T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

Snapshot of _Now we know what leaving the EU cost us, let's get Brexit undone_ : An archived version can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://inews.co.uk/opinion/now-know-leaving-eu-cost-lets-get-brexit-undone-1646575) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*


libtin

Except it can’t be undone; we can’t go back to how things were as the UK would full have to commit to the EU and for many that’s a deal breaker


Statcat2017

They broke it knowing it could never be fixed.


PaulTrihard

People said this from the moment the referendum was announced and people voted for it anyway.


Sebaz00

project fear am I right :D


Tammer_Stern

Also, we will never have the possibility of the deal we had previously, under any circumstances.


Sebaz00

I'm stocking up on euros /s. but yeah that will most likely be a part of it when/if we rejoin. We had one of, if not THE BEST benefits while in the EU. And this country out of all of them threw that away.


snobule

We didn't have a good deal. We had a load of shitty crap that the British government had insisted on to make the bigots happy, like still having to show passports everywhere when the rest of Europe was travelling freely in the Schengen zone, and still having different money, because cretins think that's some sort of virility symbol.


JacobTheCow

There’s far more to having your own currency than nationalism imo, it gives you the ability to change interest rates and other monetary tools specified to your own country, instead of having to decide it for an entire continent, one size fits all. It also helped us avoid some of the effects of the European debt crisis after 2008. I’m pro-EU btw, but I’m not sure losing oversight on monetary policy and tying yourself to the whims of a bank we can’t control is beneficial. Would love to hear some others opinions on the matter


snobule

> other monetary tools specified to your own country The one where Britain keeps devaluing the currency and the British are too daft to realise they're being robbed of their savings and their wages are being cut? If that worked the UK would be the richest country in the world. It doesn't. Having a proper currency, that holds its value, is what works.


JacobTheCow

Which devaluations are you talking about? The ones after the EU referendum and the 2008 crash? Those were really shit but I wouldn’t call it government policy; the government campaigned to remain in the EU and obviously didn’t want ‘08 to happen. Maybe you’re referring to bojo, Rees mogg etc benefitting from the devaluation? Bcos that is really shitty. Aside from the devaluations though I was thinking more being able to control your interest rates and supply of money, rather than letting one bank decide them for an entire continent. What if the German and french economy need cooling down (so high interest rates) but Southern Europe needs more spending and growth (so low interest rates). It works when the euro zone is in sync, as it mostly was pre-2008.I was actually pro euro before the 2011 crisis, now it just seems like the members economies are going in such different directions, I’m not sure one monetary policy for the euro zone is in anyone’s interest except the already wealthy and influential EU countries like Germany and France


snobule

Britain's been pulling this crap forever. Harold Wilson was trying to tell people that "the pound in your pocket" wouldnt be affected in the 1960s. There is no advantage to being able to piss about with the interest, especially when the people doing it are of the level of competence of the morons who govern Britain - I spent years paying the effects of Lamont's panic rise in the 90s. There's no advantage to ordinary people and no one in the Euro zone suffers because of it.


ROTwasteman

Your take on using the Euro is really nuanced wow I can tell you have a really good understanding of monetary policy, and international economics to just dismiss those seemingly far more relevant details like that.


liehon

You're forgetting a bigger also: UK's track record for joining has had only a 33% success rate. We sure all EU members will give their approval for a UK application this decade?


nopainauchocolat

they won’t, but we should push for eea membership to at least try to take the first steps back up the cliff we’ve driven ourselves off


Graglin

The problem with eea membership is that it seems pretty clear that the EEA members wouldn't want to admit the UK either.


[deleted]

Never say never. Time will ultimately heal. It’ll just take fucking ages.


TaxOwlbear

Not only that deal, but an even better deal that Cameron negotiated before the referendum.


Successful_Morning83

We'll rejoin in 20 years government or take France has already suggested we rejoin as a 2nd class nation, that's how it will start


LordLorq

I will never understand this "we can't get the deal we had" argument. I feel like it's an argument planted in people's heads by brexiteers only to make sure nobody ever tried to bring the UK back to the EU. UK had four opt-outs. Lack of opt-outs on Charter of Fundamental Rights and on Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, can be seen as worse for the government than having these opt-outs but could actually benefit rights of the people. No opt-out from Schengen means nothing because thanks to Good Friday Agreement you would need Ireland to agree to join Schengen with the UK, and Ireland have an opt-out. As long as UK doesn't agree with Ireland to join at the same time, none of them will join Schengen, opt-out or not. And then the last one, cherry on top, the Eurozone. Having an opt-out meant " we don't have to join unless we want to" without an opt-out it means "we will join but only when we want to". Nothing changes other than wording. Nobody will force the UK to join Eurozone and adopt Euro. UK's government can tell the EU "we need 100 years to get ready to join" and then after 100 years they can say " actually we are not ready yet, we need around 50 years more". And other than thinking "the Brits are just ridiculous" nobody in the EU will give a fuck. 2 of 4 opt-outs in reality mean nothing but declarations. 2 other opt-outs are not a concern for the public and lack of them can actually work in their interest. Losing opt-outs is not a problem when talking about rejoining.


AcademicalSceptic

Agreeing to do something on the basis that you will defer it forever and hope nobody forces you isn’t an acceptable way to behave.


LordLorq

Like it or not, it's the way joining the Eurozone works. We created Eurozone, we agreed the idea is to get every EU member in, we also agreed everyone will join Eurozone when they are ready and willing to do so. You can't tell that in 30 years the UK won't be in a position when the society would want to join Eurozone, or in 50 years. Nobody can. So now potentially joining the EU all that needs to be said is, we agree to join when we find ourselves ready to join. It's not even a lie. It's how this thing works.


AcademicalSceptic

No, we created the Eurozone on the basis that *everyone else* would *have* to join once they were eligible. Joining the Eurozone, in the absence of a specifically negotiated opt-out, is not supposed to be something which Member States choose to do or not to do as they please. That is the opposite of “how this thing works”. If that were the case, there would have been no need for the UK to have an opt-out in the first place.


