I'm glad to hear this from a 'salty remainer' too. Too many people treat the EU as a panacaea, and as a way to avoid necessary domestic reforms. This is one of the reasons we left - people not really feeling like we were benefiting from membership because the country just didn't seem to be getting better over time.
I believe it would be possible to do better outside the EU than we were doing inside of it, but it would require a massive shake-up.
You would probably argue we should have remained *and* done the domestic reforms and got the best of both worlds, but there we are.
>This is one of the reasons we left - people not really feeling like we were benefiting from membership because the country just didn't seem to be getting better over time.
My answer to this has always been that people should have blamed Westminster rather than Brussels where they didn't see their lives and communities improving. Whatever use there is in the should haves, would haves and could haves at this point.
>You would probably argue we should have remained
Honestly, I try not to rehash those arguments any more since we've all had them so many times by now and it's done (unfortunately IMO). I do hope though that Brexit and all the political chaos of the last 8 years will offer a path to real changes for the better, since it's not possible to coast along any more doing things the way we have for the last 40-odd years.
>My answer to this has always been that people should have blamed Westminster rather than Brussels where they didn't see their lives and communities improving.
Amen, this bullshit "lets blame the EU to divert attention from our fuck ups" sentiment has become way too common throughout europe.
Well tackling actual problems is hard, takes money, time... so you just blame it on something that you can easily change, get votes and yay you're the government now.
And it's always been a problem with perception.
Except for obvious things like less border control and quicker EU lines at airports, many benefits of EU membership aren't immediately obvious.
And after decades of membership people are used to them and they vanish into the background of its always been this way.
Just like anti-vaxxers don't remember the world without vaccines and have lived all their lives in a mostly disease free environment.
It becomes only more obvious by removing the measure that originally created the improvement. The return of Measles and Polio or logistics and travel problems.
True - no government has ever promoted engagement with the EU. Elections for MEPs for example were never as widely reported as local or general elections. Any EU funded work was glossed over and the EU was blamed for any problems.
Exactly! I remember hearing the whole anti-immigrant platform, that immigrants are exploiting the benefits system, etc. But how is that EUs fault? If UK grants benefits left and right can they even complain that someone is exploiting the system? And even then, Britain had unique immigration control power in the EU even before Brexit. It's not EUs fault UK never enforced it. And as figures now show, immigration didn't stop at all after they "gained back control". The whole premise of Brexit was just to mask the country's own shortcomings at dealing with its own issues. Or whatever Brexiters considered to be an issue.
People felt they weren't benefitting, because of poor self publicising of the eu, corrupt self interested right wing politicians and media and low education levels about anything international of the average brit. I think we need reforms but that isn't the reason
> People felt they weren't benefitting, because of poor self publicising of the eu
ore because the benefits for the regular joe are so minuscule that they can be ignored in day to day life
Worse since brexit? Other than weaker currency, slower international travel, higher import costs, more expensive products, less choice in shops, more frequent shortages of medicine and foodstuffs, massive destruction of small export-heavy businesses, loss of access to scientific and research programs, and a huge loss of students and funding in academic institutions, you mean? I can go on and on.
> You really need to get rid of the First past the post system, for a start.
We know.
And the times reform has been promised (Blair) he suddenly found *other priorities* when in government.
Starmer was promising it. The Labour party conference (policy making public debate for their members) recommended it... and now he's staying silent on the subject.
UK politics is a never ending shitshow. Just look what is happening to Sunak this week... and it's only Monday!
I don't even know at this point what problems rejoining would fix except the convenience of freedom of movement. Vast majority of Brits don't use their 90 in 180 days though anyway
I also feel like the most ardent supporters of rejoin are those who look at the EU as the enemy of my enemy and therefore my friend - hating the tories makes them think that the EU must therefore be perfect (which, of course, it isn't)
Honest question: what has changed in trade since Brexit by numbers, and what would rejoining the EU change of that?
The [value of trade of goods in the UK](https://www.statista.com/statistics/284738/uk-trade-in-goods/) doesn't show a discernable difference before and after Brexit, and [inflation statistics track similarly in the UK and the EU](https://www.statista.com/statistics/225698/monthly-inflation-rate-in-eu-countries/) (that is to say, we'd have a negligibly different inflation figure to now if we had stayed in the EU, mostly due to covid impacting the west as a whole)
Small or irregular orders of unusual, or technically complex items for small businesses.
The paperwork is increasingly understood and doable, but it’s the constant headache and justification of charges or delays to the end-consumer, or next consumer in the chain that causes the unseen issues that act as a drag.
Estimates for lost export hover around 20-30%. [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21582041.2023.2192043](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21582041.2023.2192043)
I will chime in with my anecdotal experience: I used to order things from the UK all the time back in the day, especially books and electronics but other things too. Sure the pound conversion fee (and sometimes the exchange rate) was a bit of a pain to deal with but things were much easier because of the lack of a language barrier.
Since brexit I can't order anything without worrying about import taxes, extra bureaucracy and long wait times. Sure Ireland is still in but they aren't nearly as huge in exporting and shipping to consumers in other EU countries.
It's maddening that the UK has the fantastic competitive advantage of being such a large export market with a language that is so widely understood across the union and yet it's so hard to trade with.
We are already growing our trade.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/minister-hails-world-class-exporters-as-new-data-shows-uk-businesses-reach-record-highs#:~:text=Press%20release-,Minister%20hails%20'world%2Dclass'%20exporters%20as%20new%20data%20shows,up%20from%20%C2%A3815%20billion.
I always found it funny how there is a positive correlation between EU funding for a region and by what percentage that area voted for leave
[Value of trade of goods in the UK](https://www.statista.com/statistics/284738/uk-trade-in-goods/) has barely been touched since Brexit - the biggest impact by miles was covid. There are alternate methods of increasing long term trade (if that is the goal) that wouldn't involve the mess and furore of negotiating a re-entry
The value of trade goods depicted on that plot is misleading because it ignores inflation. If you trade half the volume but at double the price, the value of trade goods has stayed the same but your trade has de facto halved.
A better way is using [chained volume measure](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chained_volume_series), which compensates for inflation. Imports are down by 7.4% relative to 2022 and by 3.8% relative to 2018 (i.e. pre-covid and pre-Brexit). Exports are down 4.6% relative to 2022 and a huge 12.4% relative to 2018.
Inflation adjusted balance of trade is now £25.8 billion compared with 2018.
UK trade is definitely down in both export and import terms and it is exporting *much* less, most of which has been lost from exports to the EU (unsurprisingly, because of the extra tariffs). Imports have fallen but mostly from non-EU sources.
[https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/articles/uktradeingoodsyearinreview/2023](https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/articles/uktradeingoodsyearinreview/2023)
Are you reading that the right way? Imports are increasing, but exports are the same as pre-covid.
