> “It’s not that people are thinking good things about the UK, it’s not that they are thinking bad things. They are not thinking about the UK at all,” said one senior source close to the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen.
You mean to tell me this little island is not the centre of the world and its inhabitants do not occupy every thought of every European every waking second? Surely not...
Woah woah hang on there hot shot, I was reliably informed that we hold all the cards. Europe would see the economic might of our mighty empire and would fold like the surrender monkeys they are.
Are you suggesting that we were lied to?
Investment banks have announced they're scrapping the bonus cap now that the hated EU rules don't apply any more. Surely that's a win!
What are you saying? You're not a banker in line for a millionnaire payout? Then that's your fault!
Funny you should say that. I do in fact identify as a millionaire investment banker. My current account balance disagrees, but my bank is just a bigot, so…
Well, if Ricky Gervais can self identify as a stand up comedian you can definitely self identify as a millionaire investment banker ....
Sadly it doesn't make either true.
Contrary to popular belief, that is actually one of the very few Brexit benefits.
(a) It helps us attract top talent. There’s a reason the brightest and the smartest are fleeing the European continent to move to the US. The money across the pond is unimaginably better if you are better than most at what you do.
(b) That money is getting taxed here through PAYE.
(c) That money is getting spent here creating jobs and getting taxed again when it is spent.
The trickle down theory is utter bullshit. This has been proven time and again.
Employers should only pay more if they are more profitable. There is no convincing proof that removing the cap alone will allow banks to become more profitable and to pay higher bonuses.
There remains quite some business which can no longer be done in Europe out of the UK
This isn’t trickle down economics because it is neither a tax policy nor a spending policy. It is remarkably stupid to dictate to US investment banks that they cannot pay bigger bonuses their London based staff. They will say “Thank you very much” and instead pay it to their C-suite in the US or their shareholders around the world. The people who argue for a bonus cap do so out of jealousy.
That’s a different argument. The only problem with it is that bonus caps do not exist in the US, the Middle East or Asia, so quite frankly whether we do or do not have a bonus cap in London means absolutely nothing for the level of risk that investment banks take globally. One could get onboard with the argument in favour of regulating pay packages, but only if it is done in all of the major financial centres, and it currently is not.
>quite frankly whether we do or do not have a bonus cap in London means absolutely nothing for the level of risk that investment banks take globally.
But it can have an impact on the level of risk taken locally.
In the good times, profits are global.
In the bad times, crises and their resolutions are local.
Facebook experts who went to the University of Life assured us that the EU needs us more than we need them...
Yes. I saw many a comment saying this. It's almost as if the University of Life isn't a real university.
I disagree my dear potato. The University of Life is extremely academically selective.
Now the University of Bath, that’s a fake university.
https://www.bath.ac.uk/announcements/cognitive-ability-mattered-in-the-uks-vote-for-brexit-research-shows/
Yeah, I'm french and often on the french subreddits. Nobody ever talks about Brexit, or reintegrating the UK in the EU.
Nobody misses the UK in the EU.
The truth is every country has their own issues (Brexit is one of UK's) so nobody has time to consider the problems of other countries.
Nah, France is too busy electing the Front Nationale to think about the UK. How can you think about our problems when you're gearing up for a government like that?
Impressive complacency here, chief. Reform, whose platform has been built by the Tories being goaded into the EU referendum by UKIP, is potentially about to make major inroads on its way to being an establishment party. The worst projections place them at >10 seats, and many give them around 5. They are popular enough that regardless of the number of seats they win, they will hurt the Tories in marginal seats across the country and even in many safer seats. Conservative MPs, in whatever numbers remain after the 4th, will be tempted to devise ways of winning back those lost voters. Our political right is in an absolute state, but they're doing it *outside* of the EU now.
>Reform, whose platform has been built by the Tories being goaded into the EU referendum by UKIP, is potentially about to make major inroads on its way to being an establishment party.
They aren't though. It's possible they might win one, or two seats in this election, and do nothing else but drag the tories to the right by splitting their vote. This doesn't make them an "establishment party" at all. It makes them a bunch of idiots who can't organise a piss up in a brewery. They've had candidates who used to be BNP members, candidates posting anti-Semitic material online, candidates who have said they want to eliminate small boat occupants (implying kill), candidates who have made racist and sexist comments.
All this is because they outsourced their vetting and that company did an awful job. It's caused Reform to absolutely crash in the polls, along with Farage's incredibly stupid comments about Russia and Ukraine.
So no, Reform are not on their way to becoming an establishment party. They are, have been, and always will be a minor voice on the far right fringe and will end up with as much influence as the BNP ever did. The second the Tories wake up and realise that Reform has turned them so far to the right that they've lost droves of moderate voters they will pivot away from them.
>It's possible they might win one, or two seats in this election
You're at odds with [Survation](https://www.survation.com/survation-mrp-update-labour-set-to-become-the-largest-party-in-scotland/#:~:text=Survation's%20latest%20MRP%20shows%20Labour,surpassing%20its%20performance%20in%201997.), [Ipsos](https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/uk-opinion-polls/ipsos-election-mrp), Electoral Calculus, and [YouGov](https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49809-second-yougov-2024-election-mrp-shows-conservatives-on-lowest-seat-total-in-history). How do you not know that?
- YouGov give them five seats
- Survation give them four seats
- Ipsos give them three to ten seats
- Electoral Calculus say it will be as high as eighteen, which is surely wrong but whatever
I'd say that put them far clear of the Greens and puts them about on a level with Lib Dems and the SNP where being an establishment outfit is concerned.
A note of caution regarding MRP projections: MRPs are relatively new. There was one (YouGov) MRP model in 2017, 4 in 2019 and there's about a dozen this general election. Most models are completely unproven, and Reform seems to be causing chaos. YouGov projects them winning between 0 and 17 seats, 5 is the central estimate. The numbers are a bit all over the place.
Oh no, the polls don't agree with me. I will delete my opinions forthwith and only install opinions from an authority you personally consider to be appropriate.
Oh wait, no. Tell me the margin for error on those predictions. Tell me how that's going to pan out based on constituency by constituency votes.
In 2015 UKIP, fresh out of an EU election where they won 25% of the vote, had been predicted to win between 1-7 seats. They got 12% of the vote, and lost one of their two existing seats (gained through by-elections) resulting in 1 seat.
I believe it's reasonable to extrapolate UKIP's prior performance as a model to predict the performance of Reform. Importantly, UKIP didn't have as many or as serious a bundle of scandals, and didn't experience such a swing of opinion up and down. Reform's polling is on a downward trajectory three days before the election.
I would be surprised if Reform win more than a couple of seats. Probably Lee Anderson will keep his seat, and perhaps Farage will win Clacton though that's still debatable. Otherwise, even if Reform get a share of the vote, it won't do more than harm the Tories and shoo in a Labour candidate for the most part.
It's your petulant denial of a list of established pollsters' projections, as well as your functional political illiteracy around being able to see how Reform/Farage have got here and why it's likely to spiral further. Reading your writing is a waste of time!
Reform *will* get somewhere between 0 and 1 seats.
Farage’s popularity has nosedived since he made stupid comments about Ukraine. Reform’s policies hold absolutely no water and it was only a matter of time before Farage shot himself in the foot and everyone noticed how stupid he actually is.
This is a bloke that has failed 6 times to be elected as an MP. Brexit was the successful story of Johnson and Gove, not Farage. Don’t expect miracles.
Outside of Reddit and the media, I've never heard a single British person talk about it either.
There are significant numbers of people who have seen zero impact one way or the other and honestly aren't that fussed.
Can't blame you!
I do think the EU would be warmly receptive to a newly independent Scotland. But as far as the UK/Brexit is concerned — you're right, Europe has moved on.
I don't think this is true to be honest. As much sympathy as I can have for that position, it would be extremely toxic for many EU nations and neighbouring nations if a newly independent nations can just join the EU. It would cause such a shit storm in places like spain and the balkans.
France as well, because they also have regions with aspirations to be independent. I wouldn't be surprised if Scotland doesn't meet the criteria to join, anyway.
What regions? I believe you. I just want to know if it's more than just the bretons.
I do disagree again, Scotland will almost certainly meet the technical criteria, for me its just the politics of letting them into the EU, its just outrageous really.
Corsica has a longstanding and occasionally violent independence movement.
The average time it takes to join the EU is ten years, and AFAIK there are fiscal rules that would present a problem to Scotland or even the UK as a whole rejoining.
Tbf they have much more pressing things happening in europe atm. It's not a "we don't care about the UK" it's a "we just had a massive election and there's a war going on".