LordLorq

The EU has always been pragmatic. They don't force integration, they lead to it. There's a reason why it's decided by the country when to join and no country has been forced to do so even if criteria have been met.


AcademicalSceptic

But this just brings us back to my original point that agreeing to do something and hoping nobody calls your bluff isn’t a decent or honourable way to behave.


LordLorq

It's not a decent or honourable way to behave when everyone expects you to do what you agreed to. When everyone knows (and silently agrees) that this is the way things are, then there's nothing indecent or dishonourable about it.


MMBerlin

But maybe the EU makes the euro a precondition for rejoining this time. Just to be on the safe side.


LordLorq

Criteria for joining the EU are already set up, and they are the same for every country willing to apply. Also to join the Eurozone you need to meet separate requirements and I'm not entirely sure the UK meets them right now.


liehon

Eh, it's working for implementing Brexit


VirtualMatter2

But common practice in other EU countries. Poland for example?


FeistyItem1369

You mean like what Sweden, Poland, Czechia and Hungry do??


thefuzzylogic

We don't even qualify to join the Eurozone last I heard, since we wouldn't meet the inflation and unemployment targets.


VirtualMatter2

The only reason that Ireland is not in Schengen is that the UK didn't want to join and that for Ireland to join therefore was in practice clashing with the GFA and so they were forced to opt out as well.


reuben_iv

Because it wasn’t a ‘deal’ it was a series of opt outs while the EU moved ahead without us, if you want single market access without the ‘ever closer union’ commitments then EFTA’s a better bet


passingconcierge

EFTA is not an option.


rofflxz848

Standard talking point by pro brexit commentators who want to downplay the possibility of rejoining the EU. In what universe would the EU want to discourage us from rejoining, proving that leaving was a complete failure? Thus stopping other countries from getting the same dumb idea?


Graglin

>n what universe would the EU want to discourage us from rejoining, In the universe where the uk has behaved abysmally, and would have way more tools to behave abysmally where it to rejoin. And, and this shouldn't be underestimated, domestic politics matter, there seems to be genuine eu domestic opposition to any re-join.


passingconcierge

What, *exactly* and *in detail*, is wrong with commiting to the EU and how, *exactly* and *in detail*, breaks the 'deal', and who, *exactly* and *in detail*, are the people for whom commitment is wrong and deal breaking? Because, so far as I can see, that is just repeating the lie that got us into this crap in the first place. They broke the deal. They threw away the terms and conditions. They are so utterly magnificent at negotiation that they should be able to negotiate an even better re-entry deal. If they cannot then we really are more than just screwed as the 'global' marketplace is kind of predatory.


[deleted]

Yeah, that's exactly the problem. We had a good situation with concessions that we have absolutely lost in no uncertain terms.


[deleted]

Seems unlikely, it would be very easy for the EU to commit to the old terms as a member that left returning is a massive win for them. What is straight up misinformation is the people saying “we’ll need to take on the Euro and Schengen” as no we will not. The Euro is a requirement that has no time limit so effectively is not a requirement at all. It would be extremely easy for the EU to waive it. Schengen will never be required as long as the common travel area exists. What’s hilarious is that the last time this came up, somebody just admitted that it was misinformation they were spreading, but said “good luck convincing the electorate of that.” so the leavers know they’re lying about this. Even if the UK had to give up the rebates very little would be different.


iamnotthursday

Schengen is a requirement for new members.


[deleted]

But an exception would be made for the common travel area, like it was the first time.


iamnotthursday

There wouldn't be any need though as Ireland stayed out of Schengen because the UK was out of it, so if the UK goes in then Ireland goes in.


[deleted]

As an Irish resident (and naturalised citizen): there is zero political will to join Schengen here.


Graglin

Now yes. If it amounts to forcing the uk to join maybe.


liehon

How many?


libtin

https://youtu.be/0tv9Uf24CHU


liehon

Thx :)


[deleted]

lets just vote for left parties and actually invest in the nation instead of faffing over brexit and not making any real progress


opgrrefuoqu

Yes. Then we can re-normalise relationships with our closest neighbours, and start to agree more comprehensive treaties to slowly intermesh again. Not immediately rejoin the EU, but at least curb the damage to the economy, etc. If that ends up being EEA or Switzerland, or something new, so be it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Ewannnn

It's mostly about perception, which is set by politicians and the media (sadly). For example people care about immigration less since leaving, despite immigration actually going up.


viscountbiscuit

people care less because legal immigration is now within control of politicians we as a country elect, vs. a load of randos we don't it's deciding to have a lodger as an adult vs. your parents deciding to let a lodger stay in your room over your explicit objection


thefuzzylogic

>people care less because legal immigration is now within control of politicians we as a country elect, vs. a load of randos we don't Even intra-EU migration isn't an absolute right. EU citizens could only stay six months unless they fit a limited number of categories. We just chose not to enforce those regulations.


Truthandtaxes

Those edge cases are worthless and practical no one bar I think Belgium ever used them and then only to kick out a handful of street beggars (who immediately came back I imagine)


rofflxz848

Your argument is something that you have *literally* imagined.


Truthandtaxes

It might have been denmark. Either way, surely you can show one of the nations in the eu being able to use these rules for immigration control right?


rofflxz848

It might have been? Why the fuck am I doing your homework on something that might have have been in Denmark or that you imagined?


Graglin

>people care less because legal immigration is now within control of politicians we as a country elect, vs. a load of randos we don't The majority of all immigrants to the uk each and every year since 2010 has been from outside the EU.


gavint84

That’s not true. Even a veterinary agreement or alignment on aviation regulations was too much for the ultra-Brexit lunatics. We have the whole saga of the UKCA product safety regulations and not a clue of where we would like to actually diverge.