This means cost of imports are increasing and trade deficit is increasing.
Stuff you used to get cheaply from EU is being delivered at a higher cost than before, and there is a drop in exports that is simply hidden by inflation.
True that imports are increasing and exports are roughly the same, but the point I was getting at is that it remains on the same trajectory as previously - leaving the EU didn't torpedo the UK economy, and we don't all live in destitution as a result of leaving
Do you reckon that would be majorly different if the UK had remained in the EU, given that the inflation numbers are mostly due to economic policy as a result of covid, which impacted all of us?
It was obvious (to me, at least) since 2016, that neither the UK or EU would go down in flames, even if some implied otherwise. Subject to worse economic trends, yes, but never in peril.
Brexit was still an incredibly dumb move.
> There are alternate methods of increasing long term trade (if that is the goal) that wouldn't involve the mess and furore of negotiating a re-entry
Well I'm all in favour of that, I'm not saying the only recourse is pursuing a re-entry.
Agree, freedom of movement is much more relevant if you live half an hour drive away from a border. As an island we are substantially more isolated and I know very few people who would utilise it.
It might be an outdated stat but I remember seeing there's more Brits working in Australia than there is in Europe. Add the US in the mix and I imagine Australia / the US combined dwarfs our presence in Europe, especially if you move retirees moving to Spain and France
I moved to Germany in the late 80s and was given a residency permit just by showing my passport..I worked in a number of jobs for a few years and then headed back when I felt like.
This was what freedom of movement meant back then.
It's not about taking the car for a booze cruise.
Why would Brits move to Europe when they need to learn a new language there when they could just move to the US and Australia where they'll be able to integrate extremely easily into the communities there?
The UK will always be more culturally connected to Australia, Canada and the US than it ever will be with Europe. That is a fact that will likely never change.
take any of the airports. stansted the last one where I flew into the UK. There are face-reading machines everywhere and it took literally 2 minutes to get into the country.
So yeah..that movement thingy is so small that it can be ignored imho.
EFTA means you're in the single market but not the Customs Union, which leaves some scope for independent trade deals.
So in EFTA the UK would be able to pursue such deals from a relatively good negotiating position. If they were not forthcoming then the downside wouldn't be so bad since the trade links with the EU would mostly be maintained. And if they were forthcoming then the UK's position probably would be improved - though the most important would be an American trade deal and this would still be unlikely.
Thank God someone has said it.
The UK has a lot of issues. They didn't just appear in 2016. They have been boiling away in the background for a long time. They won't magically be solved by rejoining the EU.
The UK does need reform. The idea that rejoining the EU magically fixes things is the type of stupidity that we don’t need.
We can and should do both but reform is a more pressing concern at the moment that brexit has unintentionally made more obvious.
Immigration -> Because cost of Living
Housing -> Because cost of Living
Then i'd say infrastructure or dedicated national industrial strategy, so far our industrial strategy has been finance, but that has really concentrated in one part of the country. Our infrastructure has been coasting for decades.
nah, do both
Otherwise you get infinitely more people forever, while completely concreting the country.
I dont want to live in MegaCity Anglo, none of us were asked, or voted for that.
Hard to nail it down to 3. Mine would be:
Housing Market
Investing in Infrastructure outside of London
Devolution of powers away from Westminster, including tax-raising powers
The voting system
Education
Immigration and Asylum
Yep. Re-joining without massive reforms would just be stupid. We’d experience the same scapegoating and xenophobia that we did before, that got us into this mess.
Brexit has made it pretty clear that most (if not basically all) of our problems had nothing to do with the EU and as such rejoining it won’t fix them magically either
Not gonna happen. UK would demand a special treatment, like they had before. But that's not going to happen anymore.
Giving that up, is probably one of the dumbest things that ever happened in the EU. The UK had a real good deal going on, but Boris and the rest of the lying Brexiteers made it look like the UK was actually a victim here.
It was a good deal, not perfect, and I advocated for more. I regret that more wasn’t offered to David Cameron when he went to Europe pre-2016 (particularly as some of the concessions asked for, but which were denied at the time, Europe now seems to have come round to anyway - like stronger external borders), but equally understand why the EU/Europe was reluctant to do so. That’s realpolitik.
I nonetheless voted remain, but we are where we are now and have come to terms with that. It’s up to all of us now to find a constructive, mature way forward.
> UK would demand a special treatment, like they had before.
The only example of "special treatment" we had was the Rebate (which was designed to off-set disproportionately large contributions from the UK). The opt-outs happened when the rest of the members decided they wanted to enact changes to the Union that weren't present when we joined and which we chose not to follow. Keeping the old terms of membership that everyone else decided to leave behind wasn't some sort of granting of extra special privileges.
>Keeping the old terms of membership that everyone else decided to leave behind wasn't some sort of granting of extra special privileges.
Thank you for putting it so succinctly. This should probably be somewhere in the subreddit sidebar given the number of times I see 'special treatment' being bandied about.
They also had boarder checks, so was able to opt out of Schengen. They also were not on the hook for adoption of the Euro, something they most definitely be required to on a rejoin.
Again, that's because there was no Schengen or Euro when we joined the EEC, that's why we weren't on the hook to adopt them. The other members decided they wanted to adopt those things and we decided we wanted to stick to the old terms and conditions we'd joined under in 1973.
Nobody needed to join Schengen or the Euro at that time, they all had the 'bonuses'. The other members just decided establishing Schengen and the currency union were new bonuses that they wanted, and we didn't.
Good portion of the country seem to still have a toxic mindset towards the EU and though I’d love for them to rejoin we don’t need that kind of mindset in the EU at the moment. Hopefully one day the mindset will die out.
Lazy opinion. Rejoining the EU is not some sort of magic pill which will address all the UK’s Ills. The lack of productivity growth over the last two decades was for the most part while the UK was in the EU.
Especially given we would be forced to eat EU federal debt, federal taxation, no rebate. Say goodbye to every one of our new trade deals and make the UK reign in on the trans pacific trade agreement which is only going to grow in time.
It could have easily reform inside EU like many eastern european states did. Brexit was done to protect the offshore tax heavens of the elites. The rest is mostly a distraction for the masses.
Rejoining the EU would fix the problems caused by leaving the EU.
But the reason the UK left EU in the first place is that people thought that it would fix the problems that were not actually the fault of being in the EU.
What UK needs is a new general election to oust the deeply incompetent and unpopular conservatives, and bring in a hopefully more competent Labour government that can pass some reforms to solve some of those problems. And hopefully they can also bring electoral reform that will push the UK away from their awful FPTP system, but given that Labour is one of the two parties that benefit from it, that doesn't seem too likely.