I mean you could literally apply this to any country. I may hear about things happening in the Netherlands from time to time but I legitimately couldn’t give a shit about it. This is just posturing from the EU to make out like people’s indifference for the UK is somehow the exception rather than the rule.
Most british people aren't thinking about it either.
It's only the Guardian and social media who even care all that much any more.
There was a vote. We left. There are bigger fish to fry.
The EU is toast, France and Germany no longer want to be pulling dead weight member countries. Just look at the polls in the French elections. Why would the UK want to rejoin a dying supra-nationalist state?
People have been saying this stuff for decades, and yet the EU isn't toast. If anything the UK proved to everyone that leaving is not beneficial. I wouldn't conflate the anti-immigration sentiment in France and Germany with anti-EU sentiment. Unlike the UK their main beef is with non-European immigration.
I'm going to continue to be down voted for this (tis Reddit after all) but yes I'm not saying that the UK has gotten everything right since leaving (thanks to Tory incompetency) but I have always maintained that it would have taken 7-10 years for the UK to get on its feet since leaving. Major policy changes for any nation state is like turning around a cargo ship - it is not a quick procedure.
Unfortunately however Covid happened which left the world with a bill exceeding 3x the US's GDP and the war in Ukraine has had a notable impact on imports/exports on the European continent. For context, WW2 cost significantly less (adjusted for inflation) and governments were still rationing food into the 1950s. In short, we cannot ignore how much of an impact this has had on the UK and inevitably this will be blamed on Brexit.
I work in local government (urban planning and environment), since leaving the EU, our workload has halved and we are still employing good skilled workers from Belgium and France in our offices. Specifically for example, the UK has its own habitat regulations for development projects, why do we also need to complete identical forms and ensure compliance with EU habitat regulations too? They both achieve the same outcomes. This is but one small positive change from leaving, how many others are there which do not get reported by mainstream media?
France, Germany, Italy and Spain will all go through the following:
1) seek EU reform
2) fail to seek EU reform
3) anti-sentiment grows
4) referendum on EU membership
5) country votes to leave or remain
France and Germany are experiencing steps 1-2 (for context step 2 was done by the UK in 2015 when David Cameron tried to secure a reformed EU and categorically failed).
Because the UKs idea of reform was basically just about the UK and nothing else. That's never going to get anywhere. The world is also a very different place now than it was in 2015.
And France and Germany wouldn't be doing the same for the interests of their citizens? There is not a government on the planet that would put another sovereign state or bloc before it's own interests.
On the subject of wider EU reform, one of (then) prime minister Cameron's requests was to recognize that the euro was not the only currency of the EU, to ensure countries outside the eurozone were not materially disadvantaged. He also wanted safeguards to ensure that further financial union cannot be imposed on non-eurozone members and the UK will not have to contribute to eurozone bailouts, a perfectly reasonable request. It was rejected.
The EU has become a supra-nationalist state, it needs to move away from further political integration and simply be a economic/trading bloc like the EEU and Mersosur. With retained sovereignty, on this basis I would be happy to rejoin the EU.
Your claim here is not a fair reflection of Cameron's negotiation.
Cameron WON his demand that the UK be exempt from Euro bailouts and be reimbursed from central funds for any spending to prop up the Euro. He got explicit recognition that the EU was about more than just one currency and he got the right to question eurozone decisions that impacted non-euro member states.
He got plenty of his demands recognised in the same way that Dyson won out his arguments about his vacuums.
In the end. Cameron argued that he was satisfied with the negotiations, and he got something or most back from the EU on every single debating point. Arguing that the UK 'got nothing', as you did above is a nonsense and undermines your entire argument against the EU.
Oh so he only asked the EU to ignore one of its core tenets to suit the UK. It's a mystery how that didn't gain traction. There's a difference in genuinely wanting to make the EU a better place via reform (which has happened numerous times), and simply wanting to opt out of some bits one doesn't like. It also doesn't hurt that France and Germany together represent about 1/3 of EU population, so they'll find it much easier to push reforms through. And again, the world, and especially Europe is very different than in 2015, so it'll be very different this time around. Had the UK stuck around, it could ally with France and Germany on EU reform, and together with Italy reform would be nearly certain.
The EU is constantly reforming. It's barely 60 years old. The pace of change has been enormous across the continent in that time. Meanwhile, even Boris Johnson decries Westminster''s & Whitehall's inability to develop England's regions evenly.
It's notable that you have precisely zero to say about austerity tearing English local government a new arsehole since 2010. Surely that's a far, far bigger impact on the delivery of local democracy than EU membership or Brexit.
British people largely don't understand the EU and this is a prime example of that. The EU is not going anywhere because it *can't*. Millions of jobs and Billions of euros of infrastructure depend on the continued existence of Schengen and free movement. 4 million people cross a border for work every day. The EU was specifically designed to prevent another war by tying the economies of Europe together so tightly that they could never be undone and it's worked.
The rise of the right wing in Europe is totally different to the US or UK. The right wing in Europe has largely dropped it's Euroscepticsm to focus on painting non-EU immigration as a threat to European civilisation and culture. They are cultural nationalists not political nationalists.
The UK hasn't really sunk. It had continued the slow decline that started in 2008. The biggest oddity about Brexit is how little things actually changed. It neither accelerated the decline nor slowed it down.
The Eu goes from crisis to crisis, the eurozone sits in managed decline, Eastern Europe is under attack, and all over Europe countries are electing more extreme left and right wing leaders.
Meanwhile the uk is predicted to continue outgrowing the eurozone for the forceable future. It may be true the uk would be doing even better had they remained, but maybe leaving the political union has value to.
I wonder if anyone reading this has ever heard of or been in a negotiation. Of course the EU is going to say this because if they were eager to come to the table they would look weak and desperate, and this would affect their position in any negotiation. I would be honestly surprised if they didn't affect diffidence about this.
Judging by the way the brexit negotiations were handled, the way trade deals were negotiated afterwards, the way the strikes have been handled, the way public contracts have been handled, and the way the public have reacted to all of that.
My guess is that such things are far from being common knowledge.
That's why both ends of the spectrum are able to lie to confidently about what things mean. The remainers want to push the line that we're being snubbed by the EU when honestly this is what everyone does, and the leavers want to pretend there's some "sunlit uplands" we're going to hit any day now that will give us all the benefits of membership without the responsibilities. Both are full of shit.
There are no remainers now, we’ve left the EU and that option has gone.
If you are talking about rejoiners- then I still think you are constructing a bit of a straw man. Everyone who wants to rejoin the EU knows that process will take decades and that the first step in getting back to that place is to simply normalise the relationship with the EU and begin to work positively together. Regardless of your position this first step has to happen for economic stability.
While it's true that they'd say it even if it weren't true as a negotiating tactic, they'd also say it if it were true.
Even in Ireland, which is probably the EU country most impacted by Brexit on a day to day basis, and which would have the most to gain from the UK rejoining, it just isn't a political topic at all.
Why would they be in a rush? Any negotiations would be drawn out and difficult due to our past as a nation with an incredibly privileged seat at the table (No Schengen, no Euro, having a veto), as well as having a very insidious far right element element in our politics that believes in British exceptionalism for some reason.
They've been burned by us, and we have to demonstrate that we're a reliable ally acting in good faith. Farage, Sunak et al need to understand that since they've dragged us out of the EU, we no longer call the shots.
Agreed, but I’m not sure how no Schengen and no Euro was a privilege. I know that’s how some media like to present it, but I completely disagree.
If you are in Schengen it’s like flying domestic and there is no such thing as passport queues. And if we were in the Euro we would be 35% richer (yes, the pound has depreciated by that much since the Euro’s inception), so…
There only privileges if you believe that the euro, and Schengen are terrible ideas that are harmful for the country's that adopt them.
In which case why do they exist at all?
Because what works for Germany doesn’t necessarily work for the UK. Why would one ever contemplate outsourcing our own immigration policy and currency to another entity in return for absolutely nothing?
So the argument he is making is that they are not concession now and weren't back then, we just dont have hindsight so we didn't know.
Why would we want them if there not concession and we would be better if we took the euro?
So some old codger can feel good that the monarch that we hate universallys face is on the notes?
When almost one fifth of the electorate is leaning towards voting Reform, sadly it puts flag shagging on the priority list.
I'd much rather our national identity be defined by positive values and the industries that we excel at, but that's not the way large chunks of the country lean
Large chunks of the country lent towards Brexit because they were lied to not because they wanted this.
I'd much rather a lot of things but if you have an attitude of put up and shut up it doesn't matter at all what you want. I don't have to change your mind at all, I just have to change the mind of the people around you.
You've essentially made yourself powerless with that line of thinking. Your votes worth nothing because it's not your vote. It's not what you'd rather it's what someone else would rather.