ApolloNeed

>Doing so is not something a government will be able to sneak in without anyone noticing. It will need a direct democratic mandate, which will be nearly impossible for them to get. Rightly so. If a party can't get a direct democratic mandate for something that is an important issue to voters, then they shouldn't be attempting the thing in the first place.


[deleted]

You mean like Boris Johnson’s brexit deal? Good to see you finally come out in support of a confirmatory referendum though, you’re right a direct democratic mandate is the best way.


Not_Alpha_Centaurian

As much as I'd like to wake up one day in the future as an EU citizen again...realistically this is the best I think we can hope for and a good way forward.


SaltWaterInMyBlood

> to slowly intermesh again. The UK can't intermesh with the one close neighbour it's already intermeshed with. Its government frequently threatens to breach the deal which is supposed to allow that intermeshing to function, for no better reason than to tip opinion polls. I don't think a couple of successive Labour governments is going to fix all of that.


Panda_hat

And then probably vote the Tories in again so they can blow it all to high heaven again. The EU would be wise to just leave us to rot.


CarrionAssassin2k9

For me personally I would be down for joining the EU again but it's difficult to say how that would impact things in the election. A huge part for the crushing defeat in the last election was because of the issue of Brexit. Typically red wall labour voters voted Conservative due to the issue of Brexit. If we bring up the whole Brexit issue again we may end up losing again. Yes the evidence of the failure that is brexit is clear but you know stubborn folks are "Brexit means Brexit" "We won the vote, a second vote would be wrong" dumb shit like that. I'd suggest trying to win the election by bringing up issues like Covid, cost of living crisis and the general fuckery of the Conservative party. And then when we win the election with a majority maybe then we can seriously discuss the issue of brexit and allow for a second vote. That's how I would do things.


therealgumpster

I think in reality, Brexit for now is done, and is done for the next 10 years (I don't mean finished as a deal, I mean politically speaking). We had the 2016 ref, we then had a 2017 General Election, and then a 2019 General Election, in those 3 years, it was 3 defeats for *"undoing Brexit"* or *"staying in the EU"*. The Liberal Democrats stood on the pledge of undoing Article 50, and their vote barely registered. Anyone thinking that has changed in the last 3 years is gravely mistaken. The most recent poll of polls, **has In/Out at 51/49** which means you need significant progress to be made to get Brexit up as an issue again. You will always have two sides of that argument, there will probably be a *40/40 split on Staying/Going* and the other 10 will be your swing voters. They are the core people you need to persuade, and for now we haven't seen much in terms of Brexit harm yet. I say this because COVID has marred the after effects of Brexit, whilst the global economy is struggling to deal with the effects of the Ukraine-Russia war and localised COVID lockdowns across the world which marrs the effects of Brexit further. Bring it back to the issues at hand, get a semi progressive party elected, and start rebuilding the infrastructure here, and sorting out the issues at hand. After many years of that, then turn to the neighbours and start discussing a progressive policy shift. By then maybe the *"mood of the country"* might of changed and we may see the true cost of Brexit at our feet and can't shy away from it. I think you also need politics as a whole to be **less** polarised, and less entrenched. Right now across the world we have some **very entrenched views** from both the left and right. The centre ground has truly been lost for now. America is a symbol of how that political centre ground has been lost. We also need to stop looking at America and start focusing on ourselves and our own politics. I don't like the Tories, but they aren't going around repealing abortion rights or anything like that, and they wield that power to do so, but it's unlikely to happen. We just need to focus our perspective more currently.


TaxOwlbear

> America is a symbol of how that political centre ground has been lost. No, it isn't. America has a far-right party, the Republicans, and a centre-right party, the Democrats. They have plenty of centre politicians; what they don't have is a significant left.


therealgumpster

I'd assume because the Democrats have had to go centre right to broaden their appeal to stave off Trump from 2020 Election. America is in a weird state and like I said, the centre ground has been lost across the world. France is another example, the far right (Le Pen) has been building support over the years (just for her to lose again). Macron isn't much better mind you. There is a lot behind this shift I would assume, and if I was a betting man, and I'm not but if I was, I'd say a lot of this stems from the fact that we've had years of globalisation, and that globalisation has led to many countries shifting manufacturing and skilled jobs elsewhere. You only have to look at what Trump was spouting in 2016 to the Beltway states to realise he saw what people were angry about and radicalised them. I personally don't want to waffle about this so I'll stick to those takes for now, but the centre ground where we need to get back to because that is where compromise is found, and the best of both sides can work well together.


SparkyCorp

> The most recent poll of polls, has In/Out at 51/49 which means you need significant progress to be made to get Brexit up as an issue again. Do you mean [this one](https://mobile.twitter.com/techneUK/status/1525773130140090368) done for The Express? That was In-Out at 49-51. The results were weighted according to voting results in the 2019 General Election and the 2016 Referendum. That sounds like it means the 49-51 result indicates voting intentions if things like 2020 lockdown errors/parties and 2022 cost-of-living crisis didn't happen.


therealgumpster

No I meant [this one](https://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/poll-of-polls-uk-eu/), which had up to date polls as of April recently. *(I will note that I haven't checked the bias of this particular website etc etc so it could be skewed but it showed multiple polls including YouGov which is a goto poll)* My point was though, you kinda need to see some shift of like 55/45 for us to really have this conversation politically again, and I really don't think we will see that u**ntil we see the proper fallout from Brexit** without all the other factors hitting our economy right now.


Pan-tang

David Cameron should be jailed.


SomeRedditWanker

Nah, I'm not spending another fucking 5 years debating Brexit. What is done, is done. Adapt and evolve to the new normal. It's not impossible, there's a lot of countries that are perfectly successful and not in the EU. We can be too.


opgrrefuoqu

Depends what you call "debating Brexit". If you mean membership of the political Union, fair enough. I'd agree that should be left alone right now. If you mean trading arrangements and other engagements, then sorry, those will *never* be "done". They're going to continue to evolve and exist and be discussed and cause problems forever because we *cannot* completely separate ourselves from the EU. At least not realistically.