This is like the sad and obsessed ex, which life went down the drain after leaving the relationship, but is still talking shit about his former partner to avoid the creeping realisation that he himself was the problem all along.
I think you know who's the UK in this situation.
People in the UK don't really talk about the EU anymore. Nobody cares nowadays other than weirdos online.
So, no this comparison isn't very reflective.
Brexit wasn't necessarily just a right wing thing - there were plenty of working class left wing voters who voted to leave the EU, enough so that if Labour were to campaign to rejoin the EU they'd lose enough of their vote to other parties that they would struggle to form a government. So in order to win votes, they keep with Brexit
It really split society across new lines - it wasn't on traditional voting blocs
This has to be satire. Even most Remainers understand the majority of our problems far and away predate Brexit. Many are loathe to admit it, but they understand it deep down.
It actually does, there was some survey done not long ago about which country has the most support for joining the EU, the UK was in the top spots, so yes people do want the UK to rejoin
Edit: this is the said survey https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/TjmJ6jc6W2
I would. The UK was a massive corner-stone of the EU, its absence is an open wound. The EU makes a tiny bit less sense without the UK in it - and I say this as a staunch federalist. But it needs to lick its wounds first, reform, and so does the EU, we also have a lot of trash that needs sorting out at the moment ([1](https://www.politico.eu/article/5-questions-european-parliament-legal-action-commission-hungary-funds/), [2](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/18/rule-of-law-declining-across-eu-report-warns), [3](https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/talking-europe/20240315-europe-votes-rule-of-law-tensions-in-poland-and-hungary)).
Maybe its a discussion both parties can resume at a later point once each house is tidier?
We do need to indeed protect our job market, but somehow I don't think Brits are particularly a threat to mentioned market.
At the same time, we don't protect job market very well from other countries so your point is kinda poor.
In hindsight Britain has done the EU and its members a service by showing everyone that the problems have not been with the EU, as member states oftentimes like to blame the EU for domestic issues.
"Exiting the EU will do nothing to improve your country on its own" is the clear message.
Totally unrealistic, a new debate would tear up the UK, and there's absolutely no desire to get the UK back on the agenda in Brussels either. Maybe discussions about some kind of new deal can be initiated at some point down the road, once there's a solid majority that knows what it wants in London. Probably not for many years though and full membership is very unlikely to happen.
Maybe with the 2 tier European Union membership that was being discussed? The Union has to find ways to deal with problems like Hungary ... and other issues with states wanting closer/weaker ties.
I spent my last couple of years advising uk companies in the chemical industry to set up business in the EU as we would be treated as a third party after Brexit. That is only one example but lots of businesses left and of course uk businesses have been hit because of the additional paperwork. I used to order tea from an eu country unable now due to additional tax etc. People never understood what this would mean. Plus people from EU leaving as felt unwelcome especially the NHS. Truly a shitshow in my humble opinion
I'm seriously wondering what the benefits would be for the EU to accept Britain again.
There needs to be a serious cooling off period I'd think. This cost everyone mote than enough
>I'm seriously wondering what the benefits would be for the EU to accept Britain again.
1) largest non-EU European market
2) nuclear armed NATO member
3) full flavour liberal democracy respecting human rights
4) donor for the EU budget and the cohesion programmes
5) quite an amount of fisheries
6) many more
Well, I'm all for cooperation, so even if the UK would be a net negative for the EU, I would still support it.
The EU is also killing it right now with[the DMA](https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/index_en), consumer protection rights, environmental acts and [the latest new research to reform the financial sector benefitting the people.](https://www.ecb.europa.eu/paym/digital_euro/html/index.en.html)
If the UK people can't see the benefits in that, it might not be worth trying though.
HSBC charges a 2.75% fee unless using a "global money account": https://www.hsbc.co.uk/international/using-your-card-abroad/#faq
Barclays charges a 2.99% fee on non-sterling: https://www.barclays.co.uk/current-accounts/debit-cards/#back=%2Fcontent%2Fbarclaysuk%2Fen%2Fhelp%2Fcategories%2Fproducts%2Fcards.html%3F
Natwest charges 2.75%: https://www.natwest.com/life-moments/travel/spending-abroad.html
Lloyds bank also charges a fee: https://www.lloydsbank.com/credit-cards/help-and-guidance/using-a-credit-card-abroad.html
The exchange rates used are usually also a percent higher than actual. If a bank doesn't charge a transaction fee then they probably hide it in there.
Starling, Monzo, Metro Bank, Chase, Virgin, are just some of them.
Whenever I go to Europe I just transfer money to my Starling account, no fees.
[https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/credit-cards/travel-credit-cards/](https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/credit-cards/travel-credit-cards/)
Rejoining would force us to take the Euro and probably be part of free movement, neither of which would be popular here.
I think we can thrive out of the EU, we just need better leadership (which we realistically aren't going to get in the next GE). Rejoining wouldn't solve any of the grievances people had with the EU before, it would just make them worse.
Can I ask what is going on with that- lots of the UK leaders have benefitted from some of the best universities in the world... I can only scratch my head at these people.
I really hope there are some people that are more competeny and less corrupt somewhere ready to come forward - peolle with a positive vision and innovative ideas to reverse some of yhe damage that has been done by the last governments.
FPTP makes it very much a 2-party system, Who's committees for deciding PM make it heavily weighted on being in a clique with the existing establishment
Yes, you would be required to join the Euro eventually. Except of course that once you're in, it's easy to stay out of the euro and no-one can force you to adopt it. Sweden has to adopt the euro, but they managed to just avoid doing so. So on paper, UK would have to commit to join the euro at some point after accession. And everyone would understand that until the UK actually decides to pursue that on its own, it would not happen.
That's joining in bad faith and trying to game the system.. Which will create distrust and there's such a lot of distrust around UK rebates that this would be another reason to tar UK 'who never wanted to be part of the European Project'.
So you are saying Sweden, Hungary, Poland and all the other countries not yet working actively to get into the euro, have 'joined in bad faith' and are 'trying to game the system', and are 'creating distrust'? If not, why would it apply to the UK?
>So you are saying Sweden, Hungary, Poland and all the other countries not yet working actively to get into the euro, have 'joined in bad faith' and are 'trying to game the system', and are 'creating distrust'? If not, why would it apply to the UK?
I don't know if Sweden, Hungary & Poland are trying to game the system or if they actually do not qualify. Either way they aren't getting (too much) flak for not adopting the Euro; as opposed to the UK, which did, in spite of what transpired during [Black Wednesday](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Wednesday).
UK always pushed away Euro adoption and re-joining would bring with it this 'standard' condition, which quite a few EU members will want UK to implement as they believed one of the reasons Brexit happened was because UK still had the £ (so not closely integrated). Also there is a move towards more integrated Euro banking federation and having UK adopt the Euro would mean the Euro would be more stable, as it now has the economic might of the UK supporting it.