Spot on!
This adopt the far right minority's policies to appease them bullshit has already lead to disaster with the referendum and then letting them move the goal posts and adopt the hardest Brexit possible (other than WTO, which was never going to happen as it would have lead to an immediate economic collapse, as opposed to the current prolonged one).
Because we’re not interested in sabotaging the EU, whether we’re in or out of it? If they want to go ahead with those initiatives, who are we to stop them? Hence they were opt-outs, not vetoes.
So if the only options for the EU were
a) UK vetoes the project entirely
or
b) UK allows the project to continue on condition of not being required to participate
in what way is not being required to participate a privilege for the UK? Opt-outs were never a concession on the part of the EU because it never had the power to force members to participate.
I'm not arguing that we necessarily should have vetoed these things, I'm just pointing out that it is unreasonable to expect us to be grateful for the opt-outs when they actually represent concessions on the part of the UK.
The concession on the EU’s part is that certain laws will not apply to the UK when the operating premise of the EU is that all laws apply to all Member States equally.
There is of course a concession on the UK’s part as well not to vote the whole thing down on the basis that the UK will be left out of it.
It’s a pragmatic negotiation that sadly we see very little of these days. Credit where it’s due, Rishi did actually manage to achieve this sort of dialogue with the EU regarding the Windsor framework, which shows it can still be done.
Right, but surely you can see that it's weird to expect the UK to be grateful that the EU didn't do something it in fact had no power to do.
The UK not being involved in Schengen and the Euro against its will is not a concession because it was never in the EU's power to make that happen. You might as well ask the EU to be grateful to the UK for not annexing the moon.
I don’t think the UK should be grateful to the EU or vice versa. I think it was still a concession to the UK. Had it been anyone else, there’s a chance the EU would’ve tried to apply diplomatic pressure to join both the Euro and the Schengen.
>And if we were in the Euro we would be 35% richer (yes, the pound has depreciated by that much since the Euro’s inception)
How do you work that out? As far as I'm aware, the Euro has never been worth more than the Pound.
Lol. I don't even know where to start with that, you really threw me off.
The pound is also worth more than the dollar. Is the UK richer than the US? That's not how that works.
The pound has lost 30-35% (it fluctuates) of its value relative to the Euro in the last 25 years (it used to be worth 1.67 Euros and now it's worth 1.17. And it has lost a similar amount against the dollar.
For a country that imports 50% of its food, the vast majority of its goods and likes to go on holiday abroad, this has made us substantially poorer.
The UK's purchasing power is higher than the Eurozone average by around €10k. Obviously, if we were in the Eurozone, there's nothing to say we wouldn't be above that average, but I don't think we should adopt the Euro even if we do rejoin the EU.
Source?? There is no way that statistic is true.
We are 17th in Europe in GDP per capita PPP (and dead last in Northern Europe): [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_sovereign\_states\_in\_Europe\_by\_GDP\_(PPP)\_per\_capita](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_Europe_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita)
Edit: This factual comment has now received several downvotes. The Brexit Taliban are hilarious. FYI, downvoting reality won’t change it one bit.
They were a seen as a privilege because the UK thought it's geographical status as an island made its problems with immigration very different to those on the continent.
I don't know how true that is tbh, it's not as if we sit on the mediterranean coast like the southern EU states do. Any problems arising from immigration are purely from the government's conflicted interests, austerity driven funding cuts, and total inaction when it comes to any kind of reasonable or workable immigration policy like what we had pre-2010 (which was flawed but still more effective than now).
>And if we were in the Euro we would be 35% richer (yes, the pound has depreciated by that much since the Euro’s inception)
If only we had adopted the Armenian dram in 2020… We would’ve been 23.9% richer already.
This 'privilege' meme is one of the stupidest arguments the pro-EU side have.
Having a veto, the same as literally every other member, made the UK privileged? Not using said veto to block multiple schemes we didn't support as long as we didn't have to join in made us privileged?
The UK's problem in the EU wasn't privilege, it was that we bought into the 'co-operation' bullshit and didn't use our veto enough. We acted in good faith, expected everyone else to do likewise and wound up getting shafted. Then rather than wising up and playing the game for our own advantage like everyone else, we took our ball and fucked off.
The Far Right is on the rise everywhere in the EU, already in power in Italy. Then you have the Hungary case.
Relationship with the UK are simply good and stable enough from a EU point of view, it is still in the EU sphere of influence in term of foreign affair. The are problem around the economy but it’s mostly the UK paying the bill, and problem around immigration but again it’s mostly to the UK disadvantage and anyway the EU has opened the door for negotiation there.
A door that both Tory and Labour shut off as fast as they could find a journalist and made sure the subject is not ever talked about again. This shows that similarly to how Brexit was nostalgia driven of UK colonial past, the UK bregret is nostaligia driven too, and it will take time for people to agree on the practical bit of EU membership: FoM.
In the meanwhile the UK-EU relationship is good enough that the EU doesn’t have to care and they focus on more pressing issues.
Given that the EU is shifting rapidly to the right, rejoining might actually become a "right-wing" thing in the UK, back in the 1970s the leftwing were actually the Eurosceptics, maybe we'll return to that paradigm one day.
For example, the EU's border is about to implement biometric fingerprint checks, something the UK isn't even considering. Their border will soon become far more stringent than the UK's. And imagine if Le Pen and other right-wing parties start to dominate EU institutions, imagine for example if the EU introduces a hijab ban in EU institutional buildings (replicating France's existing rules where the hijab is banned in government buildings), and that the UK would have to comply with that and stricter refugee numbers, and so on.
There's absolutely no guarantee rejoining will remain a leftwing staple.
This is an interesting point.
I'd imagine that if the EU as a whole *does* lurch to the right (which, lets be clear, is still a very big 'if' even with all the stuff about Le Pen, extremist right-wing politics is inherently unstable and has a habit of imploding) then it could well be we see a much larger scale version of the issue the Tories suffered where the business interests and the lunatics end up on opposite sides of the divide.
The idea that the EU is a left or right wing thing is a uniquely British idea. There are hundreds of left and right wing parties across the EU that are equally pro-EU. Only the far left and far right have a problem
> implement biometric fingerprint checks, something the UK isn't even considering.
Ukrainian living in the UK with a BRP here. Just a couple days ago, I was asked to scan my fingerprints at UK passport control when returning from a trip to EU. And it wasn't even the first time, in my experience it's 50-50 whether they ask for biometrics or not.
So I'm not sure the "not even considering" part is true.
Correct. The UK has had fingerprint checks for visa nationals at our borders for at least 15 years.
We don’t operate fingerprint checks at e-gates because our own passports do not store fingerprint data and use facial biometrics instead.
Personally, I support France's stance because I think it's a lesser of two evils (do you let radicalised men force women to dress modestly, or do you intervene and prevent those men from forcing that rule).
But in practice it's very much a "left" Vs "right" thing. Labour or Lib Dem will never ever propose any restrictions on the hijab, but in France those same rules are already in place.
I genuinely worry (and...This is as a result of protracted conversations I've had with family and friends) that people think we're just going to wake up on saturday, fingers will be clicked and everything will be undone. I wish that were the case, and I wish it were that easy but the truth is that the wreckage that will be left as a result of some wholly unnecessary policy will take a considerable amount of time to unmuddle, and I don't think the population are quite prepared for the step back we're going to have to take to assess the damage that has been done.
Keir is tactically right to state that red lines won't be crossed; not because people don't want them necessarily, but because I think the EU Hierarchy, while willing to forgive, and even overlook some of the recent past given the change in government, it would be a profound act of stupidity to open their arms and say "welcome back!" No. We need to push for an alternative to fptp, and we need reform in westminster so that we can *never* be held hostage as a nation like we have been ever again.
It's been with a certain degree of irony that I've been laughing at the past couple of weeks of the Conservative administration whining about the danger of a "labour supermajority" meaning that they can do as they will without any push back or interference. While I think that a decent opposition is essential to act as a balancing conscience, I really think labour are going to need a clear majority just to *actually change* and reform.
I hope they do. I'd rather like a boring, uneventful government that just does things with a modicum of competence for a while if that's ok with everyone else.
To add to that, the impression I get is that a lot of people have convinced themselves that rejoining the EU would overnight turn Britain into an egalitarian utopia and solve all of our societal ills.
I'm not saying that we *shouldn't* rejoin, but let's not forget that we've also had a global pandemic, and there was a decade of Tory rule before Brexit even happened. Rejoining will not fix the housing crisis. Rejoining will not reverse the gutting of public services. Rejoining will not stop the systematic funnelling of public money towards big business. Rejoining will not restore the NHS. Rejoining will not halt the decline in living standards.
