Will Labour unpick Brexit?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 31 май 2024
- In this new Federal Trust video Brendan Donnelly and John Stevens discuss the likely evolution of a Labour government’s approach towards the EU. They argue that political pragmatism and economic reality may lead over the next five years to a transformation of Keir Starmer’s current cautious approach towards the EU.
SPEAKERS
Brendan Donnelly is the Director of the Federal Trust and a former Conservative MEP.
John Stevens is the Chair of the Federal Trust and an analyst and commentator on economic affairs.
ABOUT THE FEDERAL TRUST
The Federal Trust is a research institute studying regional, national, European and global levels of government. It has always had a particular interest in the European Union and Britain’s place in it. The Federal Trust has no allegiance to any political party. It is registered as a charity for the purposes of education and research.
Website: fedtrust.co.uk/
X: / fedtrust
Donate: www.paypal.com/donate/?busine...
Support our work:
/ federaltrust
#brexit #rejoineu #labourparty #keirstarmer #generalelection2024
Voting for a party which has ruled out rejoining the EU or even a customs union is not a great feeling but Labour will get my vote . I hope we get another referendum on proportional representation under Labour.
Hope he makes it first job to unpick Brexit and make this country wealthy and trading with EU again
Let's hope that Britain returns to Europe and adopts the Euro. The Pound and Monarchy should be ditched asap
UK will rejoin EU. Brexit has been a complete waste of time.
Why would we allow that, please? You can apply, but not join without EU consent.
And boy oh boy-have you misbehaved.
Why would we allow you back?
And please no waffeling, concrete advantages to the EU.
@@RealMash Another individual who imagines he speaks on behalf of 26 governments and millions of people.
@@RealMash The UK has no interest in EU membership.
We've left it.
@@RealMash
Girt Wilders has now formed a Netherlands government. Their policy is to veto expansion. Including Ukraine.
@@jontalbot1 where does @realmash pretend to speak for others, he/she just asks you a question and explains that it is not up to the UK to decide about membership.
We can apply to join the EU but we will have to fulfil the criteria.
Like everyone else
Wanting to be semi-detached member of the EU was always a mug’s game.
@@brendandonnelly1853 Your campaign to join would do well to make that your prime argument. It amazes me that it seems as if around ninety per cent of pro-EU UK posters on various RUclips websites aspire to the retention of the pound and staying out of Schengen, many as a condition for supporting a join campaign
@@frankoneill5675 I never saw anyone say that except you. Everyone knows readmission is not straight forward
@@jontalbot1 Say what?
Hope we go back in as id love freedom of movement back of going to another European country as many time as you wish without getting your passport stamped and it would be good if we had the Euro as then we would be able to use it in other countries without exchanging it
I bloody hope so. It’s why I’m voting for them.
UK doesn’t decide any of this. Eurozone will not let the UK in.
Ah the Eurozone King!
@@Purple_flower09 Bricks 🧱 loser.
The UK joining the eurozone is the one really significant thing that would strengthen the EU and would be rated by it as extremely valuable.
@@JohnStevens-gp7ge UK will not join the Eurozone because Eurozone will not allow it. Try to comprehend that Eurozone is dismantling Londons monopoly over the European banking. This became possible when UK decided to brexshit. This was not possible when the UK was still a member of the Single Market. June 2025 UK will be finally fully out of Single Market and London can’t operate in the EU anymore. SO WE ARE DOING THE OPPOSITE. We are throwing UK out not in. After that we will not reverse the decision because this is Trillions in transactions, hundreds of billions in revenue and tens of billions in tax revenue. Taking UK back is against our financial interests. There is absolutely no way in hell that the Eurozone gives this cake back. In Eurozone everyone is pissed off how UK handles OUR money.
My view is that we need to fix the UK's broken democracy as a matter of urgency. For me this comes in advance of eventually applying to join the EU.
If the UK reforms itself but is still not accepted back inside the EU we would at least have a functioning democracy.
Radical reform of the broken system would also benefit an application.
The two processes can run in parallel and indeed reinforce each other.
The EU is dead rotten to it's core
You have no chance in joining for the next 35 years.
@@JohnnyinMN none of us knows the future with such assurance and indeed with such a high degree of precision. If we think of the events of the last 5 years or so I think it becomes evident that all manner of unlikely things might come to pass.
Broken democracy?. Like electing an EU commission president.....you can chose candidate A or erm .....Candidate A. Only a europhile would call this Democratic.
Somthing has to chage ' even the middle class are working to exist ' imagine what its like for the young & unskilled ' & ill people on benifits have nothing at all ' yet im sick of rightwing governments picking on the poor like their lazy ' its easy for these priveledge types assuming this ' farage is in constant denial over brexit ' personally i think leaving the EU has been a major financial disaster for us ' ie uk ' we have been running on fumes ' while the rich have had it to good 🤑
Somebody has to have some sense here!
The Labour government will have to agree some sort of trade policy with the EU; they happen to be our biggest trade partners!
There is a trade ageement in place already, the TCA.
The Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) between the UK and the EU is not an agreement that does the UK any favours. It was negotiated by our BoZo so that he could then brag that he got Brexit Done!
@@user-bt8cz9nv4x That doesn't concern the EU. EU member states seem pretty happy with the deal and see no reason to change it.
@@frankoneill5675 Yes, and dam shoddy it is too!! Does not cover servics whch is the majority of our exports, and customs friction is killing SME's and inward investment is down as a consequence!!
@@frankoneill5675 ...becase it is almost No Deal and far fra below what was promissed by the Leave cabal in 2016 there is every imperative to change it, which can only meaningfuly mean rejoining!
I think the point both you guys have missed is that Labour are going to win with a huge majority (possibly 200+) and with that big a majority Keir Starmer will probably call an election after 4 years not 5, so in a second Labour term after 2028 they will still have a majority of 150+ maybe even increased if the Tories are as unelectable as they are now, so I could see a referendum to rejoin in the UK in 2031 or 2032.
I hope there are Europeans who are sympathetic towards the UK. It was a very close vote and the people were lied to. Many people now regret Brexit.
Unfortunately:
- UK used to have quite a few privileges compared to other members. The EU, if it has learned anything from the past, won’t grant a returning UK any opt outs.
- Way too many self styled rejoiners are convinced that they can cherry pick and get a EU membership a’là carte, and won’t accept returning on the same terms as every other new member.
- UK governance needs a deep overhaul before UK can be trusted to take a long term commitment to EU membership.
I can’t see UK seriously applying for renewed membership before a decade or two, and then there will be another decade or two of detailed work.
And you, yourself, aren't you a European? Nah, just kidding 😀 (kind of).
Looking in from the European mainland, I am sympathetic towards the UK and sincerely hope the Britons get their act together. However, I am also wary. What is to prevent the UK from pulling another similar stunt sometime in the future? After all, your jingoistic folly did cost us billions.
I'd say, get your act together, prove to me you can be trusted again and I will welcome you back with open arms.