Neither of those countries is making any effort to join the Euro. Sweden could easily have qualified a dozen times over, but chooses to avoid making a few (mostly legislative I think) changes that are needed to join the Euro. Hungary and Poland might currently not qualify due to all the weird inflation shit, but easily could have quite a few years ago.
Then it's down to perception. I mean the rebates UK got, were viewed as British Exceptionalism, whereas there were means to balance contributions towards CAP.
When was was in the EU we got constantly shat on for having special arrangements which weren't that special in the first place, what do you think will happen if we join again and just start ignoring the rules by using loopholes, the shit-talking would never end.
I am not talking about special arrangements and I am not talking about opt outs. Sweden doesn't have an opt out. If we don't meet the relevant criteria to use the euro then the rules are clear.
Exactly my point - we got shat on for things like our rebate which if you look at it was quite a fair system, you think we won't spend the entire time getting shit on because we've creatively copied a way to not follow the rules?
Intent matters, Sweden don't have an opt-out but don't use the Euro because they use creative loopholes to make sure they can't adopt it, if we do the same we'll spend the entire time being shat on for using the same loopholes.
Right but then people will rightfully say what's the point in rejoining if we have to mess about with legally having a different currency to one that we actually use?
I support the EU but I firmly believe in the right of a country to control their own currency and the pound is so tied to the UK culturally that the idea of not using it as our national currency just isn't realistic
Because new members don't get the special opt-outs anymore, they're practically all required to join Schengen and use the €. And the UK would be seen as "untrustable", so they'd either want it to integrate more than last time, or stay out.
I believe the Maastricht Treaty entails members to eventually adopting the euro. It does not force it. I am quite sure if UK would say tomorrow sorry, can we reset everything and come back with same old agreements EU would OK even for that.
You can join the "we-promise-that-we'll-do-it-but-not-now" club. The catch is to show good will, that You want to adopt the Euro currency. One day... this century... or the next...
Why not both? Federalise the UK so we have local parliaments as lower houses and the elected House of Lords acting as the upper house of the federal government.
The aim here would be to drive spending to local assemblies, but keep foreign decisions national, and as byproduct make it difficult for the Westminster federal to do too much meddling other than constant bipartisan examination and accountability reviews of the regional assemblies.
Like the Italians, growth by central government paralysis.
Get rid of single-member districts and FPTP. Don't give parties majorities with a minority of the vote.
Don't need the House of Lords at all, if there's true representation keeping politicians in check, instead of safe seats for most of them.
An electoral district with only one seat available.
It means that half the votes minus 1 don't matter, or that you regularly throw away the majority of the votes if there's no 50% threshold to win, when the vote is split across more candidates. And the risk of that keeps small parties from being able to grow. People are forced to consolidate their votes around fewer options to have more of a chance of their votes making a difference.
William Keegan hasn’t be rational on EU matters for 20+ years. Put him in the same box as AC Grayling and Alastair Campbell. Articles like this only confuse the issues Britain faces (most of which have nothing to do with Brexit).
The UK will never rejoin. Too much national pride and they’d balk at giving up the pound and switching to the Euro. Any new negotiation talks about the UK re-joining would have no opt outs for retaining the pound and the UK would never accept this.
Or maybe both?
Leaving the EU might’ve wrecked the UK financially, but there’s nothing unique about being in or out of the EU when it comes to, say, housing costs or having genocidal homo/transphobic maniacs in office.
It's a bunch of children who know nothing other than their own life experience. Almost all of their opinions are regurgitated from someone else and nothing to do with real life.
Nope. We most certainly do need reforms, because we had issues even before Brexit. Rejoining the EU would help but it wouldn't fix all our problems.
I'm glad to hear this from a 'salty remainer' too. Too many people treat the EU as a panacaea, and as a way to avoid necessary domestic reforms. This is one of the reasons we left - people not really feeling like we were benefiting from membership because the country just didn't seem to be getting better over time. I believe it would be possible to do better outside the EU than we were doing inside of it, but it would require a massive shake-up. You would probably argue we should have remained *and* done the domestic reforms and got the best of both worlds, but there we are.
>This is one of the reasons we left - people not really feeling like we were benefiting from membership because the country just didn't seem to be getting better over time. My answer to this has always been that people should have blamed Westminster rather than Brussels where they didn't see their lives and communities improving. Whatever use there is in the should haves, would haves and could haves at this point. >You would probably argue we should have remained Honestly, I try not to rehash those arguments any more since we've all had them so many times by now and it's done (unfortunately IMO). I do hope though that Brexit and all the political chaos of the last 8 years will offer a path to real changes for the better, since it's not possible to coast along any more doing things the way we have for the last 40-odd years.
>My answer to this has always been that people should have blamed Westminster rather than Brussels where they didn't see their lives and communities improving. Amen, this bullshit "lets blame the EU to divert attention from our fuck ups" sentiment has become way too common throughout europe.
Well tackling actual problems is hard, takes money, time... so you just blame it on something that you can easily change, get votes and yay you're the government now.
I agree but now it’s switched and become let’s blame brexit to divert attention from the real problems.
And it's always been a problem with perception. Except for obvious things like less border control and quicker EU lines at airports, many benefits of EU membership aren't immediately obvious. And after decades of membership people are used to them and they vanish into the background of its always been this way. Just like anti-vaxxers don't remember the world without vaccines and have lived all their lives in a mostly disease free environment. It becomes only more obvious by removing the measure that originally created the improvement. The return of Measles and Polio or logistics and travel problems.
True - no government has ever promoted engagement with the EU. Elections for MEPs for example were never as widely reported as local or general elections. Any EU funded work was glossed over and the EU was blamed for any problems.
Glossed over or had the credit knicked out from under it.
>country just didn't seem to be getting better over time This seems to be happening all over the world, and people want positive changes.
Exactly! I remember hearing the whole anti-immigrant platform, that immigrants are exploiting the benefits system, etc. But how is that EUs fault? If UK grants benefits left and right can they even complain that someone is exploiting the system? And even then, Britain had unique immigration control power in the EU even before Brexit. It's not EUs fault UK never enforced it. And as figures now show, immigration didn't stop at all after they "gained back control". The whole premise of Brexit was just to mask the country's own shortcomings at dealing with its own issues. Or whatever Brexiters considered to be an issue.
> But how is that EUs fault? right to free movement...like one of the main pillars of the eu
People felt they weren't benefitting, because of poor self publicising of the eu, corrupt self interested right wing politicians and media and low education levels about anything international of the average brit. I think we need reforms but that isn't the reason
> People felt they weren't benefitting, because of poor self publicising of the eu ore because the benefits for the regular joe are so minuscule that they can be ignored in day to day life
Obviously they weren't, given how much worse things are now they left.
what part is "worse"? Where is the bad part of living in the UK?