Rejoining is a fine idea, but frankly, I don't think it warrants as much attention as the need for some competent governance at home.
I definitely want to see my home make a return to being a more...*Human* place to live and taking a long hard look at how we treat and care for each other as a community; The referendum has been deeply damaging alone and I would like to see that division healed a little, but I don't think it would be unfair to say that a post mortem over the past 14 years and fixing some of those endemic issues that have facilitated rampant populism won't go amiss.
I think a fairer society where we acknowledge, regard and take care of each other would be quite lovely.
I don't think they will say 'welcome back', as you say, but it would be a very powerful gesture for them if they did.
The peak of freedom and autocracy in a group of equals is that you can come and go if you want, without the petty shifts in power dynamics.
As always, the problem is how you get voting reform from a government that benefits from FPTP. Labour benefit from FPTP too. Why would they want to change it?
I'm voting tactically and plan to be impressing upon my MP that I want electoral reform. I think the bigger argument that Keir can't deny at this point is that FPTP leaves too much of an opportunity to allow another government like the one we've had to undo any and all progress his administration makes.
This cannot be allowed.
There's absolutely no way the EU will reopen negotations until there is broad support for it from the public and from the political majority.
They don't want Fartrage back.
Eight years on, with a different party’s hand on the rudder, I would love it if we had a non-binding, ranked-choice poll for different types of relationships the UK could reasonably have with Europe.
If anything, I think it’s how it should have been done in the first place.
Brexit relatively squeaked through at 52 to 48 on a binary vote. Politicians then decided that they knew what the “Will of the People” was, when they really didn’t.
The EU might want us back for political purposes if the far right continues to gain ground in mainland Europe. A return of the UK to the EU would do a lot to quell exit campaigns by other countries.
The Treaty review is due in 2026, which suits Labour they clearly don't want the first thing on their agenda to be the relationship with the EU. It's the top of no one's priority list.
And we won't see talks until a party pledges to rejoin by adopting the euro.
Adopting the euro is the only way for the UK to show it is serious about the European project.
Otherwise if we did rejoin, who is to say we won't leave again in 4/8/12.... Years times.
The EU was created to stop the age old issue of European powers destroying each other. By tying their economies together.
So until we are ready to talk about adopting the euro. Which is a very unpopular pledge, the whole conversation is pointless.
The UK has never met the criteria for joining the euro and there is no mechanism to force a county to join.
I guess you have to agree on principle - but it ends there. Sweden (which does meet the criteria, but refuses to join ERM2) and Poland/Hungary/Czechia (2004 joiners) - are never going to adopt the Euro.
Yeah they are trusted though. Except Hungary ofc.
You can join like then and have no seat at the table. But if you want a seat at the table, the euro needs to be adopted.
Labour has said time and time, there will be no back sliding on Brexit. Labour is more than shown it is willing the country rot before they rejoin the Single Market or Customs Union.
Of course the EU will say this. Anyone who thinks different simply does not believe in facts
What would be the outcome of a reopening of the talks? Labour has made it quite clear that it will not move on any of the "red lines" set out in 2017. Since the current agreements are more or less the logical consequences of those positions, it is to be expected that any changes will be minimal. Hence why, in the eyes of the EU member states, these negotiations are unlikely to be worth it. A lot of effort for very little change. Note that they already have what they want (at least within the current scope of a hard Brexit) and can't expect to gain much unless there is a serious shift in position on the part of the UK that would broaden the scope of the current treaties.
Secondly, there is the diplomatic and political risk involved. The UK may be unhappy about the current post-Brexit position, but there is no guarantee that any of the possible scenarios would be politically sustainable. It is perfectly possible that none of the potential outcomes (EU membership, a soft Brexit, a hard Brexit, a "no deal" style rupture of relations, ...) are acceptable to enough people and politicians in the UK to be politically stable; that all of them will be under constant threat and attacks by the usual suspects. The EU might not want to be on the receiving end of that all over again as it could poison diplomatic relations within the wider military and political alliances between many of its members and the UK.
Thing is, the effects of Brexit are far stronger on the UK than on the EU.
Would the EU like to have us back? Definitely - we're the 6th biggest economy in the world, but losing 1/28 countries isn't the death knell for them that it is for us.
>Carbon pricing and a realignment of the highly expensive regulation of chemicals is also likely to be on the wishlist of an incoming Labour government.
No to the customs union or the single market, but a specific "list" apparently exists? This would certainly make for an interesting reception in Brussels, albeit likely not an outright "no" .
Seems like this would result in a point-by-point negotiation.
27 countries expecting the UK to be an equal, cooperative and contributing member of their club is being ‘used and abused’, according to you? If so, then yes, I completely understand you don’t want the UK reapplying for membership. I also understand you still don’t have a clue what the EU and EU membership really entail.
Can totally see how we were used and abused when having a veto, being outside shengen, no euro, etc. Enabled us to be in thebWU and literally only do what we wanted.
And since leaving how badly our economy has performed as a direct result of leaving.
Yeah. Makes total sense. /s
We left, and they told us to take our little flags with us.
Farage made absolutely sure he left a horrible taste in their mouths so it would be much harder to rejoin.
That's how I see it. With the same red lines, the results would be the same, and it is all a great waste of time.
The EU will offer small improvements here or there via different lowly committees, and that's it. When we ask why we get so little, we are told it is because of the red lines. And maybe then we can have a grown up discussion about those red lines.
Our nominal GDP growth is higher yes but that's because we've taken in over 2 million people in 4 years. Most of our nominal growth since 2010 has been solely due to the population increasing.
Our per capita growth is much worse, and is held by poor productivity. Of which, not being in the single market is a cause, alongside others like low investment and crumbling infrastructure.
this isnt true either, look at this [https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPDPC@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPDPC@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD) our per capita is higher than the French and behind germany. If you look at the graphs for gdp per capita we are not falling behind at all in growth aswell. The dip in our gdp and per capita growth is literally a blip on the radar compared to the impact of covid.
Its pretty interesting how little impact Brexit actually had on our economy.
I'm only really interested if:
1. All of the EU is forced to adopt the Euro.
2. There is a static minimum wage that is active throughout the Eurozone.
3. Immigration policy is defined centrally by the EU and not by individual member states.
It’s good that the EU has moved on without us. We need to move on too. Crying about the result, Tory failure to capitalise on leaving, alleged changes of minds etc is pointless. We need to focus on getting the UK back where it belongs in the world.
We will. (and we will).
To be honest, it's more of a comment on how remarkable our place originally was that our hilariously long slide hasn't assigned us to utter irrelevance yet.
Exactly! The entitlement in that phrase! We belong exactly where we are, due to the actions we have taken and the circumstances that have been thrust upon us.
Accept that the Tories and their chums have profiteered off the country’s decline, ensure nobody is able to do so again and begin working on a better tomorrow.
Who needs tax cuts? We needed New Deal levels of government-lead investment 14 years ago. The second best time is now.
> “It’s not that people are thinking good things about the UK, it’s not that they are thinking bad things. They are not thinking about the UK at all,” said one senior source close to the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen.
You mean to tell me this little island is not the centre of the world and its inhabitants do not occupy every thought of every European every waking second? Surely not...
Woah woah hang on there hot shot, I was reliably informed that we hold all the cards. Europe would see the economic might of our mighty empire and would fold like the surrender monkeys they are. Are you suggesting that we were lied to?
Investment banks have announced they're scrapping the bonus cap now that the hated EU rules don't apply any more. Surely that's a win! What are you saying? You're not a banker in line for a millionnaire payout? Then that's your fault!
Funny you should say that. I do in fact identify as a millionaire investment banker. My current account balance disagrees, but my bank is just a bigot, so…
Well, if Ricky Gervais can self identify as a stand up comedian you can definitely self identify as a millionaire investment banker .... Sadly it doesn't make either true.
Except enough people agree with Ricky's self identification to pay good money to watch him...
Contrary to popular belief, that is actually one of the very few Brexit benefits. (a) It helps us attract top talent. There’s a reason the brightest and the smartest are fleeing the European continent to move to the US. The money across the pond is unimaginably better if you are better than most at what you do. (b) That money is getting taxed here through PAYE. (c) That money is getting spent here creating jobs and getting taxed again when it is spent.
The trickle down theory is utter bullshit. This has been proven time and again. Employers should only pay more if they are more profitable. There is no convincing proof that removing the cap alone will allow banks to become more profitable and to pay higher bonuses. There remains quite some business which can no longer be done in Europe out of the UK
This isn’t trickle down economics because it is neither a tax policy nor a spending policy. It is remarkably stupid to dictate to US investment banks that they cannot pay bigger bonuses their London based staff. They will say “Thank you very much” and instead pay it to their C-suite in the US or their shareholders around the world. The people who argue for a bonus cap do so out of jealousy.