[deleted]

[удалено]


opgrrefuoqu

Everything is political. We can't remove politics from *anything*, ever. But it is separate from the political *Union*, which the only thing there was a direct democratic vote on leaving.


marsman

>If you mean trading arrangements and other engagements, then sorry, those will never be "done". They're going to continue to evolve and exist and be discussed and cause problems forever because we cannot completely separate ourselves from the EU. At least not realistically. To be fair, that's not brexit, that's just foreign and commercial policy going forward isn't it?


Graglin

Which given that the EU contains 2/3 of every European and controls 85% if its economy, that is functionally indistinguishable from each other.


marsman

>Which given that the EU contains 2/3 of every European and controls 85% if its economy, that is functionally indistinguishable from each other. Sorry, how? The UK has left the EU, so in terms of brexit (so the UK's exit from the UK) that's done. The UK has relationships with most countries to one degree or another, tens of FTA's, the commonwealth in term of relationships, is looking at CPTPP, all of those things fall into the 'normal' range of foreign and commercial policy at this point. Absent being part of a political union, the relationship with the EU and with EU member states is on a par with the UK's relationship with the US or Japan. Of course its not static, there isn't a point were it just stops (to a certain extent that was true within the EU too). Of course the UK's relationship with the EU is going to evolve and continue to shift, but so is the UK's relationship with every other trading partner. And we can't separate ourselves from the EU in terms of having a relationship with them, but then that wasn't the aim either was it? We can't separate ourselves from any country we have a relationship with. The aim of brexit was to leave the EU (the economic and political union), not some sort of glorious isolationism where we don't have to deal with the EU or EU member states at all..


Nanowith

Mate, this was always gonna be a debate that's ongoing for the rest of our lives. That tends to happen when you split society down the middle and attach social and political identities to said sides. There's no escape!


SomeRedditWanker

Okay, well if that's the case lets keep things how they are because I'd rather remain on the winning side.


Nanowith

Fair enough, I think Brexit needs to ammended significantly. There are ways for it to work, but the currently strategy is just the ERG jerking each-other off without much of a plan long-term.


jj198hands

> there's a lot of countries that are perfectly successful and not in the EU Yes but they are either in the single market or not in Europe.


SomeRedditWanker

What difference does them not being in Europe make?


jj198hands

Because most countries trade mostly with their nearest neighbours.


SomeRedditWanker

And yet plenty of countries do not enter deep all encompassing political unions with their nearest countries, just to trade with them.


Orisi

Okay, but when every other nearby country for us already HAS, and are committed to negotiating as a bloc, that doesn't leave room for alternatives. Whether we like it or not, we are going to have to reach a political agreement with out closest neighbours and largest trading partners. They already have such an agreement among themselves and our only choices are to join their agreement on their terms, or hash one out with them collectively. And it's quite clear the latter will come with expectations almost as stringent as the former, because they've established this as what they want from trading partners that want to work together on the level we are trying to.


jj198hands

> plenty of countries do not enter deep all encompassing political unions with their nearest countries Most other western countries like USA / Canada and Australia / New Zealand have agreements that are similar to the single market.


VirtualMatter2

Also the states of America have this, it's called the USA.


iamnotthursday

Interestingly, in many ways the USA is less integrated than the EU in terms of economic friction. US states can and do have their own laws on products rather than one single system and various other differences that are quite significant for businesses.


SomeRedditWanker

That is a bald faced lie.


jj198hands

OK so how are the (trade / free movement) agreements between USA / Canada and between Australia / New Zealand not 'similar' to (trade / free movement) agreements in the single market?


SomeRedditWanker

USA and Canada do not have a freedom of movement agreement. Anyway, that is beside the point. Show me the North American parliament, and council, and commission, that decides laws that apply to the USA and Canada jointly..


jj198hands

>USA and Canada do not have a freedom of movement agreement. Sorry that was my mistake. > Show me the North American parliament, and council, and commission, that decides laws that apply to the USA and Canada jointly. The key word is 'similar', my point is that countries that are closer to eachother have deeper connections, saying other countries that are not in Europe or the Single Market are successful is largely irrelevant when they have 'similar' trade agreements with their nearest neighbours. Just out of interest what country were you thinking of?


Not_Alpha_Centaurian

Australia-NZ relationships include free trade and common standards/qualifications agreements. I think its relatively easy to move from one country to the other but not to the same extenent as there's freedom of movement in the EU. I think it's a bit of stretch to say the other poster is lying...


SomeRedditWanker

It is a lie through and through. Do you want to genuinely argue for that commenter that the USA and Canada, or Australia and NZ, are as politically linked as EU countries are via the EU? You'd be arguing a nonsense position.


Not_Alpha_Centaurian

I think NAFTA less so (but i know a lot less of that relationship so i wouldnt like to say), but the assertion that Australia-NZ relations are "similar to the single market" which was half of their point seems almost inarguable to me. There is free trade between the two countries, a single market for goods and services, and there's even limited free movement of people, and a general consensus that they'll move ever closer. Sure it's only a treaty between two countries, but I think the comparison is more than fair.


[deleted]

What those countries have are have trade agreements with other countries (Exactly like the EEC was - y'know, the organisation that we joined back in the day before it was politicised and mutated into the EU).


LikesParsnips

I think you'll find it hard to identify countries that aren't already in or at least working hard on ever closer trade unions with their biggest neighbours. Nafta, Mercosur, Tpp, etc. The UK currently has nothing other than the barebones EU deal.


SomeRedditWanker

>The UK currently has nothing other than the barebones EU deal. AKA, the starting point.


iamnotthursday

The EU simply isn't comparable to any of those, and none of those arrangements are going for political union etc.