Unfortunately, all I currently see is many - way too many - Britons wanting to rejoin just because they lost some trade. I'm sorry but that's not good enough.
@@paologat They have to reduce their debt to GDP from 101% to 55% in a shrinking economy. 10 years is way to optimistic.
@@RealMash this is an important point. Those would want the UK to eventually apply to join the EU don't mention the extremely severe austerity that would be required. For year after year.
It's just an opinion but I believe, that in order to convince the EU of our long-term commitment, the Labour Party needs to adopt PR and abandon FPTP. In addition to giving us a more representative parliament it would make it immensely difficult for any Party to dominate our politics in the way that the Conservatives have over the course of my 68 years. The damage their, at best lukewarm and at worst hostile, attitude to the EU would become a distant memory. Thanks for the discussion, always thought provoking.
You're absolutely right.
If representative democracy is required, the last thing the UK needs is PR. The preferential system--used in Australia--is fairer and much more accurately freflects the public's desires
@@ausbrum thanks for pointing this out, I was completely ignorant of this method. Why do you think that PR is last thing we need seeing as a version of PR is used to elect the Australian Senate?
@@ausbrum I think in the UK we tend to refer to all other voting systems as PR. And there are numerous versions of PR too. In due course I hope this is fully explored. But the voting system is only one part of what's wrong with the UK's broken politics.
@@ausbrum nobody cares what system they have in Australia or if it is better. It is irrelevant. What is relevant is if uk fulfill the Copenhagen criterias. And uk does not. It is VERY unlikely that uk will be able to fulfill them during the next 15 years. If the criterias have not become more stringent, wich is very likely, and uk fulfill them the negotiations start. They usually take some ten years. The there is the voting where all members has a veto on whether uk can become a member or not. Do you feel lucky? It might be clever to consentrate a bit on requirements instead of day dreaming of unicorns.
Wise words. All I would add is to ask whether Starmer would continue the Conservative's persistent obfuscation of the damage from Brexit? I think he is bound to be more open about the downsides and cost of Brexit.
Great podcast. Keep up the good work
Great to hear from you both and i hope you are right..
"Will Labour unpick Brexit?" - well something has to be done
@@adv957 No, they can't. Not the UKs decision. But yo sure can get your house in order and then apply.
@@adv957 It is, for now and the next decade or so. But the pain will rise, the discontent will rise. It is just that in every passing minute it will take the UK two minutes to reverse it. The UK will ask to join-but the expectation and the work needed must be realistically estimated.
Nothing will be done. I call this video ‘false hope from two old, deranged men.’
It is repeatedly suggested that the Majority are not in favour of Rejoin, when they are. Yes, there is an application process, and UK should begin it. That is the point. It is not a "fault" in those who wish Rejoin to point out there is an accession process. "But what about ..." arguments do nothing to lessen the broad concensus for Rejoin.
depends on your definition of "broad consensus", since the moment the join question includes the reality of taking the € and being part of Schengen there isn´t that much of a group left
Why would the EU want the UK back? As an European I see no benefits. Work on your extreme exceptionalism and sense of entitlement first.
That’s what the video suggests.
The younger generation are growing up in an era when the varnish has come off the “glory of Empire”, and even we ourselves are no longer convinced by the bluster about being the best in the world at everything. I get almost a sense of incredulity at the sheer state of our country, from our antiquated and unfair electoral system and the House of “Lords”, to our inability to stop sewage spewing into ours rivers or provide sustainable jobs and public services in deprived areas.
I think that this generation will have a *very* different attitude to the European project than the entitled Boomers who supposedly fought off Nazism all by themselves despite not having been born until the fifties and sixties.
The antidote to UK exceptionalism is making, and winning the case for re-joining the EU, with all which that will entail.
As a Brit I would agree and don’t blame any European for not wanting the UK to rejoin after what was a pretty contentious breakup by the UK! The sheer bloody arrogance and totally misguided confidence not only of the leave campaign but also of the campaign to remain who underestimated the nationalistic rhetoric and fervor on the minds of those less inclined to think carefully and critically about what they were actually voting for, the foolish assumption that despite no clear and concise plan we would just simply and automatically transition to being better off outside of the worlds largest trading block right on our doorstep was just incredulous to many of us!
But you should also understand that this kind of manipulation and bumper sticker populist narrative targeting the fears of the less educated can happen anywhere, and that to shun a nation where nearly half voted to stay and the other half of which I would say at least a quarter were shook into the realization of “what the hell have we done” almost immediately is not a good idea! Also as a European you should also remember the lessons from history, one hundred and five years ago the determination to punish a nation when it had caused far worse didn’t work out too well for anyone did it? That btw is merely an example…..not a threat!
@@Bluedog4712 fair nuff, point well taken. However I do hope the discussions in the UK will focus a bit more on what the UK thinks it has to offer the EU project instead of solely the economical benefits to the UK.
After all the EU is a peace project in which the economic dimension is just a part.
The joining of the customs union will aid the ailing economy and not break any not rejoining the EU pledge. Before we are reduced to complete penury.
No labour has said it will not try to return to the EU.
I'm dutch why do I know this (maybe cause I read it on Labours' website) and are you british still asking these silly question when you already know the answer?
And why do you think it is even an option?
I am afraid you have a higher standard of honesty towards pre-election promises in Holland (perhaps because you invariably end up with the compromises of a coalition programme?). Here there is every reason to doubt whether what Sir Keir Starmer is saying is simply to secure the largest possible majority which, under our "winner takes all" electoral system, will give him immense power and very extensive freedom of policy movement (at least after a year or so). Then there are events both economic (de-globalisation) and constitutional (Northern Ireland and Scotland) which will force any UK government to address the damage done by Brexit. This piece is prompted by the clear, widespread assumption amongst the large number of UK voters who now are hostile to Brexit that Labour will, notwithstanding their current statements, will seek to do exactly that.
@@JohnStevens-gp7ge We can only hope! 🙄
It's called financial necessity. The UK cannot continue as is without incurring further, and ever increasing, debt which will prevent the most basic of services form being provided by HMG. The Labour Party does not have the absurd 'Brexit freedom' albatross around its neck and viable financial and fiscal policy will be impossible to implement and control without a return to the EU as a full member. It will happen. The only actual question is when, and the need to pursue this matter is existential rather than silly.
@@ianedwards3089 Yes, we can hope and pray for a Labour Party U turn. 🙏🤞👍
@@JohnStevens-gp7geThe continentals do not get how british politics work. You can say one thing but imply another,british people get that. Starmer has to appeal to a wide and varied audience. We all understand we need the Tories gone. By hook or by crook.
Although I would vote in a heartbeat to rejoin, my immediate priority is proportional representation. No one party, Labour, Conservatives or anyone else, should *ever* have an absolute majority in Parliament; it ends all effective scrutiny and leads to arrogance, incompetence and corruption. I think other Europeans would look much more favourably on us if they could be sure we would not simply mess it all up again once back in the EU.