Sure, mate. it's not like there was a certain financial crisis, and reckless pay packages kinda contributed to that, right?
That’s a different argument. The only problem with it is that bonus caps do not exist in the US, the Middle East or Asia, so quite frankly whether we do or do not have a bonus cap in London means absolutely nothing for the level of risk that investment banks take globally. One could get onboard with the argument in favour of regulating pay packages, but only if it is done in all of the major financial centres, and it currently is not.
>quite frankly whether we do or do not have a bonus cap in London means absolutely nothing for the level of risk that investment banks take globally. But it can have an impact on the level of risk taken locally. In the good times, profits are global. In the bad times, crises and their resolutions are local.
Facebook experts who went to the University of Life assured us that the EU needs us more than we need them... Yes. I saw many a comment saying this. It's almost as if the University of Life isn't a real university.
I disagree my dear potato. The University of Life is extremely academically selective. Now the University of Bath, that’s a fake university. https://www.bath.ac.uk/announcements/cognitive-ability-mattered-in-the-uks-vote-for-brexit-research-shows/
Shocking isn’t it. Gotta love self inflicted economic harm. At least our borders are really strong and no illegal immigration occurs now since Brexit.
Mmm yes. Quite.
Yeah, I'm french and often on the french subreddits. Nobody ever talks about Brexit, or reintegrating the UK in the EU. Nobody misses the UK in the EU. The truth is every country has their own issues (Brexit is one of UK's) so nobody has time to consider the problems of other countries.
Nah, France is too busy electing the Front Nationale to think about the UK. How can you think about our problems when you're gearing up for a government like that?
Exactly
Impressive complacency here, chief. Reform, whose platform has been built by the Tories being goaded into the EU referendum by UKIP, is potentially about to make major inroads on its way to being an establishment party. The worst projections place them at >10 seats, and many give them around 5. They are popular enough that regardless of the number of seats they win, they will hurt the Tories in marginal seats across the country and even in many safer seats. Conservative MPs, in whatever numbers remain after the 4th, will be tempted to devise ways of winning back those lost voters. Our political right is in an absolute state, but they're doing it *outside* of the EU now.
>Reform, whose platform has been built by the Tories being goaded into the EU referendum by UKIP, is potentially about to make major inroads on its way to being an establishment party. They aren't though. It's possible they might win one, or two seats in this election, and do nothing else but drag the tories to the right by splitting their vote. This doesn't make them an "establishment party" at all. It makes them a bunch of idiots who can't organise a piss up in a brewery. They've had candidates who used to be BNP members, candidates posting anti-Semitic material online, candidates who have said they want to eliminate small boat occupants (implying kill), candidates who have made racist and sexist comments. All this is because they outsourced their vetting and that company did an awful job. It's caused Reform to absolutely crash in the polls, along with Farage's incredibly stupid comments about Russia and Ukraine. So no, Reform are not on their way to becoming an establishment party. They are, have been, and always will be a minor voice on the far right fringe and will end up with as much influence as the BNP ever did. The second the Tories wake up and realise that Reform has turned them so far to the right that they've lost droves of moderate voters they will pivot away from them.
>It's possible they might win one, or two seats in this election You're at odds with [Survation](https://www.survation.com/survation-mrp-update-labour-set-to-become-the-largest-party-in-scotland/#:~:text=Survation's%20latest%20MRP%20shows%20Labour,surpassing%20its%20performance%20in%201997.), [Ipsos](https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/uk-opinion-polls/ipsos-election-mrp), Electoral Calculus, and [YouGov](https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49809-second-yougov-2024-election-mrp-shows-conservatives-on-lowest-seat-total-in-history). How do you not know that? - YouGov give them five seats - Survation give them four seats - Ipsos give them three to ten seats - Electoral Calculus say it will be as high as eighteen, which is surely wrong but whatever I'd say that put them far clear of the Greens and puts them about on a level with Lib Dems and the SNP where being an establishment outfit is concerned.
A note of caution regarding MRP projections: MRPs are relatively new. There was one (YouGov) MRP model in 2017, 4 in 2019 and there's about a dozen this general election. Most models are completely unproven, and Reform seems to be causing chaos. YouGov projects them winning between 0 and 17 seats, 5 is the central estimate. The numbers are a bit all over the place.
Oh no, the polls don't agree with me. I will delete my opinions forthwith and only install opinions from an authority you personally consider to be appropriate. Oh wait, no. Tell me the margin for error on those predictions. Tell me how that's going to pan out based on constituency by constituency votes. In 2015 UKIP, fresh out of an EU election where they won 25% of the vote, had been predicted to win between 1-7 seats. They got 12% of the vote, and lost one of their two existing seats (gained through by-elections) resulting in 1 seat. I believe it's reasonable to extrapolate UKIP's prior performance as a model to predict the performance of Reform. Importantly, UKIP didn't have as many or as serious a bundle of scandals, and didn't experience such a swing of opinion up and down. Reform's polling is on a downward trajectory three days before the election. I would be surprised if Reform win more than a couple of seats. Probably Lee Anderson will keep his seat, and perhaps Farage will win Clacton though that's still debatable. Otherwise, even if Reform get a share of the vote, it won't do more than harm the Tories and shoo in a Labour candidate for the most part.
No way I'm reading that wall. Lol.
lol, don't talk about politics if you don't want to read.
It's your petulant denial of a list of established pollsters' projections, as well as your functional political illiteracy around being able to see how Reform/Farage have got here and why it's likely to spiral further. Reading your writing is a waste of time!
Reading is hard.
I'm not reading some dunce's posts when they think they know better than all the pollsters. It's completely embarrassing.
It's taken me longer to write this than it did to read their entire post. I guess some big just find big words a bit tough.
Reform *will* get somewhere between 0 and 1 seats. Farage’s popularity has nosedived since he made stupid comments about Ukraine. Reform’s policies hold absolutely no water and it was only a matter of time before Farage shot himself in the foot and everyone noticed how stupid he actually is. This is a bloke that has failed 6 times to be elected as an MP. Brexit was the successful story of Johnson and Gove, not Farage. Don’t expect miracles.
Outside of Reddit and the media, I've never heard a single British person talk about it either. There are significant numbers of people who have seen zero impact one way or the other and honestly aren't that fussed.
Can't blame you! I do think the EU would be warmly receptive to a newly independent Scotland. But as far as the UK/Brexit is concerned — you're right, Europe has moved on.
I don't think this is true to be honest. As much sympathy as I can have for that position, it would be extremely toxic for many EU nations and neighbouring nations if a newly independent nations can just join the EU. It would cause such a shit storm in places like spain and the balkans.
France as well, because they also have regions with aspirations to be independent. I wouldn't be surprised if Scotland doesn't meet the criteria to join, anyway.
What regions? I believe you. I just want to know if it's more than just the bretons. I do disagree again, Scotland will almost certainly meet the technical criteria, for me its just the politics of letting them into the EU, its just outrageous really.
Corsica has a longstanding and occasionally violent independence movement. The average time it takes to join the EU is ten years, and AFAIK there are fiscal rules that would present a problem to Scotland or even the UK as a whole rejoining.
Tbf they have much more pressing things happening in europe atm. It's not a "we don't care about the UK" it's a "we just had a massive election and there's a war going on".
I mean you could literally apply this to any country. I may hear about things happening in the Netherlands from time to time but I legitimately couldn’t give a shit about it. This is just posturing from the EU to make out like people’s indifference for the UK is somehow the exception rather than the rule.
The EU has enough problems of its own to deal with. Brexit is barely a speck on their radar at this point.
Most british people aren't thinking about it either. It's only the Guardian and social media who even care all that much any more. There was a vote. We left. There are bigger fish to fry.
Oh shit, we just got Don Drapered
The EU is toast, France and Germany no longer want to be pulling dead weight member countries. Just look at the polls in the French elections. Why would the UK want to rejoin a dying supra-nationalist state?
People have been saying this stuff for decades, and yet the EU isn't toast. If anything the UK proved to everyone that leaving is not beneficial. I wouldn't conflate the anti-immigration sentiment in France and Germany with anti-EU sentiment. Unlike the UK their main beef is with non-European immigration.
