towards freedom of movement. I cannot, for example, see the EU taking the UK back unless it was willing to join the Schengen area.
I am under no illusions about how long this process will take.
I am also aware that there is a 30% or so minority in the UK population who are vehemently opposed to this course of action. Their reasons might be considered wholly irrational by a majority in the UK. In many cases, the racism that underpins their sentiment is not just irrational but is repugnant. But they do exist and time will be needed to take them with this process to the extent that it is possible.
I also know that the deal that the UK will get on rejoining the EU will not be the same as the one that had when it departed. For example, I have no doubt that as a condition of rejoining the UK will have to commit to joining the euro. However, as I continually note within the context of Scotland having to make a similar commitment if it were to apply for EU membership in its own right (as I think it will at sometime), what is requested is a commitment, but there are no timescales attached, as Sweden has proved.
Most importantly, what is required is that this process start. The policy of exceptional isolationism that motivated Brexit, based as it was on a concept of English superiority, has to be rejected in favour of one of international cooperation that reflects the reality that this country (however, we define it) has always existed on the basis of trade, sharing of culture, and free movement of people with its nearest partners, all of whom happen to be members of the EU now. To pretend there is any other basis on which what is now rightly recognised as a small country on the north-west coast of Europe might coexist in a complicated world is to peddle a falsehood, which is what the Brexit campaign always did. The time to go forward has arrived.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Will there still be an EU for us to rejoin? If Germany gets fed up with paying through the nose for American fuel and decides to revert to getting the cheap stuff from Russia, along with some other EU members, won’t that split the EU and lead to its demise?
Sorry Bill, but ‘if’ is doing a might lot of work in your claims and I really do not see any of those conditions happening.
The penny has finally dropped with the realisation by the so-called ruling elite that Britain is finally recognising that it is a smalll fish in a pond dominated by the US, EU, and China. Final dissassociation wirh a bloody colonialist and imperialist past has not been comfortable for them. Racism is the last card they play by demonising migrants and foreigners and treating them, where they can, in the most brutal and callous manner. The only salvation is to make people aware of our history and promote internationalism and remoive the poison of racism from our society.
Brexit is a failure. Nothing the Government or Opposition can do will, in any realistically foreseeable future, make up for what is lost. Governments are not alchemists; they can’t turn lead into gold. We were members of the EU because it is in Britain’s best interests. What difference will that make to British politics?
None.
There is the problem.
Many of us argued against Brexit and events have vindicated the arguments we used.
Rejoining the single market is the single best thing we could do for the economy.
My only reservation is that if we used the euro, any hopes of MMT would be much smaller. Change of that nature in the EU , I suspect, would have to be by consensus .
Does/should rejoining the European Union include monetary union (using the Euro), or should we maintain monetary sovereignty?
I thought that was obvious from what I wrote
I do not support monetary unions and never will
Let’s put this to bed “once and for all”.
The starting document for the Single Currency was the Maastricht Treaty. All EU members signed up to joining the single currency except the UK and (after a kerfuffle) Denmark – they were given an “opt out”. But the key point was that joining would only happen WHEN THE CRITERIA FOR JOINING ARE MET (the famous Maastricht criteria). Sweden did not and does not have an opt out… it’s just that it does not meet the Maastricht criteria. Often forgotten is the criterion on Central Bank independence and Sweden/Riksbank does not meet it so can’t be admitted to the Eurozone.
Initially, there was considerable pressure on the Swedes to join but they resisted and since the mid-90s the tide has turned and there is no suggestion that Sweden should join.
So, YES, the UK will have to agree to join the Eurozone… but if BoE legislation does not meet the Maastricht criteria (and I am not sure what the position is) then we cannot join. So, we simply adopt the Swedish stance that “we will join when we meet the criteria…. but we will never meet the criteria”.
I agree
But Sweden chooses not to create something that it could deliver in 15 minutes.