As a bonus, I would like to see the Green proposal for a fully elected second chamber consisting of members voted in for one, non-renewable, non-repeatable ten-year term. Perhaps candidates could be selected from a shortlist of people with long expertise in valuable areas, representative of *all* of society (particularly disadvantaged groups), drawn up by a commission overseen by a citizens’ assembly, to vet the quality of candidates?
Looking in from the mainland, I can only agree with you. PR is the biggest issue, bar none. However, another major issue is to convert the current gentlemen's agreement with your government into a clear written text that is enforceable and can only be changed by a super-majority.
With all my Fibre I hope Starmer repairs the damage that Brexit inflicted ,but we have to do it with the help of the EU and it's people, fingers crossed they can see past the nastiness of some of the Brexiteers.
Out means out.
🇪🇺🇳🇱🎉
Of course people can see past the nastiness of the brexiteers.
And what we see is a nation filled with arrogant exceptionalists that didn´t protest that much against the nastiness of the brexiteers.
@ab-ym3bf Half the population drowned out by a lying right wing press until reality hit home.
@@ianwheeler7513half the population falling for obvious lies because they confirmed their feelings.
@ab-ym3bf I can agree with some of that sentiment, but I'd argue what nation hasn't got bigots and xenophobic elements couple that right-wing media barons who don't live in the UK, and right-wing think tanks and you have a recipe for disaster.
Whatever Starmer does the Daily Mail won’t like it. He will however probably care less about the Daily Mail after the GE.
I m just a german guy and not fluent or an expert in english but didn t Brexit mean leaving the EU? And haven t the UK left alreay? So why everybody in the UK still talk about the Brexit and not about the sovereignty. Cause that is what it s all about, sovereignty. Or didn t i get it? Curiously enaugh no one in the EU talk about Brexit anymore, here you may here about GB beening independent, when even someone talk about it anyway. Perhaps someone can help me to understand.
The consequences of Brexit are much worse for the UK than for the EU. That is why some people in the UK talk so much about Brexit and people in the EU don’t.
@@brendandonnelly1853 yes i understand it and been not surprise but you said "consequences of Brexit" when meaning sovereignity. Witch by the way almost everybody use in comments. Like Experts when meaning immigrants. That is a bit confusing. You know "independed" has a positive attitude for me, some fresh ideas and a vision. Consquences instad ... not so much. So were are they the visions of freedom and sovereignity? Miss them for years now. I mean there had to be some in 2016.
@@brendandonnelly1853 Wrong. Sovreignty is Sovreign.
Let's clear a misconception first; souvereign is where the bribe money goes. Sometimes politicians bribe people, (retirement at 63) sometimes people bribe politicians. (party donations)
Second
Some tories didn't like some aspects of the EU. Labour hates all of it for what it stands: globalisation.
Finally
The british people as a whole must learn that the EU is not a self service gas station.
It's a political alliance on its way to become a military one. The four freedoms are just the compensation for the people to hand over some souvereignty to Brüssel. So hand over comes first and treats come second. Good boy!
@@MENSA.lady2....mensalady? With that spelling? Really? 😂
Too late, the UK economy is finished
Every 27 🇪🇺 member State will need to ratify any application to join their club.
🇬🇧 was unable to join the EEC in the sixties due to Charles de Gaulle's repeated "Non!"
Then there were just six member States 🤔
Yes indeed. Britain does need to change and to demonstrate to the other EU members that things have changed in Britain. An unchanged 'Brexity' Britain is definitely not a good fit! For as long as Britons only want to be back in the EU for their own economic gain and want to keep EU values, aims, institutions, solidarity and closer union at bay, the other member states will not be agreeing to return. Neither will it be tolerated that Britain wants back into the single market, for its own economic betterment, but continues to reject the EU per se.
If this can happen, rejoin will follow swiftly. So how will Starmer deal with the British lying press? How will Starmer, who has indeed boxed himself into the leave corner, initiate the change, before pro EU Labour voters leave him and go with a more positive party? For the forthcoming GE people will 'lend' him their votes regardless., but not for long. He will need a very good strategy to initiate the change in Britain and his current pronounced leave stance may make this impossible for him personally.
So far Starmer has only demonstrated that he and his party want better from EU just because he is Starmer and a nicer person and party than the Tories. He wants to renegotiate a better TCA. In other words, that old problem, the British entitlement thinking. Negotiate, sign and ratify - and later demand that it be changed to suit you! Not respecting that all other EU countries have equally signed and ratified t h i s TCA and actually don't want changes.
When will Starmer (and Britain) realise that future membership depends on the EU getting better commitment from Britain, rather than Britain negotiating better deals for itself from the EU? If the EU does not see that change in Britain, nothing will happen. Especially after Starmer's last, almost instant rebuff regarding mutual youth mobility. It really is Britain that will have to do the heavy lifting or finally move on in a (hopefully far more constructive) third country relationship. A decision which way to go forward will need to be made. And he will need to make this decision. We watch in hope how a return to EU will be possible.
Spain,Greece, and Cyprus are all in various disputes with the UK. The UK also threatened Norway, the Netherlands, the Faroe Islands, Iceland,and Denmark .I don't think the UK wants allies or friends right now. They certainly aren't acting as if they do.
@@MrsGardiner I agree except it looks like Starmer has given up on the idea that the review of the TCA will amount to much. Lately he's only mumbled about tweaks to veterinary arrangements.
@@derektowers7708 Iceland is not a member of the EU.......
@@Purple_flower09neither is Norway
Less ideology; more pragmatism sounds good to me.
And who exactly needs to be pragmatic?
Brexit needs to be undone.
"Unpicking" Brexit is beyond the capacity of any British political party. Brexit has happened and Britain is no longer part of the decision making in the EU.
If Britain wants to trade with the EU Britain will be required to abide by EU rules and regulations. Rules Britain gets no say in.
Whilst I have seen polls suggesting the english are disliking the consequences of brexit. Saying that means they like/accept what the EU will demand for rejoining is a bit of an ask. The English and particularly english politicians still do not want to be European and this fact will always hamper any attempted rapprochement what ever the flavor.
That may come down to the half baked ideas they have about Europe--just as they half half baked notions of "America"
the european issue? you mean the british issue..
One year after getting into office, Starmer could look at the opinion polls and if they indicate a win call a referendum on rejoining.
No. He couldn't.
It would not be primary legislation.
@@rebeccanoble6797 Be that as it may. But remember, no matter how many referenda Britain holds, the final decision is the UEs and theirs alone. Once bitten twice shy comes to mind ! Your had your chance & fluffed it. Any hope of Joining again is merely 'pipe dreams" !
@@willieckaslike we're not holding any referendum.
The UK has left the EU. You'll never get an opportunity because we are not going to rejoin the eu. Ever.