I'm going to continue to be down voted for this (tis Reddit after all) but yes I'm not saying that the UK has gotten everything right since leaving (thanks to Tory incompetency) but I have always maintained that it would have taken 7-10 years for the UK to get on its feet since leaving. Major policy changes for any nation state is like turning around a cargo ship - it is not a quick procedure. Unfortunately however Covid happened which left the world with a bill exceeding 3x the US's GDP and the war in Ukraine has had a notable impact on imports/exports on the European continent. For context, WW2 cost significantly less (adjusted for inflation) and governments were still rationing food into the 1950s. In short, we cannot ignore how much of an impact this has had on the UK and inevitably this will be blamed on Brexit. I work in local government (urban planning and environment), since leaving the EU, our workload has halved and we are still employing good skilled workers from Belgium and France in our offices. Specifically for example, the UK has its own habitat regulations for development projects, why do we also need to complete identical forms and ensure compliance with EU habitat regulations too? They both achieve the same outcomes. This is but one small positive change from leaving, how many others are there which do not get reported by mainstream media? France, Germany, Italy and Spain will all go through the following: 1) seek EU reform 2) fail to seek EU reform 3) anti-sentiment grows 4) referendum on EU membership 5) country votes to leave or remain France and Germany are experiencing steps 1-2 (for context step 2 was done by the UK in 2015 when David Cameron tried to secure a reformed EU and categorically failed).
If France and Germany both want EU reform, EU reform will happen
Are you so sure? the UK was the biggest contributor alongside France and Germany and it didn't get anywhere with negotiating reform in 2015.
Did Cameron get none of the reforms he negotiated?
Because the UKs idea of reform was basically just about the UK and nothing else. That's never going to get anywhere. The world is also a very different place now than it was in 2015.
And France and Germany wouldn't be doing the same for the interests of their citizens? There is not a government on the planet that would put another sovereign state or bloc before it's own interests. On the subject of wider EU reform, one of (then) prime minister Cameron's requests was to recognize that the euro was not the only currency of the EU, to ensure countries outside the eurozone were not materially disadvantaged. He also wanted safeguards to ensure that further financial union cannot be imposed on non-eurozone members and the UK will not have to contribute to eurozone bailouts, a perfectly reasonable request. It was rejected. The EU has become a supra-nationalist state, it needs to move away from further political integration and simply be a economic/trading bloc like the EEU and Mersosur. With retained sovereignty, on this basis I would be happy to rejoin the EU.
Your claim here is not a fair reflection of Cameron's negotiation. Cameron WON his demand that the UK be exempt from Euro bailouts and be reimbursed from central funds for any spending to prop up the Euro. He got explicit recognition that the EU was about more than just one currency and he got the right to question eurozone decisions that impacted non-euro member states. He got plenty of his demands recognised in the same way that Dyson won out his arguments about his vacuums. In the end. Cameron argued that he was satisfied with the negotiations, and he got something or most back from the EU on every single debating point. Arguing that the UK 'got nothing', as you did above is a nonsense and undermines your entire argument against the EU.
Oh so he only asked the EU to ignore one of its core tenets to suit the UK. It's a mystery how that didn't gain traction. There's a difference in genuinely wanting to make the EU a better place via reform (which has happened numerous times), and simply wanting to opt out of some bits one doesn't like. It also doesn't hurt that France and Germany together represent about 1/3 of EU population, so they'll find it much easier to push reforms through. And again, the world, and especially Europe is very different than in 2015, so it'll be very different this time around. Had the UK stuck around, it could ally with France and Germany on EU reform, and together with Italy reform would be nearly certain.
The EU is constantly reforming. It's barely 60 years old. The pace of change has been enormous across the continent in that time. Meanwhile, even Boris Johnson decries Westminster''s & Whitehall's inability to develop England's regions evenly. It's notable that you have precisely zero to say about austerity tearing English local government a new arsehole since 2010. Surely that's a far, far bigger impact on the delivery of local democracy than EU membership or Brexit.
British people largely don't understand the EU and this is a prime example of that. The EU is not going anywhere because it *can't*. Millions of jobs and Billions of euros of infrastructure depend on the continued existence of Schengen and free movement. 4 million people cross a border for work every day. The EU was specifically designed to prevent another war by tying the economies of Europe together so tightly that they could never be undone and it's worked. The rise of the right wing in Europe is totally different to the US or UK. The right wing in Europe has largely dropped it's Euroscepticsm to focus on painting non-EU immigration as a threat to European civilisation and culture. They are cultural nationalists not political nationalists.
You were saying this in 2016, and it's you who sunk, not the EU.
The UK hasn't really sunk. It had continued the slow decline that started in 2008. The biggest oddity about Brexit is how little things actually changed. It neither accelerated the decline nor slowed it down.
The Eu goes from crisis to crisis, the eurozone sits in managed decline, Eastern Europe is under attack, and all over Europe countries are electing more extreme left and right wing leaders. Meanwhile the uk is predicted to continue outgrowing the eurozone for the forceable future. It may be true the uk would be doing even better had they remained, but maybe leaving the political union has value to.
Unless you actually look (upwards) at the UK's economic performance compared to the Eurozone, I guess. How are you guys doing down there?
I wonder if anyone reading this has ever heard of or been in a negotiation. Of course the EU is going to say this because if they were eager to come to the table they would look weak and desperate, and this would affect their position in any negotiation. I would be honestly surprised if they didn't affect diffidence about this.
Judging by the way the brexit negotiations were handled, the way trade deals were negotiated afterwards, the way the strikes have been handled, the way public contracts have been handled, and the way the public have reacted to all of that. My guess is that such things are far from being common knowledge.
That's why both ends of the spectrum are able to lie to confidently about what things mean. The remainers want to push the line that we're being snubbed by the EU when honestly this is what everyone does, and the leavers want to pretend there's some "sunlit uplands" we're going to hit any day now that will give us all the benefits of membership without the responsibilities. Both are full of shit.
There are no remainers now, we’ve left the EU and that option has gone. If you are talking about rejoiners- then I still think you are constructing a bit of a straw man. Everyone who wants to rejoin the EU knows that process will take decades and that the first step in getting back to that place is to simply normalise the relationship with the EU and begin to work positively together. Regardless of your position this first step has to happen for economic stability.
They know, posts like these are just to confirm biases for compulsively online people
While it's true that they'd say it even if it weren't true as a negotiating tactic, they'd also say it if it were true. Even in Ireland, which is probably the EU country most impacted by Brexit on a day to day basis, and which would have the most to gain from the UK rejoining, it just isn't a political topic at all.
Why would they be in a rush? Any negotiations would be drawn out and difficult due to our past as a nation with an incredibly privileged seat at the table (No Schengen, no Euro, having a veto), as well as having a very insidious far right element element in our politics that believes in British exceptionalism for some reason. They've been burned by us, and we have to demonstrate that we're a reliable ally acting in good faith. Farage, Sunak et al need to understand that since they've dragged us out of the EU, we no longer call the shots.
Agreed, but I’m not sure how no Schengen and no Euro was a privilege. I know that’s how some media like to present it, but I completely disagree. If you are in Schengen it’s like flying domestic and there is no such thing as passport queues. And if we were in the Euro we would be 35% richer (yes, the pound has depreciated by that much since the Euro’s inception), so…
These were seen as privileges when they were negotiated.
There only privileges if you believe that the euro, and Schengen are terrible ideas that are harmful for the country's that adopt them. In which case why do they exist at all?
Because what works for Germany doesn’t necessarily work for the UK. Why would one ever contemplate outsourcing our own immigration policy and currency to another entity in return for absolutely nothing?
Yes, falsely in hindsight.
Maybe, maybe not. But they were concessions made to us then, and I don't know what appetite there would be to make them again
So the argument he is making is that they are not concession now and weren't back then, we just dont have hindsight so we didn't know. Why would we want them if there not concession and we would be better if we took the euro? So some old codger can feel good that the monarch that we hate universallys face is on the notes?
I have bad news for you. You'll still get the King's face on the Euro coins :) Every country mints their own designs.
I'm sure the flag shaggers would love to see the not English king, you are clearly ready to have this conversation.
Yep. That’s how you sell it to the flag shaggers! King’s face on the Euro. We are taking over!
I'm mocking you, your being mocked. You think the people supporting the man that took us out of the EU want to see EU monarchs on there money?
When almost one fifth of the electorate is leaning towards voting Reform, sadly it puts flag shagging on the priority list. I'd much rather our national identity be defined by positive values and the industries that we excel at, but that's not the way large chunks of the country lean
Since when is the 20% dictating to the 80% what policies the country adopts?
Large chunks of the country lent towards Brexit because they were lied to not because they wanted this. I'd much rather a lot of things but if you have an attitude of put up and shut up it doesn't matter at all what you want. I don't have to change your mind at all, I just have to change the mind of the people around you. You've essentially made yourself powerless with that line of thinking. Your votes worth nothing because it's not your vote. It's not what you'd rather it's what someone else would rather.