So, the opt-out is real in that case and available to any country in reality.
Six months ago, I would have been quite happy to adopt the Euro, I didn’t know of any reason not to. After reading about Modern Money Theory, losing monetary sovereignty would be a very bad idea.
I think Greece ran into some of the problems after it defaulted because it was tied to the Euro, ironically similar to problems that the UK is having now, but could easily avoid if it chose to do so.
Result! As they say…..
BREXIT is a multi-faceted phenomenon that is fascinating as well as a man made disaster.
How the vote was won, was through outright lying and the manipulation of information using illegally obtained data from people being on line. Add in the rampant fascistic anti-Europeanism prior to the vote – the sabre rattling of Thatcher and the jingoistic portrayal of any HoS talking to the EU about anything for good measure.
But the crux of the issue for me at least is that the arseholes behind Leave (and that’s what they are) who won the vote, simply did not expect to win. They thought that they were just giving the EU a bloody nose.
There was certainly professionalism and talent used to get the result of course – step forward Cambridge Analytica, Brittany Kaiser, Dominic Cummings for example – but none of that was used to generate anything ‘oven ready’, credible and achievable by the politicians afterwards to take us out, such was their scepticism or even ignorance or lack of understanding of the quality of the data mining used to twist and achieve the result. How English eh? So dim.
The lack of an exit plan was all down to the Tory party – whom the British people saw fit to vote in in 2010. A talentless, unprincipled self interested bunch who should never have been allowed near Westminster so it transpires. What a country.
Not even Shakespeare could have written a comic-tragedy of the likes of BREXIT.
BTW – if we had to adopt the euro, then I’d rather stay out. We should at least go in Swedish style as you seem to suggest (or even Norway style as a backstop) and I ‘d negotiate on that saying that the requirement to impose the euro on us was not consistent with other accession countries.
I think that the EU would want us back – I understand from Byline Times that there is a union jack boxed up and waiting to be hoisted again one day. This bollocks about pretending not be part of Europe when we have always sought to work with them anyway may have been tolerable when we were an empire, but certainly not now.
Before the outbreak of WWI even, Britain working with France decided to bring their navies closer to home with the Brits patrolling the North Sea and the French the southern seas in response to a growing German threat. The fact is therefore that no matter what the swivel eyed loons in the Tory party and the (yes) the Labour party and our media tell us, Britain has ALWAYS worked with our European neighbours in some way or other to mutual benefit.
What these loons fail to realise is Europe’s bloody history that always sucked us in anyway. The European Continent is mass graveyard of suffering with too many innocent civilians, and hundreds of armies. The EU for me is an attempt – albeit sometimes a flawed one – to bring peace to the continent. For that at least it has my everlasting commendation and support.
Sorry about the long post, but every time BREXIT is mentioned we need to remind people of the truth of how it actually came about. How it came about is an affront to any notion of democracy.
Thanks PSR for such an excellent post, highlighting the dishonesty of the leavers and the utter stupidity of their delusions.
“What these loons fail to realise is Europe’s bloody history that always sucked us in anyway. The European Continent is mass graveyard of suffering with too many innocent civilians, and hundreds of armies. The EU for me is an attempt – albeit sometimes a flawed one – to bring peace to the continent. For that at least it has my everlasting commendation and support.”
Exactly.
“The EU for me is an attempt – albeit sometimes a flawed one – to bring peace to the continent. For that at least it has my everlasting commendation and support.”
Quite right. The alternative is working itself out in Ukraine, right now.
I for one am totally fed up with having to pander to a bunch of racists, for that’s what they are plain and simple, who are still unwilling to see the damage that is being done to our country just to satisfy their uneducated and brutal hatred of different peoples values and lifestyles.
With just 30% of the population still adhering to this xenophobic idiocy any government that is worth its salt would ignore such views and do what is in the interests of the 70% of right thinking people.