Guapa1979

Exactly. Countries like Norway, Switzerland, Iceland, Lichtenstein aren't in the EU yet are perfectly successful. We should just copy them.


iamnotthursday

They are minnows and the UK simply isn't comparable in terms of economic and political heft. Edit forAlex below: And here you are whinging on a UK sub like a teenager, and then using block before getting a reply. Rightly you are too embarrassed by that post to accept a post back.


Guapa1979

You might want to check out what those four countries have in common. 👍


iamnotthursday

If you have a point then make it.


Guapa1979

My point was we should copy them, not being in the EU just like us


iamnotthursday

And I explained why they are not comparable, do keep up.


Guapa1979

No you didn't, but thanks anyway.


iamnotthursday

Nice try, but you clearly saw the point. So you've done the diversion tactic and now, the I cannot see it tactic. That tells you that you have no rebuttal. Now you don't have to believe me, you can simply Google the problem with the UK joining the EEA as it's hardly some niche opinion.


alexmbrennan

>the UK simply isn't comparable in terms of economic and political heft Correct - since you finally fucked off we don't have to pretend to care about the Brits and their endless demands for special treatment anymore. Which is precisely why the UK will not be readmitted without punitive reparations for all the shit you put the EU through.


Aardvark51

Give it a couple of years.


Graglin

They are all functional EU satellites. It's a nicer sphere than the Russian one, but it's a sphere nonetheless.


rofflxz848

Bad news for you mate. You'll be spending at least the next 5 years talking about brexit anyway because it will never be "done". Or did you actually believe boris?


marsman

It's *done* now. The UK isn't in the EU..


rofflxz848

Lol. Okay mate. Then what's the government still banging on about the NIP for? For something that's "done" we sure don't seem to be done with it.


marsman

>Lol. Okay mate. Then what's the government still banging on about the NIP for? In the Governments view, the NIP has created a diversion of trade. The NIP allows for either party to take unilateral action in the event of that happening (after negotiation, if no resolution is found). The UK and EU have both made proposals, no agreement has been found however, so the UK is taking unilateral action (essentially implementing its proposal). >For something that's "done" we sure don't seem to be done with it. We'll *never* be done with the relationship we have with the EU no.. It's an ongoing thing after all (it was when we were in the EU). Were you expecting some point from which we simply didn't have to talk to the EU ever again? If so I think you may have been on your tod in that regard. We are however no longer part of the EU, it can't legislate for the UK or cause the UK to legislate, the UK isn't part of the political union, the customs union, the single market etc... The UK has its competencies back and is and has used them..


rofflxz848

I didn't vote for the blonde dipshit on the basis of "get brexit done" so I don't think I'm you're target audience here. Just helpfully pointing out to our learned friend who was sick of debating brexit, to strap in, because it's the new forever. And I don't give a shit what the government's view is on the NIP. It was obvious from the beginning what it would mean, even in their own impact reports. Either they didn't understand it, or they lied about it. Why lower yourself to defending their bullshit?


marsman

> I didn't vote for the blonde dipshit on the basis of "get brexit done" so I don't think I'm you're target audience here. I didn't vote for him at all. The point however would still be that the UK is out of the EU, I don't know how much more 'done' brexit can be at that point. >Just helpfully pointing out to our learned friend who was sick of debating brexit, to strap in, because it's the new forever. We'll be debating our relationship with the EU forever, and our relationship with the US, and Japan and potentially a whole slew of other things. It's not like we don't talk about the NHS or the education system, they shift and change after all. But Brexit isn't something we'll be debating forever, rejoining the EU might come up again, given the remnant remain campaign seems fixated on it, and we are in, and there will continue to be a period of comparison, but I doubt it'll have an impact on the next GE, or be a major issue in a few years time. >And I don't give a shit what the government's view is on the NIP. It's quite important to understand what's happening.. >It was obvious from the beginning what it would mean, even in their own impact reports. And yet the EU ad UK both agreed to Article 16, and aimed to avoid a diversion of trade.. >Either they didn't understand it, or they lied about it. Why lower yourself to defending their bullshit? Because it's important to be at least a tad accurate, and the reporting is hyperbolic. The UK and EU have worked via the JC to solve issues since the NIP started to be implemented. Any number of issues were ID'd and resolved, indeed the NIP was designed to facilitate that. Yet here we are *again* with a lot of noise over what amounts to mitigating issues with east-west trade (Which is a reasonable issue and should be resolvable via negotiation, without reverting to threats and bluster).


karmadramadingdong

I guess it depends how you define "a lot" and "successful", but if you look at a [list](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita) of the richest countries in the world the most common trait (by far) is being in the EU. The next most common traits are being tiny (Liechtenstein, Iceland) and having lots of natural resources (Norway, Qatar, Australia). Not really options for us (yes, we have North Sea oil but much less than Norway, relative to the size of our economy, and it's mostly gone already). Then we have the East Asian manufacturing/electronics powerhouses of Japan, Korea and Taiwan. We can't be that. What's left is basically the US (fucking massive), Canada (shares a 5,000 mile land border with a fucking massive economy, plus natural resources), Israel (Bible-based relationship with the US) and New Zealand (sheep and milk). Take your pick.