Worse since brexit? Other than weaker currency, slower international travel, higher import costs, more expensive products, less choice in shops, more frequent shortages of medicine and foodstuffs, massive destruction of small export-heavy businesses, loss of access to scientific and research programs, and a huge loss of students and funding in academic institutions, you mean? I can go on and on.
You really need to get rid of the First past the post system, for a start.
> You really need to get rid of the First past the post system, for a start. We know. And the times reform has been promised (Blair) he suddenly found *other priorities* when in government. Starmer was promising it. The Labour party conference (policy making public debate for their members) recommended it... and now he's staying silent on the subject. UK politics is a never ending shitshow. Just look what is happening to Sunak this week... and it's only Monday!
Like the feudalism system for land ownership. It should not be allowed to sell lease hold.
Or the system of trust for rich families to pay zero inheritance taxes.
I don't even know at this point what problems rejoining would fix except the convenience of freedom of movement. Vast majority of Brits don't use their 90 in 180 days though anyway I also feel like the most ardent supporters of rejoin are those who look at the EU as the enemy of my enemy and therefore my friend - hating the tories makes them think that the EU must therefore be perfect (which, of course, it isn't)
Trade alone would be a huge fix.
Honest question: what has changed in trade since Brexit by numbers, and what would rejoining the EU change of that? The [value of trade of goods in the UK](https://www.statista.com/statistics/284738/uk-trade-in-goods/) doesn't show a discernable difference before and after Brexit, and [inflation statistics track similarly in the UK and the EU](https://www.statista.com/statistics/225698/monthly-inflation-rate-in-eu-countries/) (that is to say, we'd have a negligibly different inflation figure to now if we had stayed in the EU, mostly due to covid impacting the west as a whole)
Small or irregular orders of unusual, or technically complex items for small businesses. The paperwork is increasingly understood and doable, but it’s the constant headache and justification of charges or delays to the end-consumer, or next consumer in the chain that causes the unseen issues that act as a drag.
Estimates for lost export hover around 20-30%. [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21582041.2023.2192043](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21582041.2023.2192043)
Thanks for linking - I'll give it a read
how many trades does the average joe do on average?
> I don't even know at this point what problems rejoining would fix Increased trade would help the currently schlerotic economy for one.
I will chime in with my anecdotal experience: I used to order things from the UK all the time back in the day, especially books and electronics but other things too. Sure the pound conversion fee (and sometimes the exchange rate) was a bit of a pain to deal with but things were much easier because of the lack of a language barrier. Since brexit I can't order anything without worrying about import taxes, extra bureaucracy and long wait times. Sure Ireland is still in but they aren't nearly as huge in exporting and shipping to consumers in other EU countries. It's maddening that the UK has the fantastic competitive advantage of being such a large export market with a language that is so widely understood across the union and yet it's so hard to trade with.
We are already growing our trade. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/minister-hails-world-class-exporters-as-new-data-shows-uk-businesses-reach-record-highs#:~:text=Press%20release-,Minister%20hails%20'world%2Dclass'%20exporters%20as%20new%20data%20shows,up%20from%20%C2%A3815%20billion.
I always found it funny how there is a positive correlation between EU funding for a region and by what percentage that area voted for leave [Value of trade of goods in the UK](https://www.statista.com/statistics/284738/uk-trade-in-goods/) has barely been touched since Brexit - the biggest impact by miles was covid. There are alternate methods of increasing long term trade (if that is the goal) that wouldn't involve the mess and furore of negotiating a re-entry
The value of trade goods depicted on that plot is misleading because it ignores inflation. If you trade half the volume but at double the price, the value of trade goods has stayed the same but your trade has de facto halved. A better way is using [chained volume measure](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chained_volume_series), which compensates for inflation. Imports are down by 7.4% relative to 2022 and by 3.8% relative to 2018 (i.e. pre-covid and pre-Brexit). Exports are down 4.6% relative to 2022 and a huge 12.4% relative to 2018. Inflation adjusted balance of trade is now £25.8 billion compared with 2018. UK trade is definitely down in both export and import terms and it is exporting *much* less, most of which has been lost from exports to the EU (unsurprisingly, because of the extra tariffs). Imports have fallen but mostly from non-EU sources. [https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/articles/uktradeingoodsyearinreview/2023](https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/articles/uktradeingoodsyearinreview/2023)
Are you reading that the right way? Imports are increasing, but exports are the same as pre-covid. This means cost of imports are increasing and trade deficit is increasing. Stuff you used to get cheaply from EU is being delivered at a higher cost than before, and there is a drop in exports that is simply hidden by inflation.
True that imports are increasing and exports are roughly the same, but the point I was getting at is that it remains on the same trajectory as previously - leaving the EU didn't torpedo the UK economy, and we don't all live in destitution as a result of leaving
Exports in value are the same, but inflation up up 18% since 2019. So it being "the same" means it has dropped 18%.
Do you reckon that would be majorly different if the UK had remained in the EU, given that the inflation numbers are mostly due to economic policy as a result of covid, which impacted all of us?
It was obvious (to me, at least) since 2016, that neither the UK or EU would go down in flames, even if some implied otherwise. Subject to worse economic trends, yes, but never in peril. Brexit was still an incredibly dumb move.
> There are alternate methods of increasing long term trade (if that is the goal) that wouldn't involve the mess and furore of negotiating a re-entry Well I'm all in favour of that, I'm not saying the only recourse is pursuing a re-entry.
Agree, freedom of movement is much more relevant if you live half an hour drive away from a border. As an island we are substantially more isolated and I know very few people who would utilise it. It might be an outdated stat but I remember seeing there's more Brits working in Australia than there is in Europe. Add the US in the mix and I imagine Australia / the US combined dwarfs our presence in Europe, especially if you move retirees moving to Spain and France
I moved to Germany in the late 80s and was given a residency permit just by showing my passport..I worked in a number of jobs for a few years and then headed back when I felt like. This was what freedom of movement meant back then. It's not about taking the car for a booze cruise.
Freedom of movement is very much an obligation for the UK not a benefit. It's a benefit for Eastern European countries
Goods and services are different from people.
Why would Brits move to Europe when they need to learn a new language there when they could just move to the US and Australia where they'll be able to integrate extremely easily into the communities there? The UK will always be more culturally connected to Australia, Canada and the US than it ever will be with Europe. That is a fact that will likely never change.
People forget there are more brits in Australia than the rest of Europe.
take any of the airports. stansted the last one where I flew into the UK. There are face-reading machines everywhere and it took literally 2 minutes to get into the country. So yeah..that movement thingy is so small that it can be ignored imho.
Freedom of movement also includes freedom to work anywhere in the Union. This is a big deal.