@@rebeccanoble6797 How right you are. We here on the mainland would never allow it ! You had your chance of being a member of one of the most powerful Trading Blocs in the world. And you fluffed it. As far as we here are concerned, Britain is 'just another country' end of !
@@willieckaslike chance?
Keep it. It's a "chance" the UK electorate didn't want.
The EU SM is in decline. We've joined CPTPP.
We're not going to seek EU membership. So you'll never have any opportunity to "refuse" or tell us what to do.
😏
Starmer and the Labour Party are an English and a Nationalist party . By Nationalist I don’t mean in the race sense like the BNP are but in the sense of English exceptionalism of the type ‘we are English and thus deserve to have our cake and eat it’.
Brexit had many fathers but was primarily a project of the libertarian right who had control of the Tory party, however at the same time Labour under Corbyn was under control of its own anti-EU Lexiter faction and so the UK from the 2016 ref through to Brexit happening in 2020 was in the grip of a perfect storm with both major parties in thrall of their respective Brexiter and Lexiter wings. The Tories drove Brexit but at no point did Labour ever try and stop it.
Lastly being in a single market means being under a common set of rules and laws related to that market and so is a constitutional state of being and that is not possible as a third party. Close alignment with a single market is not possible - the privileges of membership are for members who take on board all the responsibilities as well.
Can you imagine for example going to the US and saying the UK wants to be in the US single market but not be a state in the US nor under US law and courts and make our own rules. The answer would be to get lost, yet that’s what Brexiters and Lexiters thought they could do with the EU.
It may well be that trying to join the.Single Market and failing to do so is a phase the British government will need to go through on its path to rejoining the EU.
@@brendandonnelly1853 So you think it is a clever move for the Uk to once again ask for an exception to existing rules to be a member of the SM as a 3rd country on its path to applying to join (wish you brits stopped with the "rejoining" nonsense).
If so, your post is a confirmation of exceptionalism which was the essence of the OP´s post. Not one moment of reflection on how such a "request" will fall on the side of the EU.
I´m afraid I will go a step further than the OP, arrogance and exceptionalism isn´t restricted to one political party in the UK. It´s endemic.
The USA is a country - a fully sovereign state - not just a market. Your point would be clearer if you imagined the UK wanting to become one of the German Länder for trade purposes but somehow not become a political province of Germany.
If the UK wanted to join USMCA and the existing three members approved, that would be fine. Membership of USMCA is, after all, non-exclusive. Both Canada and Mexico are also members of the CPTPP, for instance. The point is, in terms of trade organisations, it’s the EU which is the exceptionalist outlier. It does not allow its individual members to also be members of other trade organisations, like the ASEAN, CPTPP and USMCA do.
@@georgesdelatour My example is valid and let me explain why. It’s long but bear with me.
The USMCA is a free trade agreement (FTA) between third party nations (USA, Mexico, Canada) and by no means does it offer seamless borderless trade in goods and services which is what a single market does.
In a single market all members are legally considered as domestic and are under a single overarching federal law and courts and being in such a single market is not an FTA but rather it is a constitutional state of being.
There are single markets inside the fully federal nations of the USA, Canada and Australia and in each the federal legislature and federal law and courts is superior in every aspect of law to the legislature and laws and courts of all member states, provinces, territories, commonwealths - or whatever they are called.
The EU is unique in that its a union of sovereign members who for the purpose of a single market in trade for both goods and services have pooled defined competencies of law under a common EU law and courts.
EU law is only about trade and employment and the ECJ is essentially a trade/commercial court that only has superiority to the highest national court in each member in highly defined competencies and no jurisdiction in others.
For example EU law has zero to do with criminal law and also no jurisdiction in tax law in member states.
No FTA anywhere offers seamless borderless tariff free trade in goods and in services. In fact as far as FTA’s go the USMCA is full of clauses that favor the US which does not believe in the GATT/WTO ideal of a level playing field where all nations big and small obey the same rules enforced by neutral referees via dispute arbitration.
In fact when it comes to trade in services the EU single market is superior to the single markets in the US, in Canada and in Australia.
Why?
Well the US, Canada and Australia were primarily set up as political unions making one big and powerful country and the economic single market inside this political union was an afterthought and this led to member parts demanding protection for local monopolies hence in all three of them trade has many barriers especially trade in services.
On the other hand the EU single market was primarily setup to form a giant fully free market for trade in goods and services provided they comply with relevant overarching EU rules and regulations hence for those competencies each EU/EEA member voluntarily accepts the jurisdiction of EU law and courts.
With its attitude of ‘we can have our cake and eat it because they need us more then we need them’ (words actually used by PM Johnson) the UKG wanted to be free of any of the obligations of being a member to follow laws and pay dues but at the same time it demanded all the privileges of membership.
This is documented by Michel Barnier in his published diary of the years of Brexit talks. After the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement (which includes the NIP) was signed and the talks moved onto negotiation of a new EU - UK Trade Agreement he asked Lord Frost the chief UK negotiator when they would be negotiating and signing the scores of sectoral agreements of mutual equivalence of standards (MEA’s) needed to get over the myriads of sectoral non-tariff-barriers (NTB’s) that are part & parcel of modern trade.
NTB’s are essentially sets of standards and MEA’s allow for as smooth as possible trade (in goods only) because each side commits to keeping and following sets of standards and indeed the whole certification system for each.
Frost replied to Barnier that the UKG had no intention of signing any MEA’s as it regarded them as infringing on UK sovereignty and instead the EU must just “accept the UK as a sovereign equal” with no signed agreements!
Yeah right.
This is why the EU-UK TCA is a terrible trade deal for the UK. It is basically barebones WTO terms with tariffs at zero but next to no MEA’s. Hence maximum friction for UK exports at EU Border Control Points (BCP’s).
What friction?
Well right now with the UK having recently left the EU, UK rules and regulations are pretty convergent with those of the EU and so unilaterally and pragmatically the EU decided to accept UK imports without any MEA’s but each consignment must be accompanied by proof of meeting current UK certifications and each must be checked.
This has added huge delays and costs to UK exporters. Contrast this with for example the EU - NZ Trade & Partnership deal which has a very high grade Sanitary Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement (an MEA) such that NZ agri exports to the EU are trusted and subject to only random inspections set per agreement at less than 1% of consignments and with far less documents.
In practice such is the trust level those checks are only done
@@georgesdelatour Germany is also a country, a fully sovereign state, so your correction falls flat on its face.
Also, the us/can/mex deal is a trade deal, the EU is much more than a trade deal or even a single market. But that fact will never land between English ears.
No chance of them dealing with poverty, injustice and inequality or anything of any value actually.
All caused by the tories
Time to rejoin the EU.
It's time to start the long and tough business of building an overwhelming consensus in the UK that the country should commit to a programme of change that would ultimately make the UK a decent candidate for EU membership.
@@Purple_flower09yeah, but that's a bit much to write on a protest march sign!
Sure. See you in half a century.