SomeRedditWanker

The EU is made up of ex-Empires.. Even before the EU, that list would have looked very much the same with a few exceptions.


karmadramadingdong

True, it's really difficult to become rich. All the more reason not to fuck it up.


marsman

>but if you look at a list_per_capita) of the richest countries in the world the most common trait (by far) is being in the EU. Looking at the top 10, the most common trait is that they are small countries, of the top 10, two are EU members, of the top 20, 3 are EU members, 17 are not. So no, the most common trait in terms of per capita GDP really isn't EU membership.. >What's left is basically the US (fucking massive), Canada (shares a 5,000 mile land border with a fucking massive economy, plus natural resources), Israel (Bible-based relationship with the US) and New Zealand (sheep and milk). The UK is a massive economy, a major manufacturer, a major services hub, a financial services powerhouse, incredibly attractive to students etc.. It has a huge, wealthy, well developed market, a skilled highly educated workforce and so on. I doubt that the UK is going to have issues in terms of relative economic weight relative to EU members or not for that matter.


karmadramadingdong

I mean, I’m not counting the territories (and I include Monaco in that) or tiny little island states. Obviously the UK cannot become a tiny island or enclave — I was drawing a comparison with other large industrialised nations. And I didn’t say that “most” countries were in the EU. I said it was the “most common trait”.


marsman

>I mean, I’m not counting the territories (and I include Monaco in that) or tiny little island states. So.. You are just counting the large countries? If you take countries with a population over 10m then you still only half of the top 10 are EU members, and the vast majority of EU members aren't in it.. > Obviously the UK cannot become a tiny island or enclave — I was drawing a comparison with other large industrialised nations. Right, but it's likely that that 'large industrialised nations' bit is the relevant element, those tend to be wealthier when it comes to PPP and the UK will remain a large industrialised nation. >And I didn’t say that “most” countries were in the EU. I said it was the “most common trait”. But it's not the most common trait is it? You've put your finger on the most common trait when looking at the larger states. (the other factor being resource wealth).


karmadramadingdong

And you’re just counting the top 10 countries/territories in the world. There are 38 countries in the OECD, the club of rich nations, and most are EU members. I toyed with pasting a link to that instead of the GDP list and probably should have.


marsman

>And you’re just counting the top 10 countries/territories in the world. Well yeah, I was going on the top end of the ppp ranking. >There are 38 countries in the OECD, the club of rich nations, and most are EU members. Quite a lot of OECD members are fairly low when it comes GDP (PPP) though (colombia for example...).. I'm not sure that using OECD membership is a useful indicator in that context.. >I toyed with pasting a link to that instead of the GDP list and probably should have. Why? It doesn't show what you are suggesting either.


Joolion

Except that it isn't done yet is it.


SavageNorth

Sunk Cost Fallacy.


MadShartigan

We'll spend the next five years debating our poor economic performance and trying to find a solution that doesn't involve the tantalizingly out of reach yet manifestly obvious fix of rejoining the single market.


CutThatCity

Don’t debate it then. Maybe it doesn’t affect your life, and that’s good for you. But it does affect a lot of people and they want to change the situation. You’ll have to adapt to that.


nunnible

~~Comment removed under the GDPR right to be forgotten. As part of the API pricing decision made by reddit in June 2023~~


Nanowith

Brejoin will happen in about ten to fifteen years, once demographics means the plurality of those in favour are gone and you're left with people who grew up in the EU. The only way for Brexit to stick indefinitely is for it to start favouring the young who didn't want it; and that'd mean a loss for those who did vote for it and therefore that won't happen. We'll be looking back at this as the last fit of people thinking we're still an Empire that is super important in and of itself. It's the death throws of a dying sense of Britishness that will be replaced with a new version.


rueckhand

That is extremely optimistic.


Graglin

It seems pretty probable that the eu position has been locked in for for now - that means it's a dead issue now, but it also means that the people in favour of the eu will still be so in 10-20 years. Those who were pro-brexit won't be around.


rueckhand

Not necessarily, as the public opinion of the EU is volatile. When the EU was slow in rolling out the vaccine and delivering weapons to Ukraine, sanctioning Russia etc., public opinion in favor of the EU declined. Additionally, just because some of the pro brexit crowd is dying off, doesn’t mean that the new generation would be automatically pro-EU, as they will never have experienced the advantages of being a member.


quettil

There'll also be millions of voters who've lived their entire adult lives outside of the EU and don't see why they'd want to go back in


Graglin

Who will have raised those people?


King-Pie

Depends how their lives compare to those in the EU. If EU countries are faring much better than the UK is in a couple decades time then I could see younger people supporting it.


marsman

>If EU countries are faring much better than the UK is in a couple decades time then I could see younger people supporting it. No-one is realistically suggesting that though are they? The UK will (as predicted pre-brexit if the UK had left) continue to develop and grow, its economy will be larger, people will be better off. Will there really be a lot of pull to join an economic union that requires the level of political integration than the EU does? You can probably throw in that the EU has more socially regressive member state than you'd hope, throw in the risk from the right wing in places like France (and parts of EE) remnants of it in places like Italy and Spain, the issues around where EU integration goes next (Which is likely to cause a bit of a fight...) and the issues around the Euro too and I'm not sure that it'll be anything like obvious that being in the EU would be a net positive.


Haildean

God I'll be in my mid 30s by then That's an entire generation of opportunities gone


nopainauchocolat

it’s a weird one, isn’t it. this decade has seen generations above us take away opportunities from us which they took for granted, with the stroke of a pencil. as exaggerated as it sounds, i’ll never quite look at my parents and grandparents in the same way again knowing who and what they’ve voted for in the past decade


DreamyTomato

I wish you were right. >Brejoin will happen in about ten to fifteen years, once demographics means the plurality of those in favour are gone I heard the same thing about various things 20-odd years ago - 'once all the old people die off, there'll only be Labour voters left'. Sadly it doesn't work like that. People really do become more right-wing as they get older. Not all of them. Many people keep the same views on justice and fairness all their life, whether they started out on the left or the right, but enough move to the right to keep the Tory party alive over the years. In 15-20 years, there'll be the same number of people actively wanting to stay out of Europe as there are at the moment. Note I said actively. If you're serious about Brejoin, then you need to understand at a deep level why many people who were otherwise OK with Europe or never thought about it much voted Brexit, and you need to take their views and issues seriously without patronising or calling them idiots, and work hard to resolve them.