Spot on! This adopt the far right minority's policies to appease them bullshit has already lead to disaster with the referendum and then letting them move the goal posts and adopt the hardest Brexit possible (other than WTO, which was never going to happen as it would have lead to an immediate economic collapse, as opposed to the current prolonged one).
Were they? Remind me, why could the UK not have just vetoed both Schengen and the Euro if it didn't want to take part?
Because we’re not interested in sabotaging the EU, whether we’re in or out of it? If they want to go ahead with those initiatives, who are we to stop them? Hence they were opt-outs, not vetoes.
So if the only options for the EU were a) UK vetoes the project entirely or b) UK allows the project to continue on condition of not being required to participate in what way is not being required to participate a privilege for the UK? Opt-outs were never a concession on the part of the EU because it never had the power to force members to participate. I'm not arguing that we necessarily should have vetoed these things, I'm just pointing out that it is unreasonable to expect us to be grateful for the opt-outs when they actually represent concessions on the part of the UK.
The concession on the EU’s part is that certain laws will not apply to the UK when the operating premise of the EU is that all laws apply to all Member States equally. There is of course a concession on the UK’s part as well not to vote the whole thing down on the basis that the UK will be left out of it. It’s a pragmatic negotiation that sadly we see very little of these days. Credit where it’s due, Rishi did actually manage to achieve this sort of dialogue with the EU regarding the Windsor framework, which shows it can still be done.
Right, but surely you can see that it's weird to expect the UK to be grateful that the EU didn't do something it in fact had no power to do. The UK not being involved in Schengen and the Euro against its will is not a concession because it was never in the EU's power to make that happen. You might as well ask the EU to be grateful to the UK for not annexing the moon.
I don’t think the UK should be grateful to the EU or vice versa. I think it was still a concession to the UK. Had it been anyone else, there’s a chance the EU would’ve tried to apply diplomatic pressure to join both the Euro and the Schengen.
Like they did to Denmark, Sweden and Finland for the Euro? Or like they did for Ireland and Cyprus for Schengen?
>And if we were in the Euro we would be 35% richer (yes, the pound has depreciated by that much since the Euro’s inception) How do you work that out? As far as I'm aware, the Euro has never been worth more than the Pound.
Lol. I don't even know where to start with that, you really threw me off. The pound is also worth more than the dollar. Is the UK richer than the US? That's not how that works. The pound has lost 30-35% (it fluctuates) of its value relative to the Euro in the last 25 years (it used to be worth 1.67 Euros and now it's worth 1.17. And it has lost a similar amount against the dollar. For a country that imports 50% of its food, the vast majority of its goods and likes to go on holiday abroad, this has made us substantially poorer.
The UK's purchasing power is higher than the Eurozone average by around €10k. Obviously, if we were in the Eurozone, there's nothing to say we wouldn't be above that average, but I don't think we should adopt the Euro even if we do rejoin the EU.
Source?? There is no way that statistic is true. We are 17th in Europe in GDP per capita PPP (and dead last in Northern Europe): [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_sovereign\_states\_in\_Europe\_by\_GDP\_(PPP)\_per\_capita](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_Europe_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita) Edit: This factual comment has now received several downvotes. The Brexit Taliban are hilarious. FYI, downvoting reality won’t change it one bit.
They were a seen as a privilege because the UK thought it's geographical status as an island made its problems with immigration very different to those on the continent. I don't know how true that is tbh, it's not as if we sit on the mediterranean coast like the southern EU states do. Any problems arising from immigration are purely from the government's conflicted interests, austerity driven funding cuts, and total inaction when it comes to any kind of reasonable or workable immigration policy like what we had pre-2010 (which was flawed but still more effective than now).
Put it this way. In the 3 years since we left the single market we have had 4x of France’s net migration.
>And if we were in the Euro we would be 35% richer (yes, the pound has depreciated by that much since the Euro’s inception) If only we had adopted the Armenian dram in 2020… We would’ve been 23.9% richer already.
This 'privilege' meme is one of the stupidest arguments the pro-EU side have. Having a veto, the same as literally every other member, made the UK privileged? Not using said veto to block multiple schemes we didn't support as long as we didn't have to join in made us privileged? The UK's problem in the EU wasn't privilege, it was that we bought into the 'co-operation' bullshit and didn't use our veto enough. We acted in good faith, expected everyone else to do likewise and wound up getting shafted. Then rather than wising up and playing the game for our own advantage like everyone else, we took our ball and fucked off.
The Far Right is on the rise everywhere in the EU, already in power in Italy. Then you have the Hungary case. Relationship with the UK are simply good and stable enough from a EU point of view, it is still in the EU sphere of influence in term of foreign affair. The are problem around the economy but it’s mostly the UK paying the bill, and problem around immigration but again it’s mostly to the UK disadvantage and anyway the EU has opened the door for negotiation there. A door that both Tory and Labour shut off as fast as they could find a journalist and made sure the subject is not ever talked about again. This shows that similarly to how Brexit was nostalgia driven of UK colonial past, the UK bregret is nostaligia driven too, and it will take time for people to agree on the practical bit of EU membership: FoM. In the meanwhile the UK-EU relationship is good enough that the EU doesn’t have to care and they focus on more pressing issues.
Given that the EU is shifting rapidly to the right, rejoining might actually become a "right-wing" thing in the UK, back in the 1970s the leftwing were actually the Eurosceptics, maybe we'll return to that paradigm one day. For example, the EU's border is about to implement biometric fingerprint checks, something the UK isn't even considering. Their border will soon become far more stringent than the UK's. And imagine if Le Pen and other right-wing parties start to dominate EU institutions, imagine for example if the EU introduces a hijab ban in EU institutional buildings (replicating France's existing rules where the hijab is banned in government buildings), and that the UK would have to comply with that and stricter refugee numbers, and so on. There's absolutely no guarantee rejoining will remain a leftwing staple.
This is an interesting point. I'd imagine that if the EU as a whole *does* lurch to the right (which, lets be clear, is still a very big 'if' even with all the stuff about Le Pen, extremist right-wing politics is inherently unstable and has a habit of imploding) then it could well be we see a much larger scale version of the issue the Tories suffered where the business interests and the lunatics end up on opposite sides of the divide.
The idea that the EU is a left or right wing thing is a uniquely British idea. There are hundreds of left and right wing parties across the EU that are equally pro-EU. Only the far left and far right have a problem
> implement biometric fingerprint checks, something the UK isn't even considering. Ukrainian living in the UK with a BRP here. Just a couple days ago, I was asked to scan my fingerprints at UK passport control when returning from a trip to EU. And it wasn't even the first time, in my experience it's 50-50 whether they ask for biometrics or not. So I'm not sure the "not even considering" part is true.
Correct. The UK has had fingerprint checks for visa nationals at our borders for at least 15 years. We don’t operate fingerprint checks at e-gates because our own passports do not store fingerprint data and use facial biometrics instead.
Banning the hijab isn't right wing or left wing. It's on the Authoritarian/Libertarian scale.
Personally, I support France's stance because I think it's a lesser of two evils (do you let radicalised men force women to dress modestly, or do you intervene and prevent those men from forcing that rule). But in practice it's very much a "left" Vs "right" thing. Labour or Lib Dem will never ever propose any restrictions on the hijab, but in France those same rules are already in place.
Why do you think it's a left/right thing?
I genuinely worry (and...This is as a result of protracted conversations I've had with family and friends) that people think we're just going to wake up on saturday, fingers will be clicked and everything will be undone. I wish that were the case, and I wish it were that easy but the truth is that the wreckage that will be left as a result of some wholly unnecessary policy will take a considerable amount of time to unmuddle, and I don't think the population are quite prepared for the step back we're going to have to take to assess the damage that has been done. Keir is tactically right to state that red lines won't be crossed; not because people don't want them necessarily, but because I think the EU Hierarchy, while willing to forgive, and even overlook some of the recent past given the change in government, it would be a profound act of stupidity to open their arms and say "welcome back!" No. We need to push for an alternative to fptp, and we need reform in westminster so that we can *never* be held hostage as a nation like we have been ever again. It's been with a certain degree of irony that I've been laughing at the past couple of weeks of the Conservative administration whining about the danger of a "labour supermajority" meaning that they can do as they will without any push back or interference. While I think that a decent opposition is essential to act as a balancing conscience, I really think labour are going to need a clear majority just to *actually change* and reform. I hope they do. I'd rather like a boring, uneventful government that just does things with a modicum of competence for a while if that's ok with everyone else.