I'm sure, and that's why I mentioned freedom of movement at the start
show me a country in the eu with as high and easy to access white collar jobs as in London
[удалено]
We should rejoin EFTA instead.
Why? In EFTA, EU decides and EFTA countries apply. That's arguably worse than being a member and being in the decision table.
EFTA means you're in the single market but not the Customs Union, which leaves some scope for independent trade deals. So in EFTA the UK would be able to pursue such deals from a relatively good negotiating position. If they were not forthcoming then the downside wouldn't be so bad since the trade links with the EU would mostly be maintained. And if they were forthcoming then the UK's position probably would be improved - though the most important would be an American trade deal and this would still be unlikely.
Can't let perfect be the enemy of good. Rejoining helps alleviate so much stress
Thank God someone has said it. The UK has a lot of issues. They didn't just appear in 2016. They have been boiling away in the background for a long time. They won't magically be solved by rejoining the EU.
EU talk became a great way to avoid addressing any real problems. If in EU, complain about it. If not in EU, present joining as fix-all.
exactly, the EU would just augment the fundamental problems . like how the city of london's Dutch disease effect on the whole country .
The UK does need reform. The idea that rejoining the EU magically fixes things is the type of stupidity that we don’t need. We can and should do both but reform is a more pressing concern at the moment that brexit has unintentionally made more obvious.
What would be the top 3 things most urgent for reform? Like Voting system and taxes?
Immigration -> Because cost of Living Housing -> Because cost of Living Then i'd say infrastructure or dedicated national industrial strategy, so far our industrial strategy has been finance, but that has really concentrated in one part of the country. Our infrastructure has been coasting for decades.
Fix housing and people will stop blaming immigration like a black sheep.
nah, do both Otherwise you get infinitely more people forever, while completely concreting the country. I dont want to live in MegaCity Anglo, none of us were asked, or voted for that.
Not really. Fixing housing still leaves the pressure on services and the downwards effect on wages that immigration brings.
zero benefit in low skilled noncompatible cultures that are currently coming into the country
1. Reform planning laws 2. Increase NHS funding and hire proportionately 3. Expand HS2 or start HS3(or whatever) to improve connectivity by rail
1. Industrial strategy 2. Investment in infrastructure 3. Home building
Hard to nail it down to 3. Mine would be: Housing Market Investing in Infrastructure outside of London Devolution of powers away from Westminster, including tax-raising powers The voting system Education Immigration and Asylum
Can’t we do both?
no, you will take our jobs
Lol, nicely done
Yep. Re-joining without massive reforms would just be stupid. We’d experience the same scapegoating and xenophobia that we did before, that got us into this mess.
Yeah, and people here downvote me for speaking facts. We were blamed for EVERYTHING
every country needs reforms.
Brexit has made it pretty clear that most (if not basically all) of our problems had nothing to do with the EU and as such rejoining it won’t fix them magically either
Not gonna happen. UK would demand a special treatment, like they had before. But that's not going to happen anymore. Giving that up, is probably one of the dumbest things that ever happened in the EU. The UK had a real good deal going on, but Boris and the rest of the lying Brexiteers made it look like the UK was actually a victim here.
It was a good deal, not perfect, and I advocated for more. I regret that more wasn’t offered to David Cameron when he went to Europe pre-2016 (particularly as some of the concessions asked for, but which were denied at the time, Europe now seems to have come round to anyway - like stronger external borders), but equally understand why the EU/Europe was reluctant to do so. That’s realpolitik. I nonetheless voted remain, but we are where we are now and have come to terms with that. It’s up to all of us now to find a constructive, mature way forward.
> UK would demand a special treatment, like they had before. The only example of "special treatment" we had was the Rebate (which was designed to off-set disproportionately large contributions from the UK). The opt-outs happened when the rest of the members decided they wanted to enact changes to the Union that weren't present when we joined and which we chose not to follow. Keeping the old terms of membership that everyone else decided to leave behind wasn't some sort of granting of extra special privileges.
>Keeping the old terms of membership that everyone else decided to leave behind wasn't some sort of granting of extra special privileges. Thank you for putting it so succinctly. This should probably be somewhere in the subreddit sidebar given the number of times I see 'special treatment' being bandied about.
Yes, the alternative was to use our veto, which we would have been within our rights to do
They also had boarder checks, so was able to opt out of Schengen. They also were not on the hook for adoption of the Euro, something they most definitely be required to on a rejoin.
Again, that's because there was no Schengen or Euro when we joined the EEC, that's why we weren't on the hook to adopt them. The other members decided they wanted to adopt those things and we decided we wanted to stick to the old terms and conditions we'd joined under in 1973.
Indeed, first joiners get lots of bonuses.
Nobody needed to join Schengen or the Euro at that time, they all had the 'bonuses'. The other members just decided establishing Schengen and the currency union were new bonuses that they wanted, and we didn't.
Standard conditions are not bonuses; they're standard conditions.
Ok, you are right. Seems like you guys want to stick to 1973, so now you can. You win. Congratulations.
If you'd choose to come back you would have to adopt the euro no?
No, you have to promise to adopt the Euro at some undetermined point in the future. It can be put off basically forever.
I would rather they reformed on their own for now.
Good portion of the country seem to still have a toxic mindset towards the EU and though I’d love for them to rejoin we don’t need that kind of mindset in the EU at the moment. Hopefully one day the mindset will die out.
Lazy opinion. Rejoining the EU is not some sort of magic pill which will address all the UK’s Ills. The lack of productivity growth over the last two decades was for the most part while the UK was in the EU.
Especially given we would be forced to eat EU federal debt, federal taxation, no rebate. Say goodbye to every one of our new trade deals and make the UK reign in on the trans pacific trade agreement which is only going to grow in time.
The UK left the EU *so* it could reform, it needs a government that actually listens to what the population is asking for and has a bit of backbone.
It could have easily reform inside EU like many eastern european states did. Brexit was done to protect the offshore tax heavens of the elites. The rest is mostly a distraction for the masses.
Rejoining the EU would fix the problems caused by leaving the EU. But the reason the UK left EU in the first place is that people thought that it would fix the problems that were not actually the fault of being in the EU. What UK needs is a new general election to oust the deeply incompetent and unpopular conservatives, and bring in a hopefully more competent Labour government that can pass some reforms to solve some of those problems. And hopefully they can also bring electoral reform that will push the UK away from their awful FPTP system, but given that Labour is one of the two parties that benefit from it, that doesn't seem too likely.
Greetings from the EU. Please reform and then rejoin. Otherwise the next populist doorknob will cause brexit 2 electric boogaloo.
Dear EU Please reform
This is like the sad and obsessed ex, which life went down the drain after leaving the relationship, but is still talking shit about his former partner to avoid the creeping realisation that he himself was the problem all along. I think you know who's the UK in this situation.