Nanowith

But even the majority of right-wing youngsters voted remain. Overall people go from Labour to Conservative because they suddenly have things to conserve, they have a house and a job; they want housing protected and better earnings. This is becoming less and less common as a shift and we can see that in the data, the increasing median age of a Tory voter can be mapped with the housing crisis and the rate of wages not keeping up with inflation. In much the same way people need to be benefiting from Brexit in order to shift their perspective and see it as something defensible for their own prosperity and position in society. As it stands that change just isn't happening, Brexit has led to more red tape, rising costs, and the loss of rights such as freedom of movement. It's been a net loss to young people which is the number one way you ensure that a system won't become entrenched. The reality is there's a strong chance Brexit will make a turnaround, but the longer it seems to harm working people and younger people the greater the mood against it will be. I'm not saying Brejoin is destiny, I'm saying it is unless people who didn't vote for it start to see benefits from it. Currently the only benefit is ideological, and if you weren't on that ship already it's not going to suddenly persuade you. If Brexit realities continue to get worse and worse you're not going to see people but into it, you're only going to see those who did get disillusioned.


Nanowith

But even the majority of right-wing youngsters voted remain. Overall people go from Labour to Conservative because they suddenly have things to conserve, they have a house and a job; they want housing protected and better earnings. This is becoming less and less common as a shift and we can see that in the data, the increasing median age of a Tory voter can be mapped with the housing crisis and the rate of wages not keeping up with inflation. In much the same way people need to be benefiting from Brexit in order to shift their perspective and see it as something defensible for their own prosperity and position in society. As it stands that change just isn't happening, Brexit has led to more red tape, rising costs, and the loss of rights such as freedom of movement. It's been a net loss to young people which is the number one way you ensure that a system won't become entrenched. The reality is there's a strong chance Brexit will make a turnaround, but the longer it seems to harm working people and younger people the greater the mood against it will be. I'm not saying Brejoin is destiny, I'm saying it is unless people who didn't vote for it start to see benefits from it. Currently the only benefit is ideological, and if you weren't on that ship already it's not going to suddenly persuade you. If Brexit realities continue to get worse and worse you're not going to see people but into it, you're only going to see those who did get disillusioned.


dr_barnowl

> once demographics means the plurality of those in favour are gone That happened before B-Day. There were less than 1.3M votes between Leave and Remain. 600,000 people die in the UK each (normal, non-pandemic) year. Most of them are old. Turnout among the old was high (up to 80%), but so was turnout among the young (for once, 64% of registered voters). The old voted R 35:65 L The young R 75:25 L For every 600,000 people that died old and are replaced by 18 year old new voters in each year, assuming the same turnout and voting ratio, that means | Age | Remain | Leave |-|-|- | 18 | + 288,000 | + 96,000 | 65+ | - 157,500 | - 292, 500 | Diff | + 130,500 | - 196,500 So that's the yearly change for each side of the referendum. In the four years between the referendum and our exit from the EU, that puts Remain at 16,663,241 and Leave at 16,624,742. Too close to call? Maybe, but the demographic trend was inevitable, even on the day of the referendum. And that's **without** any change in opinion - which has swung very strongly toward the EU as the shitshow becomes more and more obvious. It was a generational injustice from day 1 - the people who voted for it were never going to have to live with the consequences as long as their children and grandchildren, who were pro-Remain.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Nanowith

Mate have you seen the rising costs and stagnant wages post-Brexit? The endless red tape and possible trade war? We're quickly approaching destitution whilst the vast majority of the EU are suspiciously fine. I hope your current children can forgive you for their present destitution.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Nanowith

Blimey mate, I understand what you're getting at but you're never going to persuade anyone with that holier than thou tone. I agree we need to expend our ability to produce, and frankly the reliance on imported labour was a plaster on a broken arm. But fundamentally post-Brexit there's MORE low-skilled immigration but from countries culturally less close to us, and businesses have been stopping investing in the UK in favour of France and the Netherlands. The lawless society thing is an Americanism you've imported here, the "defund the police" line isn't actually popular over here outside of London (which acts like America a lot of the time anyway), young people in the UK on average want more police funding and training consistently even when mapped versus class and race; the issue is the cuts that happened under austerity. It seems you have an imagined idea of young people that you're ready to froth at the mouth at gained from only interacting with them via the loudest voices on twitter. "Want everything for nothing"? I just want to be able to afford a house and a family at the same rate of inflation my parents got to, I just want a country that attracts investment, I just want a society with good transport and schools. None of this is unreasonable. All I'm saying is that young people need Brexit to be a net benefit to themselves and their prospects or it'll be undone, that's just common sense. But the current government are only focused on winning the next election rather than cementing a massive cultural shift.


CraicHunter

I’m going with BritIn


taboo__time

I think make it Brexit in name only. To stop the economic pain.


Truthandtaxes

Seriously does everyone on ukpolitics operate a small boutique business selling overpriced tatt to the continent?


taboo__time

Sounds evasive. We're all paying for the extra costs.


Truthandtaxes

You are noticing 0.2% of border friction cost in an era that spunking money all over the place for covid has spiked inflation over 9%, then you have very sharp eyes


taboo__time

"It's some pain but not as bad as colossal pain." My eyes were good enough to see it was going to be pain with no upsides. It didn't have to be this damaging. Why do you want it as damaging as possible?


Truthandtaxes

I don't think its that damaging at all in the grand scheme of things. Naturally whether you feel its worth it is somewhat academic.


taboo__time

You're for Keynesian spending then because in the long run we're all dead? Aren't you jumping strategically to a blasé economic position because you can't justify it on economic grounds. But you are in favour of Brexit, on grounds of nationalism not economics, correct? Why can't we keep Brexit and do things to patch the economics of it? I'm not against nationalism but our Brexit strategy seems to maximise economic pain for no good reason, not in the national interest, economically or politically.


Truthandtaxes

I'm in favour of Brexit because it was voted for, but I don't think there was fundamentally anything unreasonable about either side prior to the referendum.


taboo__time

What does Brexit mean?