Labour will put an end to Brexit. Eventually
It's inevitable that we will rejoin the EU because Brexit is a failed old people's project, young people don't want Brexit and more people are seeing that it's a disaster.
Due to first past the post elections, it has to be the Labour Party that eventually takes Britain back into the EU.
But...
Starmer believes that Brexit voters are too stupid to be capable of changing their minds when they experience the consequences of their folly. Therefore we either have to wait for Brexit voters to die off, or for the Labour Party to replace Starmer.
So at the moment Labour has no plan to take Britain back into the EU, but it will have to have a plan at some point in the future.
_It's inevitable that we will rejoin the EU_ Sorry, but it's not 'inevitable'. All the UK can do is apply for EU membership again. It'll first have to meet the Copenhagen Criteria and will then have to be voted in by all 27 EU member states, unanimously. Two giant hurdles that will take decades, if ever. Considering Starmer is still chanting his "we'll make Brexit work" mantra. And also considering the fact that some EU countries profited business-wise from Brexit and aren't keen to have unreliable old Blighty back in the club. It only takes one veto.
That point may be nearer than you think.
I doubt if anyone would veto a serious British application to rejoin. Seriousness would be shown by for instance joining the euro, which would make a second Brexit much more difficult.
@@brendandonnelly1853 _I doubt if anyone would veto a serious British application to rejoin_ France might. Spain might. Greece might. And there are more EU countries that have a bone or two to pick with the UK. The UK left the EU in a very hostile way, burning many diplomatic bridges in the process and continued to be a very unreliable business partner afterwards. Don't overestimate the UK's current popularity within Europe. You're not hated or anything, just not trusted. And not needed that much, to be honest.
I understand your desire for UK to rejoin the European Union. Only it's much more likely that Northern Ireland and Scotland will exit this this failed experiment UK Union, long before any UK rejoin gets off the ground.
I will not vote Labour if there is no real commitment from Labour to rejoin European Union.
Sad to say there are many more who will not vote Labour if they do
So you will be voting for the Lib Dems…
While I very much agree with you that Starmer's statements about "Never rejoining th" are very depressing we have seen Starmer "adjust" his policies to try to secure enough votes on many issues. Until we can get PR I am afraid we have to wrestle with the wretched FPTP system and that means tactical voting even if it also means "nose-holding" Not voting tactically hands a big advantage to the Tories because the anti-Tory, left-of-centre vote is split between several parties. Really the priority now must be to ensure that we eject the Tories . After that has been safely achieved one may revert to voting with one's conscience on particular issues.
What the English don't understand is that mama EU has nearly unlimited patience with its own children. But is hard as flint against silly third countries. They where allways talking about that EU will give in. Not understanding that that being out is really out and unrelevant.
But one of the reasons why British public opinion has turned against Brexit is the realisation that “out” means “out.”
@@brendandonnelly1853 What has that got to do with the EU?
You made a good point here. Too many Britons still think that they should get an easier ride 'for old times sake'. Including Starmer, who told us a year ago 'he' would simply 'renegotiate' that 'bad' TCA, which Britain negotiated, signed and ratified (stating how excellent it was.) Starmer told us, he would make it so good, it would be practically like being in the single market without the obligations of the single market. Well he had to moderate his tune recently, but the unrealistic expectation was there. I think he 'gets it now' that he cannot negotiate anything without 27 countries wishing to do likewise. 27 other countries, who have also signed and ratified this TCA and who wish to stick with it for the foreseeable future.
@@brendandonnelly1853 "British public opinion has turned against Brexit" mostly because they start to feel economical pain. Not because all of a sudden there is this deepfound feeling of wanting ever closer union.
"British public opinion has turned" back to the 1960´s, wanting to join the EU purely for economic selfish reasons. It only takes one De Gaulle to have a groundhog day.
@@brendandonnelly1853 the British electorate voted to screw over their friends and to leave them in the longboat. They screwed over themselves. Now they want the friends to forget all about it and give them money.... no shame.
Of course EU citizens have a say, that's the point, it's just silly and wrong to suggest they don't. The EU is democratic and concensus lead, unlike Putin's bots whose bigotry is all too evident in some of the comments on this post.
How many times do you Tories need to be told, there aren't special 'England only' steps to rejoining the EU through CU and SM first. There is a process for applying to join the EU laid out in Article 49 of the TEU. This process applies to all eligible countries, not to all eligible countries except England. Grow up
That is what the video says.
@@brendandonnelly1853 No it doesn't. '...it would be necessary for the government to present SM and CU membership as a step towards fully rejoining...' '...yes, and I think that is a coherent case that could be made and that finesses the problem about being a rule taker because you're not going to be a rule taker indefinitely...'
Joining the SM and CU or not because it suits or doesn't suit your government's message is irrelevant. The process to do that is not available, regardless of any message. The process to apply to join the EU is well known and available to all eligible countries. Everybody knows the conditions, as M.Barnier said.
@@frankoneill5675 There is nothing in the EU Treaties preventing a country from asking to join just the SM + CU. It just would make no sense for a country like the UK to do so without seeking also full membership. What the discussion was considering was a scenario in which the UK applies to join the EU in full, and SM+CU participation, ahead of that full membership being granted, constituting part of the transition arrangements, and that being presented by the UK government to the UK electorate as a step towards fully rejoining ahead of a final democratic mandate to do so. You suggestion this is merely a matter of messaging is mistaken. In as much as the modalities of a future UK full membership application have been discussed in the EU (which, encouragingly, is far more than current circumstances would have led me, at any rate, to expect), it is clear that the critical factor is euro membership. This the EU would need to see accomplished, not merely pledged, (the formal position for all applicants) by the UK.simultaneous with accession. (This would incidentally not be the case for a membership application by an independent Scotland or Wales and in the event of Irish re-unification, the euroisation of the NI economy would be instantaneous). Euro membership by the UK is seen (correctly imv) as proof of the UKs commitment to the EU this time being de facto irreversible. This would entail a two-stage democratic approval by the UK (either by referendum or GE, or a combination, as indeed occurred with Brexit): one to rejoin overall, initiating SM and CU membership, and preparations for euro membership, followed by a mandate for introducing the euro, triggering its instantaneous introduction, followed by full membership approval by EU member states. It is this need to secure euro membership which gives rise to the SM+CU participation as intermediary step (the experience of which would clearly be very influential to framing opinion upon the subsequent decision to join the euro) that you have regarded as some expression of "English exceptionalism". You are right to do so since the UK (or England) will be exceptional, but (contrary to your suggestion) in a more burdensome way than for other applicants, precisely because it has been an EU member and left, and thus, in returning, must actually join the euro, not merely agree to do so in the future. I trust this explanation, which derives from my understanding of the present position of at least the leading EU member states upon the matter, is not too childish or Tory for you.