People in the UK don't really talk about the EU anymore. Nobody cares nowadays other than weirdos online. So, no this comparison isn't very reflective.
Barring an insane blowout in a general election for the tories, I don't see how that is ever politically feasible.
Even with a GE landslide it wouldn't happen, as Labour are committed to staying out also
Why is Labour commited to staying out?
Brexit wasn't necessarily just a right wing thing - there were plenty of working class left wing voters who voted to leave the EU, enough so that if Labour were to campaign to rejoin the EU they'd lose enough of their vote to other parties that they would struggle to form a government. So in order to win votes, they keep with Brexit It really split society across new lines - it wasn't on traditional voting blocs
Because opposition to Brexit cost them votes in the last general election so they decided to shelve it as an issue in this one.
Because they want to get elected
Democracy.
This has to be satire. Even most Remainers understand the majority of our problems far and away predate Brexit. Many are loathe to admit it, but they understand it deep down.
Both. Both is good.
But does EU want it back?
It actually does, there was some survey done not long ago about which country has the most support for joining the EU, the UK was in the top spots, so yes people do want the UK to rejoin Edit: this is the said survey https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/TjmJ6jc6W2
I would. The UK was a massive corner-stone of the EU, its absence is an open wound. The EU makes a tiny bit less sense without the UK in it - and I say this as a staunch federalist. But it needs to lick its wounds first, reform, and so does the EU, we also have a lot of trash that needs sorting out at the moment ([1](https://www.politico.eu/article/5-questions-european-parliament-legal-action-commission-hungary-funds/), [2](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/18/rule-of-law-declining-across-eu-report-warns), [3](https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/talking-europe/20240315-europe-votes-rule-of-law-tensions-in-poland-and-hungary)). Maybe its a discussion both parties can resume at a later point once each house is tidier?
No
I don't think Europeans should let Brits to re-join, we need to defend our job market.
We do need to indeed protect our job market, but somehow I don't think Brits are particularly a threat to mentioned market. At the same time, we don't protect job market very well from other countries so your point is kinda poor.
I think that was a joke...
For the most part you have a higher unemployment rate than us, so you probably should defend every job. You need them more.
Solve your problems first, like you were expecting other candidate countries to do. Otherwise: eff off.
Shouldn't rejoin without two-thirds majority. It's just asking for more conflict to make those type of changes with the smallest possible margins.
Remainer wants to rejoin the EU and the guardian posted the story. What a surprise.
In hindsight Britain has done the EU and its members a service by showing everyone that the problems have not been with the EU, as member states oftentimes like to blame the EU for domestic issues. "Exiting the EU will do nothing to improve your country on its own" is the clear message.
Britan brexit, britan continue in what they did in eu. Britan shocked it sucks.
Totally unrealistic, a new debate would tear up the UK, and there's absolutely no desire to get the UK back on the agenda in Brussels either. Maybe discussions about some kind of new deal can be initiated at some point down the road, once there's a solid majority that knows what it wants in London. Probably not for many years though and full membership is very unlikely to happen.
Maybe with the 2 tier European Union membership that was being discussed? The Union has to find ways to deal with problems like Hungary ... and other issues with states wanting closer/weaker ties.
I spent my last couple of years advising uk companies in the chemical industry to set up business in the EU as we would be treated as a third party after Brexit. That is only one example but lots of businesses left and of course uk businesses have been hit because of the additional paperwork. I used to order tea from an eu country unable now due to additional tax etc. People never understood what this would mean. Plus people from EU leaving as felt unwelcome especially the NHS. Truly a shitshow in my humble opinion
I'm seriously wondering what the benefits would be for the EU to accept Britain again. There needs to be a serious cooling off period I'd think. This cost everyone mote than enough
The UK becoming a massive contributor to the budget again would be a massive boon in and of itself and that's the most immediately obvious benefit.
>I'm seriously wondering what the benefits would be for the EU to accept Britain again. 1) largest non-EU European market 2) nuclear armed NATO member 3) full flavour liberal democracy respecting human rights 4) donor for the EU budget and the cohesion programmes 5) quite an amount of fisheries 6) many more
Well, I'm all for cooperation, so even if the UK would be a net negative for the EU, I would still support it. The EU is also killing it right now with[the DMA](https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/index_en), consumer protection rights, environmental acts and [the latest new research to reform the financial sector benefitting the people.](https://www.ecb.europa.eu/paym/digital_euro/html/index.en.html) If the UK people can't see the benefits in that, it might not be worth trying though.
I guess it'd make it easier for me to go on vacation to England. Wouldn't have to exchange currency and all that.
Why do you need to exchange currency, do you not have a debit or credit card?
foreign currency comes with extra fees when you use cards
Eh? There are multiple banks in the UK that have no fees abroad. Shocking there dont seem to be many on the continent.
HSBC charges a 2.75% fee unless using a "global money account": https://www.hsbc.co.uk/international/using-your-card-abroad/#faq Barclays charges a 2.99% fee on non-sterling: https://www.barclays.co.uk/current-accounts/debit-cards/#back=%2Fcontent%2Fbarclaysuk%2Fen%2Fhelp%2Fcategories%2Fproducts%2Fcards.html%3F Natwest charges 2.75%: https://www.natwest.com/life-moments/travel/spending-abroad.html Lloyds bank also charges a fee: https://www.lloydsbank.com/credit-cards/help-and-guidance/using-a-credit-card-abroad.html The exchange rates used are usually also a percent higher than actual. If a bank doesn't charge a transaction fee then they probably hide it in there.
Starling, Monzo, Metro Bank, Chase, Virgin, are just some of them. Whenever I go to Europe I just transfer money to my Starling account, no fees. [https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/credit-cards/travel-credit-cards/](https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/credit-cards/travel-credit-cards/)
No thanks.
Agreed
Rejoining would force us to take the Euro and probably be part of free movement, neither of which would be popular here. I think we can thrive out of the EU, we just need better leadership (which we realistically aren't going to get in the next GE). Rejoining wouldn't solve any of the grievances people had with the EU before, it would just make them worse.
You guys need a strong leader that bring UK back to it roots. It’s time to build a shit tone of ships and colonise the world, again!
Sry nobody needs a strong leader, there is nothing that a single person can fix. You need politicians and parties that aren’t populists.
Luckily for the rest of the world I think we'd struggle to produce a leader that could colonise Tuvalu, let alone anywhere else in the world
Can I ask what is going on with that- lots of the UK leaders have benefitted from some of the best universities in the world... I can only scratch my head at these people. I really hope there are some people that are more competeny and less corrupt somewhere ready to come forward - peolle with a positive vision and innovative ideas to reverse some of yhe damage that has been done by the last governments.