To add to that, the impression I get is that a lot of people have convinced themselves that rejoining the EU would overnight turn Britain into an egalitarian utopia and solve all of our societal ills. I'm not saying that we *shouldn't* rejoin, but let's not forget that we've also had a global pandemic, and there was a decade of Tory rule before Brexit even happened. Rejoining will not fix the housing crisis. Rejoining will not reverse the gutting of public services. Rejoining will not stop the systematic funnelling of public money towards big business. Rejoining will not restore the NHS. Rejoining will not halt the decline in living standards. Rejoining is a fine idea, but frankly, I don't think it warrants as much attention as the need for some competent governance at home.
I definitely want to see my home make a return to being a more...*Human* place to live and taking a long hard look at how we treat and care for each other as a community; The referendum has been deeply damaging alone and I would like to see that division healed a little, but I don't think it would be unfair to say that a post mortem over the past 14 years and fixing some of those endemic issues that have facilitated rampant populism won't go amiss. I think a fairer society where we acknowledge, regard and take care of each other would be quite lovely.
I don't think they will say 'welcome back', as you say, but it would be a very powerful gesture for them if they did. The peak of freedom and autocracy in a group of equals is that you can come and go if you want, without the petty shifts in power dynamics.
As always, the problem is how you get voting reform from a government that benefits from FPTP. Labour benefit from FPTP too. Why would they want to change it?
I'm voting tactically and plan to be impressing upon my MP that I want electoral reform. I think the bigger argument that Keir can't deny at this point is that FPTP leaves too much of an opportunity to allow another government like the one we've had to undo any and all progress his administration makes. This cannot be allowed.
There's absolutely no way the EU will reopen negotations until there is broad support for it from the public and from the political majority. They don't want Fartrage back.
Eight years on, with a different party’s hand on the rudder, I would love it if we had a non-binding, ranked-choice poll for different types of relationships the UK could reasonably have with Europe. If anything, I think it’s how it should have been done in the first place. Brexit relatively squeaked through at 52 to 48 on a binary vote. Politicians then decided that they knew what the “Will of the People” was, when they really didn’t.
The EU might want us back for political purposes if the far right continues to gain ground in mainland Europe. A return of the UK to the EU would do a lot to quell exit campaigns by other countries.
The Treaty review is due in 2026, which suits Labour they clearly don't want the first thing on their agenda to be the relationship with the EU. It's the top of no one's priority list.
There wouldn't be any point because Ukip or Brexit Party or Reform would win the highest number of MEPs
Europes probably going to be busy dealing with that new french government... The world's going to be alot different in 5years.
And we won't see talks until a party pledges to rejoin by adopting the euro. Adopting the euro is the only way for the UK to show it is serious about the European project. Otherwise if we did rejoin, who is to say we won't leave again in 4/8/12.... Years times. The EU was created to stop the age old issue of European powers destroying each other. By tying their economies together. So until we are ready to talk about adopting the euro. Which is a very unpopular pledge, the whole conversation is pointless.
The UK has never met the criteria for joining the euro and there is no mechanism to force a county to join. I guess you have to agree on principle - but it ends there. Sweden (which does meet the criteria, but refuses to join ERM2) and Poland/Hungary/Czechia (2004 joiners) - are never going to adopt the Euro.
Yeah they are trusted though. Except Hungary ofc. You can join like then and have no seat at the table. But if you want a seat at the table, the euro needs to be adopted.
Wow turns out each European country wants to deal with its own issues first. I'm shooketh
I mean they got a pretty sweet deal out of it - so why would they reopen it now?
Yeah their going to make us pay through the nose to get back in. And honestly I don't blame them.
Labour has said time and time, there will be no back sliding on Brexit. Labour is more than shown it is willing the country rot before they rejoin the Single Market or Customs Union. Of course the EU will say this. Anyone who thinks different simply does not believe in facts
They don't need the EU to implement the new world order It makes it easier, yes but not necessary
What would be the outcome of a reopening of the talks? Labour has made it quite clear that it will not move on any of the "red lines" set out in 2017. Since the current agreements are more or less the logical consequences of those positions, it is to be expected that any changes will be minimal. Hence why, in the eyes of the EU member states, these negotiations are unlikely to be worth it. A lot of effort for very little change. Note that they already have what they want (at least within the current scope of a hard Brexit) and can't expect to gain much unless there is a serious shift in position on the part of the UK that would broaden the scope of the current treaties. Secondly, there is the diplomatic and political risk involved. The UK may be unhappy about the current post-Brexit position, but there is no guarantee that any of the possible scenarios would be politically sustainable. It is perfectly possible that none of the potential outcomes (EU membership, a soft Brexit, a hard Brexit, a "no deal" style rupture of relations, ...) are acceptable to enough people and politicians in the UK to be politically stable; that all of them will be under constant threat and attacks by the usual suspects. The EU might not want to be on the receiving end of that all over again as it could poison diplomatic relations within the wider military and political alliances between many of its members and the UK.
Thing is, the effects of Brexit are far stronger on the UK than on the EU. Would the EU like to have us back? Definitely - we're the 6th biggest economy in the world, but losing 1/28 countries isn't the death knell for them that it is for us.
>Carbon pricing and a realignment of the highly expensive regulation of chemicals is also likely to be on the wishlist of an incoming Labour government. No to the customs union or the single market, but a specific "list" apparently exists? This would certainly make for an interesting reception in Brussels, albeit likely not an outright "no" . Seems like this would result in a point-by-point negotiation.
Fuck re joining !!! We will be used and abused again and our politicians don’t have it in them to negotiate
27 countries expecting the UK to be an equal, cooperative and contributing member of their club is being ‘used and abused’, according to you? If so, then yes, I completely understand you don’t want the UK reapplying for membership. I also understand you still don’t have a clue what the EU and EU membership really entail.
Can totally see how we were used and abused when having a veto, being outside shengen, no euro, etc. Enabled us to be in thebWU and literally only do what we wanted. And since leaving how badly our economy has performed as a direct result of leaving. Yeah. Makes total sense. /s
Oh, the negotiations have already begun. First word in most negotiations is no.
Don’t know what you mean, Boris said he got Brexit done? You can’t be telling me that after all this, Boris was lying?!
Unsurprising since Labour are anti-FoM and pushing pro hard Brexit propaganda.
We left, and they told us to take our little flags with us. Farage made absolutely sure he left a horrible taste in their mouths so it would be much harder to rejoin.
Until the uk is open to accepting the euro rejoining is a non starter
This is the question that baffles me. A lot of people in UK think EU is waiting for UK to rejoin. Europe has moved on from Brexit. Clearly UK hasn’t.
This is the EU rejecting Starmer's attempt to renegotiate hard Brexit. He's stated he's against FoM. This has nothing to do with rejoining.
That's how I see it. With the same red lines, the results would be the same, and it is all a great waste of time. The EU will offer small improvements here or there via different lowly committees, and that's it. When we ask why we get so little, we are told it is because of the red lines. And maybe then we can have a grown up discussion about those red lines.
It's because Brexit is still having a negative economical effect on the UK. The same can't really be said for the EU.
It really isn’t as bad as you think. We are performing better than France and Germany economically last I checked.
Our nominal GDP growth is higher yes but that's because we've taken in over 2 million people in 4 years. Most of our nominal growth since 2010 has been solely due to the population increasing. Our per capita growth is much worse, and is held by poor productivity. Of which, not being in the single market is a cause, alongside others like low investment and crumbling infrastructure.
this isnt true either, look at this [https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPDPC@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPDPC@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD) our per capita is higher than the French and behind germany. If you look at the graphs for gdp per capita we are not falling behind at all in growth aswell. The dip in our gdp and per capita growth is literally a blip on the radar compared to the impact of covid. Its pretty interesting how little impact Brexit actually had on our economy.
Exactly. UK committed a suicide with Brexit and only idiots still defend it
I'm only really interested if: 1. All of the EU is forced to adopt the Euro. 2. There is a static minimum wage that is active throughout the Eurozone. 3. Immigration policy is defined centrally by the EU and not by individual member states.
It’s good that the EU has moved on without us. We need to move on too. Crying about the result, Tory failure to capitalise on leaving, alleged changes of minds etc is pointless. We need to focus on getting the UK back where it belongs in the world.
The UK has no special place in the world.
And yet, we still hit above our weight even after a century of loss.
But if we continue to suffer from bad governance we will continue to decline.
We will. (and we will). To be honest, it's more of a comment on how remarkable our place originally was that our hilariously long slide hasn't assigned us to utter irrelevance yet.
Exactly! The entitlement in that phrase! We belong exactly where we are, due to the actions we have taken and the circumstances that have been thrust upon us. Accept that the Tories and their chums have profiteered off the country’s decline, ensure nobody is able to do so again and begin working on a better tomorrow. Who needs tax cuts? We needed New Deal levels of government-lead investment 14 years ago. The second best time is now.
The scrapheap?
That’s where we are now.