This article says that the UK might be willing to sign up for a youth mobility scheme with the EU (for 18-30 year-olds) because it could boost economic growth: “by some estimates, it could do more for growth than planning reform and housebuilding combined”.
However, the article also says that the UK government thinks it would be a mistake to get too close to the EU, because this could serve the narrative of right-wing populists:
Downing Street believes that part of the appeal of both Trump and our homegrown [British] strain of rightwing populism lies in how institutions like the EU became too detached from the people they were meant to serve. In short, [the UK government is] determined not to be seen defending the status quo.
Thoughts?
I’m not saying I necessarily agree with the idea that getting too close to the EU would be a mistake. I think it makes a lot of sense for the UK to have strong ties with the EU.
Brexit was a massive headache for Britain so I think that’s why the UK government doesn’t want to open up that argument again immediately. I guess Starmer does want to build stronger ties with Europe, but he probably wants Brexit-voters (many of whom were from poorer parts of the UK) to feel like their vote is being honoured. If they feel they have been completely ignored then they might give their support to Reform UK, Britain’s equivalent of AfD.
Just vote on Brexit again, it will most likely turn out in favor of joining the EU and even if not then nothing changes. Then they cant say their vote was ignored.
People like Nigel Farage would probably say “they’re trying to rig democracy by making you vote again and again until you choose the ‘right’ answer”. And some Brexit voters would probably believe that narrative.
I think it’s definitely possible that there will be a push from the British public to rejoin the EU, at some point. Maybe in 5 to 10 years though.
Don’t think it’s as easy as that. They’d now need to ask to join, then for the EU open negotiations, then put the terms to the people.
Or they could ask the people if they should go ahead and negotiate to rejoin, then risk failing in the negotiations as the terms won’t be as favourable as they were when they were in their special position last time. (Though given current geopolitics maybe the EU would be a lot more accepting of previous terms, don’t know).
Either way there’s a lot of political risk there.
Joining the EU right now doesn’t make sense politically. Far more useful and effective to work on getting a customs union in place. Most of the benefits without most of the headaches.
They could simultaneously work on regulation alignment, and then they’re off to the races.
You won’t get single market AKA customs union without regulatory alignment and free movement. It’s a package deal.
Customs union and single market aren’t the same thing. Customs union means no tariffs, and a unified tariff policy on those outside the union. Nothing more, nothing less. There are active discussions about doing this.
Single market is joining the EU, with regulatory alignment and free movement, as you quite rightly say.
Actually, there are territories which are inside the single market but outside the customs union. Take Heligoland, for instance. If you ship several bottles of Cassis de Dijon from France to Heligoland, you have to pay duty on the French liquor but local authorities can’t confiscate the bottle over the low alcohol content.
@trollercoaster @Barbarian
I never understood why the torries thought implementing Brexit meant cutting all strings and burning each and every bridge though. They could’ve pursued a deal like Norway or Switzerland, if the vote was this narrow you could easily spin it as ‘we want to find a solution that makes everybody happy’.
They wanted to have their cake, and eat it, too. Maintain full access to the all benefits while giving nothing back in return. This includes burning all bridges, because nobody, especially not an alliance of 27 countries, is especially fond of being taken advantage of.
A Norwegian or Swiss style arrangement wouldn’t have worked with the Tories either, because access to the free market automatically signs you up to freedom of movement and acceptance of EU regulations, as well as mandatory contributions to the EU budget.