@@JohnStevens-gp7ge Your post is entirely anglo-centric delusion. The assumption tht the EU is preoccupying itself with Britain is unsurprising. The worst thing is that you are absolutely convinced of this. There is no evidence anywhere of the EU requiring specific conditions of Britain in terms of the Euro, a membership application being 'irreversible' (something that goes against what the EU stands for) etc that you present here. It is self-absorbed speculation.
The English would be far better off actually listening to - listening to, not imagining - what the EU says, instead of convincing yourselves of all these anglo-centric machinations the EU is plotting.
You are not the centre of the EU's world. The drive east is far more important than a former, constantly disruptive member.
Kristian Jensen: “There are two kinds of European nations. There are small nations and there are countries that have not yet realized they are small nations.”
@@frankoneill5675 Of course the EU is not preoccupying itself with Britain. However it is not remotely excluding the contingency of the UK (or parts thereof) rejoining either as you assert, and Putin and Xi and Trump are creating new incentives for both parties. My post is based on discussions over the past 18 months in several EU capitals. And I live partly in Brussels. As regards the conditions for euro membership, I was one of the MEPs responsible for the legislation creating monetary union and have retained the closest interest in its evolution. You have plainly completely misunderstood my post upon the matter. But obviously you may believe what you wish, though a gentleman would post without abuse.
Britain exiting from the 🇪🇺 EU is akin to our yobs when abroad shouting around that we are best, also thinking the grass is greener on the other side and letting them go to find out for themselves, trying reattach themselves to their former club (then 🇬🇧 Empire - now the Commonwealth). Only time will tell🤔
I agree. Public opinion will move further against Brexit as problems with it become more apparent. Is Starmer unnecessarily boxing himself in?
I assume Starmer will abandon his promise not to join the EU just as lightly as his promises on workers rights, or green investment...
@@markwelch3564 Still has a commitment to green tech. just not at a scale that hands the Tories a tactical gift so they can say Labour is a tax and spend party!
What workers’ rights is he now set to renege on?
@@bryangeake5826 they aren't workers rights any more, they're just "suggestions and guidelines" 🙁
@@markwelch3564 ..you do understand that 'keeping one's powder dry" tactic is necessary as the Tories stole the non-dom tax change policy suffieciently to take it off Labour's headline?
People tanked the £ when they voted leave, it just needs pointing out that it'll never recover, they made joining the Euro, INEVITABLE.
The pound will be worth the Ruble soon.
Why not try to join the dollar instead. It would be easier.
I repeat. It matters not how many referenda are held, or how many Political Parties, seek JOINING. It is only UE who can decide. This at the moment is next to impossible. To even be considered, Britain would need the unanimous agreement of all 27 Members, many of whom have already said they would NOT support this. Then Britain would have to meet the criteria as laid down by "the Copenhagen Agreement 2009"! This includes adopting the EURO, so I can't see that happening. There is NO CHANCE of a SWISS Style agreement, as UE have said many times; "never again" ! The best Britain can hope for, is a "Trade Deal", like any other "third (non member) country"!
Perhaps you did not follow the piece? It clearly highlights the need to join the euro. The Federal Trust advocates full membership of the EU for the UK. A Swiss style agreement was not even mentioned as it is not only undesirable but unavailable.
Hark at these entitled elitists.
“Humankind cannot bear very much reality.” The British can be all too human where Brexit is concerned.
There will be no appetite for the EU to allow the UK back in for at least a generation and this is a very optimistic view. The best Labour can do is to align the country with similar values to make rejoining easier down the track. Rejoining the EU is inevitable and anyone still thinking otherwise is a fool.
How do you know ‘there will be no appetite for at least a generation’ and rejoining is ‘inevitable’?
If you really want to join the EU, then look at the requirements as described in Article 49 and implement them.
Those conditions might be beneficial for England even if you later decide not to apply for membership.
Oh, just to make that clear wherever Article 49 mentions "negotiations" that refers to seeking a consensus on how to achieve the requirements of the ascension steps.
There is no negotiation of "Hey , lets not join schengen at all" - such ideas are likely to halt the process and look at Turkey for an estimate how long that may take.
This person seems angry but I'll ignore that and simply say that in my view the UK needs to fix its broken democracy and reform a lot of things before bothering anyone in the EU about potentially applying to join.
@@Purple_flower09 "This person seems angry" how so, because he is making obvious statements of the reality of the proces?
Thank you, Brendan and John, for this.
On considering the future 5 to 10 years following the UK general election of 4 July this year, it may be worth considering how much the EU may change during this period and before any UK rejoin application would be feasible.
For example,
1. Will Denmark continue to enjoy it’s opt-out on the Euro, and,
2. Will Ireland continue to remain outside the Schengen zone?
Although, in the case of Ireland, even if the country quits the British Isles C.T.A. and joins Schengen, there is still the knotty question of the N.I. border. Perhaps N.I. could quit the UK to become a British territory under the British Monarch outside the UK along the lines of the Isle of Man ?
Then again, another change could be that it may become impossible for the UK to rejoin the Customs Union and Single Market as a temporary interim stepping-stone prior to fully rejoining, as you discussed in the video.
Furthermore, the EU may make progress towards a more unified European defence policy particularly following recent military aggression near EU borders. After all, the European Project that gave birth to the EU was initially inspired in the 1950s by the idea that there will never again be war in Europe. The UK may be unwilling to pool sovereignty concerning National Defence.
Such possible future developments in the EU could make it a more unified and homogenous structure having the same rules for everyone, thus more difficult for the UK to rejoin in 10 years than today.
Brendon and John, do you see these kind of future developments as potential stumbling-blocks for the UK in making a rejoin application?
The UK will in any case not be offered its previous extensive opt-outs. Joining the euro in particular will be an important reassurance to the EU that the UK this time will remain a committed member state. Greater EU integration in coming years will moreover heighten the price of British self-exclusion from Europe.
AND BY THE WAY THE NEW FIGS SHOW THAT WE ARE DOING BEATER THEN GERMANY, FRANCDE, ITALEY AND SO ON
Going forward with the changes in demographic of the country, this will change pulic opinion the yuoth will fill the left by thoes who have died, with 70:30 percent in favour.
Perhaps .... but it still won't be as overwhelming as 52:48.
Ooh, look over there .... 🦄
🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺
No of course not. They're not paying. We the common people on low income are. 5 % GDP down the bin and who pays. We the common people on low income
It depends whether the EU wants that. The power doesn't rest with the UK. Also, how pro-EU are Labour? The unions, so fundamental to the Labour Party, appeared pro-Brexit. Just listen to Mick Lynch, for example. Also the Red Wall backed Brexit.
The Labour Party’s membership are very favourable to the idea of rejoining. Lynch is untypical in this regard.
@@brendandonnelly1853 But large swathes of the Red Wall voted for Brexit, as did Wales. Starmer himself has been banging the "Make Brexit Work" drum. Labour seems wary about touching Brexit.
@@hugodrax71 Starmer is trying to get the party elected and a campaign to join the EU is not a vote winner at this point.