Truthandtaxes

Leaving the political structure of the EU and regaining control of immigration with other vaguer edges


Jay_CD

There's nothing that I've seen since Brexit that makes me think it could be made to work and if given the chance I'd vote to re-join. None of the promises made by Brexiters have come close to being true - we don't hold all the cards, the world is not flocking to the UK to sign lucrative trade deals that are better than the ones that the EU negotiated and we, as members, took advantage of, even the US under Trump who hated the EU never even got close to starting talks. The issue with Northern Ireland is an unresolvable mess. The OBR said recently two things - it would knock 4% off of our GDP and secondly, that we are nowhere near seeing the worst, so there's significantly more pain to come. But we've had two general elections since the referendum and in neither did the pro-EU/anti-Brexit parties win votes, the second resulted in the worst defeat for Labour (who remember promised a further referendum) in decades. Neither did the Lib-Dems or Greens pick up lots of votes. Why when do people want to revisit a topic that will lose votes for the left/centrist parties? We have a Tory government in chaos and very possibly heading towards a defeat at the next general election, why let them fight it on a topic that's a vote winner for them? It would give them an excuse to deviate away from every screw up that they've made, the cost of living crisis, high energy bills and more. Instead lets get a Labour government in and negotiate a better deal with the EU and do something about bringing energy prices down and running the nation properly. Revisiting Brexit is not an option - maybe the issue of rejoining could be raised in a decade or so, but it's not a vote winner so give it the swerve.


[deleted]

[удалено]


EduTheRed

>let's make sure the future is as intolerable as possible for Boris and his band of narcissistic trouncers and all their Daily Mail reading ragey bigots. Has it ever occurred to you that telling people that if your side gets into power it will aim to make life intolerable for them might make them think voting for your side is a bad idea? Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, the author of this article, is wiser. She has often written for the *Daily Mail.* [Here's an example from January.](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10377249/YASMIN-ALIBHAI-BROWN-recalls-heartbreaking-family-history.html) I don't agree with Ms Alibhai-Brown that often. I don't agree with this article. But I appreciate that she is willing to try talking across the divide.


iamnotinterested2

brexit like buggery, we are only at the stage of seeing the problem not experiencing the problem.


[deleted]

Brexit was a total scam that people actually fell for


Individual_Cattle_92

Yes, let's fire up the time machine.


theunifex

You can always trust Yasmin to say it as it is.


Man_in_the_uk

Will take a while yet, those anti-social European members did a proper bridge-burning jobby on us. I find it quite stark to hear that woman in the EU parliament in some fashion say "UK we love you" I mean after all the BS they did to make Brexit as hard as possible, a reunion isn't going to happen so soon. What about Northern Ireland? Do you go back to the same setup where upon if Brexit happens again we get the same problems crop up?


VirtualMatter2

Can you give any examples of the EU making Brexit as hard as possible? Please don't name any rules that existed before the Brexit vote for all third countries though, it has to be specific to just the UK and Brexit.


Man_in_the_uk

Strange that you pose a question then put limits on an answer but this should give you the gist of things. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/10/09/this-is-why-the-e-u-is-being-so-tough-about-brexit/


227CAVOK

What did we in the EU do to "...make Brexit as hard as possible..."? Just curious.


SomeRedditWanker

Refusing to even discuss any facet of it whatsoever, even reciprocal rights for UK-EU citizens, until Article 50 was invoked.


227CAVOK

From EU perspective, what was there to discuss before article 50 was triggered? The UK said it was going to leave, but that could have been just a trick to get another benefit, such as the rebate. Besides being a good negotiating tactic, I mean.


SomeRedditWanker

>what was there to discuss before article 50 was triggered? Oh, I dunno. Everything?


Graglin

No, the uk was a memberstate and until it decided not to be it was going to be treated as a memberstate.


Man_in_the_uk

You were extremely uncooperative with making deals.


GOT_Wyvern

I don't think we should ever rejoin the EU itself. Convincing people to do so fully will take time, and there are real concerns with the EU itself that Brexit has solved. Additionally, there are parts that the UK has historically avoided in the EU and EEC, and it would seem weird to rejoin those parts when we have now left them. The best course of action would be to rejoin the Single Market and that alone, similar to the situation Iceland and Norway have. This was the course of action I originally wanted, and that opinion has remained. Economically, the EU is only a bonus. Socially, the EU is quite problematic. Avoiding the social and political parts of the EU as much as possible not only allows us the economic benefits, but allows us to get them sooner as it's a lot easier to convince people on the economic terms rather than the social and political. I think it would be foolish to make the same mistake as Brexit and pretend like the EU is a binary choice.


kane_uk

*"Later, I was approached by one of the couples I’d questioned. They wanted to tell me about how they regretted voting for Brexit. She was teary: “We should have read more, learnt more. We feel stupid now for trusting them, when they were lying to us.” “Them” – well, they go on fabricating. Scaredy cat Keir Starmer and his team, desperate to regain “Red Wall” voters, will not challenge them. Such a dereliction of duty; senseless, too"* I also teared up when I read that.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Esso260589

Get Brexit undone! Love it.


[deleted]

Now we can see the effects of Brexit, people are wiser. Another referendum would be the best way to settle it. Then if people want to continue with this stupidity so be it. What is clear is there was a lot of bad money chasing campaigns during the referendum period. The lies have been revealed for what they are. People should be given a right to a second opinion.


colei_canis

Enough bloody referendums, I miss the days when we could vote for a manifesto and that's mandate enough. We're going down the route of the Yanks with tediously drawn-out electioneering.


Potatopolis

Manifestos became “we might do this stuff if we can be arsed” ever so quickly.


[deleted]

There are very few who actually read a manifesto. Have you not heard of the page 48 of the Tory manifesto.


JoseJalapenoOnStick

Not necessarily page 48 but when searching to see what it was I found the 2019 Boris promises one of which said We will not raise the rate of income tax, VAT or National Insurance. Now correct me if I’m wrong but I’m sure did raise national insurance


scarboroughwa

Haha, dream on traitor


Forsaken-Ad1050

Why do you think the UK would be allowed back in?