We are currently in a period where our rights and freedoms are being curtailed for no sensible or valid reason surely it is possible to legislate this 30% out of racist opposition and start making urgent steps to repair the damage that is being done which in my opinion is far more valid than their racist bigotry.
I might suggest that what would help is a proper investigation into who was behind behind Brexit, if what seems to have happened was made public, namely that much Brexit activity was funded from abroad that might make it seem a much less respectable and probably traitorous cause.
John
I think this is relevant
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/18/dark-money-democracy-political-crisis-institute-economic-affairs
In their book, The Death of the Left, Simon Winlow and Steve Hall write: “Working-class Leave voters had been falling throughout the neoliberal age, and they wanted to take any opportunity that might arise to rid the nation of the conventions that had established themselves over the past 40 years. Of course, many of their frustrations were quite separate from the EU and its effects, but the referendum functioned as a proxy issue that suggested an opportunity had arisen to change direction. Immigration certainly formed part of this picture.”
I think they’re suggesting that xenophobia was not the main issue the Left had, but that they associated Europe with Thatcherism and monetarism, and they had not seen their living standards improve, even after the 2008 crash.
The book is highly recommended. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Death-Left-Begin-Beginning-Again/dp/144735415X
You did not need to be racist to vote for Brexit, of course
But if you were racist you did
Richard, when you say that 30% of the population do not accept free movement of people; if that same 30% are the voting electorate, then they provide sufficient support under FPTP, typically to provide the Conservatives with a mojority.
While that may be the case, I believe your argument that what motivated Brexit was a “policy of exceptional isolationism” is both correct and more fundamental than the issue of free movement. It is, as you say an English obsession (we have our own ‘30%’ of dogged British exceptionalists in Scotland, but Scotland has never possessed the peculiarly English, anti-European, exceptionalist obsession – it goes back to the fear of ‘universal monarchy’).
I have always believed we joined the EU (in an earlier form), under false pretences; ignoring the actual clear meaning of the Treaty of Rome, and riddled with insincerity. Half the population thought the project was solely a trade agreement. It wasn’t, it was the reconsruction of wurope as a collaborative project. Britain has never played a constructive role in the EU, or been able to take a role among the leaders of the project, because it didn’t really believe in it. Britain’s role descended into a mere disruptor under Thatcher, and eventually into a destructive form of anti-membership.
I doubt whether the exceptionalism will ever change; it is why Scotland and England cannot even reconcile the problems of our own Union (for Scotland the Union only made substantive sense because of the Empire; not an attractive fact, but a fact nonetheless); because England cannot make constitutional Unions work; with Scotland (without Empire), with Ireland, or with Europe: in short, with anyone.
You may be right
What I do know is it cannot make a modern union with Scotland
John, your sentence “Britain has never played a constructive role in the EU, or been able to take a role among the leaders of the project, because it didn’t really believe in it” rings 100% true. About 25 years ago I spent a bit of my career working in Germany and a work colleague there compared UK’s role in the EU with going to a football match. You might go into the dressing room, get changed and take part in the game, or you might go into the grandstand and shout at the players. Britain, he stated, sat in the grandstand, did a great deal of shouting (much of it abusive), but contributed nothing tangible to the match. I could only agree with his analogy as I was getting my news from German TV and newspapers and, being away from the political bias and national self-agrandisement of the British media, it was easier to form a balanced picture of events relating to EU governance and the UK’s role in it.
Ken, well that’s an eye-opener to me, and I wish I didn’t have to read it. Why are we represented by such a childish/boorish lot?
At a post-Brexit referendum meeting in Edinburgh 2016 I gained a good impression from the two MEPs who spoke. Here’s hoping if Scotland gets the chance we make a better fist of it.
What happens if there is another vote and the majority vote to remain outside the EU once more?
Do you continue to ask for vote after vote until you get what YOU want? Isn’t that a form of fascism?