My feeling is that Brexit is still at an early stage in many respects and progress towards potentially applying to join the EU is likely to be slow and at times very difficult. This is not a bad thing as sustained gradual progress in that direction, accompanied by various reforms, would indicate real considered intent.
@@Purple_flower09 Indeed Brexit is still at an early stage, and UK is still defining itself in relation to its former EU membership. UK really hasn't moved on at all, whereas the EU has done the necessary bureaucracy and moved on. Brexit is no longer a topic.
Starmer really will need to decide, which direction Britain will go. There needs to be independent life after the Brexit divorce, even if this independent life will include getting remarried eventually. But UK is not moving to its own independent life just yet, it still defines itself in terms of the previous EU membership.
I think the route out was lost in 2019, the Brexit party stepped aside to help Boris win and the pro-EU movement remained split, in fact breaking off to try and undermine Labour at various points. Even going as far as voting against the customs union option. It's going to take a long time to recover from that and I don't see Starmer as a solution. If anything he will be a blocker and it may need to be a successor that takes any steps. Starmer presents that "all things to all people" aura, which can make everyone think he'll eventually deliver what they want, but it goes the other way too.
There is no certainty on this issue. The video was only arguing that there is a significant chance of rejoining the EU sooner than is generally assumed.
@@brendandonnelly1853 yeah, that's fair, I just think that we as a movement have been a bit over-optimistic at times, not really organising well at important moments (e.g. lots of protests after the original vote, not so much energy before it). So it will be interesting to see how that goes moving forward. The one thing Starmer seems to respond to is pressure, so it may depend on whether enough pressure can be applied in that direction.
It's what I've always thought. The EU has 27 countries in it with 3 waiting to join. So would the EU want the UK back?
Not really any chance of the UK tagging an application onto those three accessions if this country were ready to apply .... which it isn't right now.
There are nine recognised candidates for EU entry, all with a begging bowl. The UK was the second largest net contributor, after Germany, still feeling guilty about one or two things in the past. Puts a complexion on things, doesn’t it?
@@jontalbot1 "The UK was the second largest net contributor" no one in the EU cares about that insignificant amount of money, only money focussed britain showing still not to understand the EU.
"Germany, still feeling guilty about one or two things in the past" if only the Uk had reached that stage...
@@ab-ym3bf Well l just wished l lived in your world- where no one cares about money. Must be the same world where Britain murdered 8 million jews
@@jontalbot1 What we gave in raw £'s was a fraction of the economic multiplier effect of being in the EU; it allowed frictionless trade with the second largest GDP entity on the planet, it increased inward investment (think Honda and AZ gone, Britishvolt flat, and Nissan, BMW and Jaguar/Landover bribed with £750,000,000 to stay) we had a rebate (though time limited) and lots and lots of Area Assisted Grants (the Welsh Assembly is bleating the UK government is not match spending, as they said they would); being in the EU was an absolute bargain for the UK.
Excellent talk, thank you.
British Labour has guaranteed the protection of Brexit and so the voters of the United Kingdom can be confident that no attempt to dismantle Britain’s independence and sovereignty.
United Kingdom, ???you mean england right???
Brexit dismantles our independence and sovereignty.
God bless your innocence.
Hilarious! Independence and sovereignty? 😂😂😂😂😊
Sorry to bring this up but the UK won't be getting back in for a long time, Ireland, Germany and France would be glad but you'd still have to convince the others, all of them, also joining the euro would not go down well with the UK public. It makes sense to focus on a better relationship with both the EU and non-members in Europe instead.
I agree that better relationships with other European countries are important. But without being a member of the EU this can't go very far because for Europe the EU is the hub not just for trade and commerce but for social and cultural exchange too.
@Purple_flower09 Good point, it's way too soon anyway, the EU lost a lot of time over brexit, the agenda has moved on and I don't think there's any great appetite for wasting more time and effort on it, apart from the fact that thanks to the botched negotiations there's now a real lack of trust in the UK, fences need to be fixed and bridges built, it's going to take time. Ps, as I said elsewhere, Ireland wants the UK back for its own reasons, still leaves 27 others to convince.
I won’t address your main point but you can add all those nations directly threatened by Russia who are well aware of the support the UK has given to Ukraine. The other countries who would welcome the UK are those who are net contributors. The UK was the second largest funder and Brexit has meant a big bill for countries like the Netherlands. Then there are the smaller nations who want to see a counterweight to the France/Germany axis. In the end about the only countries who would outright oppose are ones like Hungary/Slovakia, taking orders from the Kremlin and possibly Spain ( Gibraltar). But if it was the clear will of the majority, ways would be found. That’s how the EU works
@@jontalbot1 "all those nations directly threatened by Russia" are even more aware of the enormous support the EU has give to Ukraine, and have seen how both the Eu as well as the USA had to force thee UK to implement measures against Russia and how it, even at this moment, is still -through the back door- dealing with Russia.
The eternal "2nd largest contributor" and "net contributor" argument shows you have no idea about sentiment in the EU and what matters. Not a single Dutch person is concerned with the 50 cents they pay extra per year, while at the same time profiting from all the businesses that moved from the Uk. That narrow focus on "contribution", which is a pittance, is only an issue in money focused britain.
You show you are not entitled to mention "That’s how the EU works"
@@ab-ym3bf Macron has been a staunch ally of Ukraine. Germany was slow but has picked up and it’s great that others have too. But the EU is essentially a trading bloc numpty. It does not have an army and some of its members like Hungary and Slovakia are Russian puppets. I get you don’t like the UK but try to be a little more objective. Those countries who feel threatened by Russia recognise the support the UK will always provide. We have fought tyrants before, from Napoleon onwards
Problem is that the EU can't take Britain in before major reforms.
But the EU probably won't undertake any.
@@SJG-nr8uj It's the UK that needs to reform in order to meet the criteria. Criteria that weren't in place when the UK was grandfathered in back in 1973 as the sick man of Europe.
@@SJG-nr8uj It's inevitably they do so they will. It's they European way (and politics).
@@maartenaalsmeer So Britain will 🙂
The UK is very much in need of a wide range of radical reforms. The voting system is just one small part of it. My view is that we should carry out these reforms and changes for our own sake.
And if we carry out these reforms that will support a future application should the people strongly and overwhelmingly want one to be made. None of this is in place at this time.
Awesome. Brilliant content. Pietro Boselli Italian got British passport he my friend I am Italian nurse retired with British passport vote Labour party England London uk general election in October 2024. He super rich Thomas Pietro Boselli Italian runs Italy Thomas.
Also it well be hard for Labour to work with the EU if they turn to Right wing when their elections come in June.
Labor will do as it's told
You think the EU will turn more right-wing than the Tories are atm?
@@maartenaalsmeer If you think the current Conservative Party is right-wing, I would suggest you lay off the crack pipe.