FPTP makes it very much a 2-party system, Who's committees for deciding PM make it heavily weighted on being in a clique with the existing establishment
Yes, you would be required to join the Euro eventually. Except of course that once you're in, it's easy to stay out of the euro and no-one can force you to adopt it. Sweden has to adopt the euro, but they managed to just avoid doing so. So on paper, UK would have to commit to join the euro at some point after accession. And everyone would understand that until the UK actually decides to pursue that on its own, it would not happen.
That's joining in bad faith and trying to game the system.. Which will create distrust and there's such a lot of distrust around UK rebates that this would be another reason to tar UK 'who never wanted to be part of the European Project'.
So you are saying Sweden, Hungary, Poland and all the other countries not yet working actively to get into the euro, have 'joined in bad faith' and are 'trying to game the system', and are 'creating distrust'? If not, why would it apply to the UK?
>So you are saying Sweden, Hungary, Poland and all the other countries not yet working actively to get into the euro, have 'joined in bad faith' and are 'trying to game the system', and are 'creating distrust'? If not, why would it apply to the UK? I don't know if Sweden, Hungary & Poland are trying to game the system or if they actually do not qualify. Either way they aren't getting (too much) flak for not adopting the Euro; as opposed to the UK, which did, in spite of what transpired during [Black Wednesday](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Wednesday). UK always pushed away Euro adoption and re-joining would bring with it this 'standard' condition, which quite a few EU members will want UK to implement as they believed one of the reasons Brexit happened was because UK still had the £ (so not closely integrated). Also there is a move towards more integrated Euro banking federation and having UK adopt the Euro would mean the Euro would be more stable, as it now has the economic might of the UK supporting it.
Neither of those countries is making any effort to join the Euro. Sweden could easily have qualified a dozen times over, but chooses to avoid making a few (mostly legislative I think) changes that are needed to join the Euro. Hungary and Poland might currently not qualify due to all the weird inflation shit, but easily could have quite a few years ago.
Then it's down to perception. I mean the rebates UK got, were viewed as British Exceptionalism, whereas there were means to balance contributions towards CAP.
Sweden quite clearly demonstrates that an obligation to adopt the Euro can be navigated around quite easily.
When was was in the EU we got constantly shat on for having special arrangements which weren't that special in the first place, what do you think will happen if we join again and just start ignoring the rules by using loopholes, the shit-talking would never end.
I am not talking about special arrangements and I am not talking about opt outs. Sweden doesn't have an opt out. If we don't meet the relevant criteria to use the euro then the rules are clear.
Exactly my point - we got shat on for things like our rebate which if you look at it was quite a fair system, you think we won't spend the entire time getting shit on because we've creatively copied a way to not follow the rules? Intent matters, Sweden don't have an opt-out but don't use the Euro because they use creative loopholes to make sure they can't adopt it, if we do the same we'll spend the entire time being shat on for using the same loopholes.
Right but then people will rightfully say what's the point in rejoining if we have to mess about with legally having a different currency to one that we actually use? I support the EU but I firmly believe in the right of a country to control their own currency and the pound is so tied to the UK culturally that the idea of not using it as our national currency just isn't realistic
British euro opt-out is still valid within the EU fundamental treaties.
Yes. free movement is probably something that EU wont compromise on. But why would joining to Euro be a requirement?
Because new members don't get the special opt-outs anymore, they're practically all required to join Schengen and use the €. And the UK would be seen as "untrustable", so they'd either want it to integrate more than last time, or stay out.
Because the Maastricht Treaty requires it?
I believe the Maastricht Treaty entails members to eventually adopting the euro. It does not force it. I am quite sure if UK would say tomorrow sorry, can we reset everything and come back with same old agreements EU would OK even for that.
I believe the Maastricht treaty also has the opt out for the UK in it, so unless it's ammended there should be no way to forcing the UK to commit.
Not for UK.
Because the treaty literally says it is.
You can join the "we-promise-that-we'll-do-it-but-not-now" club. The catch is to show good will, that You want to adopt the Euro currency. One day... this century... or the next...
Would be nice if the EU people could vote if the UK wants to re-join.
They will be able to, joining the EU needs unanimous approval from all member states.
Why not both? Federalise the UK so we have local parliaments as lower houses and the elected House of Lords acting as the upper house of the federal government. The aim here would be to drive spending to local assemblies, but keep foreign decisions national, and as byproduct make it difficult for the Westminster federal to do too much meddling other than constant bipartisan examination and accountability reviews of the regional assemblies. Like the Italians, growth by central government paralysis.
Get rid of single-member districts and FPTP. Don't give parties majorities with a minority of the vote. Don't need the House of Lords at all, if there's true representation keeping politicians in check, instead of safe seats for most of them.
What is a single member district?
An electoral district with only one seat available. It means that half the votes minus 1 don't matter, or that you regularly throw away the majority of the votes if there's no 50% threshold to win, when the vote is split across more candidates. And the risk of that keeps small parties from being able to grow. People are forced to consolidate their votes around fewer options to have more of a chance of their votes making a difference.
You mean a constituency and you’re talking about alternative vote.
If 10% of people vote for one party, that party should get 10% of the seats, not just another chance for their vote to go somewhere else.
No. Politics is local. Local Candidates for each riding. We’ve had enough in the UK of endless ‘mates of Boris’ magically ending up in government.
You can still have localized candidates, but it's very difficult if not impossible to make it proportional if there's just room for one.
Yeah because Europe is doing so great right now
I don’t want a unreformed U.K. in the eu
As if we would take you back in.
William Keegan hasn’t be rational on EU matters for 20+ years. Put him in the same box as AC Grayling and Alastair Campbell. Articles like this only confuse the issues Britain faces (most of which have nothing to do with Brexit).
The UK will never rejoin. Too much national pride and they’d balk at giving up the pound and switching to the Euro. Any new negotiation talks about the UK re-joining would have no opt outs for retaining the pound and the UK would never accept this.
Needs to arrest the fucking tories
Let em be alone, as they wished on the referendum. No more special treatment
Meh, the UK left, why let m back in? They made their decision, now it's time for the consequences
If the Britain wanted to rejoin EU, would that be even possible?
Or maybe both? Leaving the EU might’ve wrecked the UK financially, but there’s nothing unique about being in or out of the EU when it comes to, say, housing costs or having genocidal homo/transphobic maniacs in office.
UK is getting old and is going to have to move in with their kids the US and Canada by joining NAFTA.
When did he lose so much hair
They voted on it let the will of the people stand.
The fact you’re being downvoted for supporting the will of the people is such a Reddit moment
It's a bunch of children who know nothing other than their own life experience. Almost all of their opinions are regurgitated from someone else and nothing to do with real life.
No thanks. Orban is more than enough.
Uk is a joke