No
That, glaringly obviously, is called democracy
Denying choice, as you would obviously want, is what is called fascism
You have to be quite remarkably stupid not to know that
“What happens if there is another vote and the majority vote to remain outside the EU once more?”
It’s the same that happens after a General Election every so-many years. The population changes its mind, the government changes.
Precisely
Democracy
In response to Richard, re Democracy, if democracy could be made to work properly, requiring some wisdom. there is still the small problem that the lowest common denominator, the mass, can turn a tide and sort of vote rubbish in? What is popular might not be right. Hence a lot of profit-taking, market forces, advertising cost loaded on us, etc. Gimmicks.
And the profound statement [Bregman, Rutger in “Humankind” p87] roughly
‘ what if science [politics, economics] is distorted to achieve the headlines/best-seller lists?’ Of Course Brexit was something like that, an emotional/jingoistic response rather than well-considered..
Both Scotland and N Ireland voted to remain in the EU, but were dragged out by the English majority. There were no meaningful consultations by the UK Gov with the Scottish or N Ireland Governments; simply a suck-it-up attitude from UK Gov. However the outcomes for the Scottish and NI economies have been markedly different: NI has clearly benefitted from the NI Protocol which has effectively kept NI in the EU while remaining part of the UK. In contrast Scotland’s economy, especially hospitality and the high-quality, high-value food and drink industries, has been severely damaged. Now we hear of discussions being held to explore options to rejoin the EU and, once more, there is no voice for the devolved nations. If the UK wants to break the UK up, it’s going about it the right way: the devolved nations have no say and, when push comes to shove, no power to stop Westminster overturning our governments’ legislation as we’ve recently seen and we have no formalised means of leaving the UK either.
Richard,
Both Tory and Labour ignore reality. The EU now treats the UK as a third country, just like Moldova.
Below is a link to the Institute of Government’s 2016 sheet setting out the trade options availabe for the Uk with the EU.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/Brexit%20Options%2
0A3%20November%20update.pdf
The economic ruin group of Tories fantasise that the UK will not be rule takers.
Tell that to the USA. If a trade deal is ever done, guess who will be accepting not just Federal but individual state standards/rules? The UK of course.
It will be the same with any Pacific rim trade deal.
As for doing trade deals with former colonies?
What is not well known is that in 2022 54 African nations agreed to form a customs union. Why? Because they have want to negotiatie trade deals with the USA, China and the EU from a position of strength.
The crumbling UK economy needs to pick up its trade with the EU.
To achieve this the UK has no choice but to accept their rules of origin, regulations etc. That is what the EU requires of all third countries who want to trade with it.
Neither the Tories or Labour are prepared to agree this.
Not a good position for the UK economy to be in continued decline.
England is in trouble. It cannot rejoin the single market without a massive backlash against open borders and so it is stuck in this quagmire of low investment and now low growth (gdp per capita has not grown since the GFC, immigration has been the driver of gdp).
Scotland does not have this issue, but I feel that independence is losing momentum, the fatigue of covid and war is not going to make people want to vote right now.
The Rees-Mogg-inspired bill to repeal all the EU legislation that remains in force is currently in the House of Lords – surely every effort has to be made to encourage the Lords to reject it before its too late. At least that would delay things a bit.
“What these loons fail to realise is Europe’s bloody history that always sucked us in anyway. The European Continent is mass graveyard of suffering with too many innocent civilians, and hundreds of armies. The EU for me is an attempt – albeit sometimes a flawed one – to bring peace to the continent. For that at least it has my everlasting commendation and support.”
Another who totally agrees with you, PSR.
One of my prime reasons for voting Remain in my early 20s was the opportunity to do away with the past history of continual war among the European States, including Britain. I have visited a number of the heartbreaking war cemeteries in Europe and always been relieved to think that it could never happen again between the members of the EU. 50 years after my initial Remain vote, with countless conflicts world wide in the interim, the peace engendered by being part of the European community seems as valuable now as it was then.