I think that as long as British people (or say the L party) look at Europe as something you like or dislike depending on this or that European election or leader we are missing the point. No one in Devon will be demanding Devonexit from the UK if the UK elects a government without Devon support. We just take it because we’re committed. Same with Europe. I’m a European to be frank more than any other identity (maybe a bit unusual in that) mostly because I think we’ll sink or swim with Europe, and I just love our continents shared culture. Our unique problem is that we just can’t get the idea that we can be European and British, and stronger and better off for having both. That’s what’s needed to join - a deep recognition that it’s not transactional - we join because we are committed and we aim to make it work come what may.
@@aking-plums6985 Ah, the 'crack pipe' argument, very convincing.... not. A party that wants to diminish its citizens rights (workers rights, human rights) by leaving a Human Rights convention is very right-wing indeed. Almost fascist, actually.
Out means out!
Tough luck.
Bye bye brexitannia.
RIP.
🇪🇺🇪🇺🇳🇱
Could I ask about your views on the impact in UK-EU relations of a Trump win in November - if that leads to something of a carving up of the world between despots. Trump would let Putin take Ukraine, Georgia and E Europe; and might let China have more space in the east. In those circumstances, would European governments including the UK be looking for allies, and ready to forget some past follies?
Ukraine has put an end to complacency in the EU and set off a process of turning the Union into a defence alliance. The election of Trump would hasten this process. Defence copoperation may well be a factor bringing the EU and UK closer in coming years. But the only way to reverse the damage of Brexit is to reverse Brexit.
The UK has for decades done the bidding of the USA and Putin to prevent any military strengthening of the EU. Im sure , if allowed back in they would use the opportunity to spy for their masters and sabotage the EU cooperation.
Putin can't take Ukraine if EU stands behind it. Don't overestimate Russia.
Exceptionalism still reigns in England apparently. You can’t ‘unpick’ things. C’mon, guys. Talk about what really WILL be needed to join in 35 years. A written constitution and acceptance of the Euro and Schengen for starters. It’s obvious you both still have no ‘real world’ viewpoint.
The piece recognises the need to join the euro. The Federal Trust has produced several studies on precisely this subject and upon a Federal UK constitution.
They will carry out what the Tories have not done yet they all have the same bosses
As UK Citizens want to Rejoin EU, we should Rejoin.
And EU citizens don't have a say in this rejoining. Why not rejoin USA instead. That is probably more easy.
No!
🇪🇺🇳🇱
Britain cannot rejoin without EU consent at every stage in that process. Rejoin cannot be simply demanded, once Britain has made up its mind. Only leaving could be demanded by Britain alone. The EU had to follow the British will to leave. To accede to the British will, without any say in the matter, the EU was nevertheless obliged to spend time, effort and cost to deal with Britain's Brexit wish. Following on from this, joining will be very carefully considered by all EU members, not something that Britain can demand or dictate.
Sorry to say so, but that's precisely the arrogant, entitled attitude which pi**es so many off about Little Englandshire. It's also what we need shot of before any application for membership is made.
that sounds very entitled. You may apply to join, than sit and wait for the Eu members to decide.
I have to have a a referendum to apply again to the European Union? The Europeans might make British people have to set very stringed strategies and very strange rules so that they won’t do it again. and to discourage any other European country, which is a member of the year of the European Union from having a exit.
No. Article 49 and Copenhagen Criteria. You have enough on your plate as it is. And why would the EU let you back in? Offer some tangible benefit.
Learn how to write first. Does anyone in England know how to create proper sentences?
Not quite, we just need for your local businesses to fail at the rate they are doing currently, after you become dependant on european farming to sustain yourselves and rejoin with the euro that will be enough commitment, we however will have to wait a decade for that in which the Uk has to sort out public support and remove any political party that supports brexit and keep in par with european legislation and standarts. I would advise also that you invest on tourism the same way the south does.
Sorry - but regards Stamer's comment on the TCA - the WORDS as reported were " Starmer says he is committed to pursuing a significant rewrite of the U.K.-EU Trade and Cooperation" NB - committed to "pursuing"! that is NOT the same as making a pledge to do the thing at any cost! GET IT RIGHT or don't make the comment simply to bolster an opinion that you may hold!
The point of this piece is that there is no lasting significance to anything Starmer is saying on the European issue ahead of the GE.
We want uk back
We don't.
No, "we" don't.
Rejoin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't be ridiculous. The EU is a dead man walking.
Apply to join. That is all the power the UK has.
@@ab-ym3bfThere are four possible ways in which the European Union could collapse, all of which the EU is heading straight for, due to its own arrogance and megalomaniac stupidity:
1. Revolt by its member states' politicians, for example against fixed migrant quotas.
2. Revolt by its member states' peoples, against the imposition of a federal government they can never vote into or out of office. This could lead to rioting, violence and wars of independence.
3. War with Russia. Lisbon Treaty Article 42 commits member states to the military defence of a member state under attack. And the EU wants Ukraine in.
4. The Islamification of Europe, orchestrated by the European Union (per the Euro-Mediterranean Project, in effect since 2010). These are all coming straight down the track.
Why one earth would anyone apply to join a disaster?
No one can predict what Starmer will do. He’s trying to win votes first of all and is scared of even mentioning Brexit. I resigned from the party because of his current stance. I am hoping that he gets a big majority’ and will be able to adopt a more positive attitude and at least get us back in the single market. If Labour then gets a second term , he will start the process of rejoining. Brexit has been a disaster and has ruined my life. I curse the Tories, Farage, Johnson., Gove and co every single day. At 76 years of age I don’t think we will be back in the EU in my lifetime and that really makes me depressed and angry.
It is possible to take a more optimistic view. Starmer’s opportunism may persuade him to chase votes through pro-Europeanism sooner rather than later.
"I resigned from the party because of his current stance"
So how are you going to vote for his eventual successor?
If all the pro-EU members leave Labour in protest against Starmer's pro-Brexit views, then when the time comes to replace him only pro-Brexit members will be left and we'll get another pro-Brexit Labour party leader.
also good comment
I feel duty bound to say that the Single Market is not available outside full membership. This looks unlikely to change, but we live in strange times.
Starmer getting a big majority would be a complete disaster. The best possible outcome would be a Lab-Lib-Green coalition, with the smaller parties forcing Starmer to get out of his anti-EU bubble and give us a referrendum on PR.
No
If Labour attempts to slide the UK under the door of the EU, when it lacks the courage to explicitly seek an electoral mandate in a GE to do that, then it will insert itself into the fault line that has split British politics for 8 years now.
They will rightly be accused of having no mandate to do the essential thing.
Their timidity will subvert their government.
@genghisthegreat2034 "If Labour attempts to slide the UK under the door of the EU, when it lacks the courage to explicitly seek an electoral mandate in a GE to do that, then it will insert itself into the fault line that has split British politics for 8 years now. They will rightly be accused of having no mandate to do the essential thing. Their timidity will subvert their government." Not sure where you go for information/news, but may i suggest that you broaden your outlook by watching A Different Bias" ? Politics, and especially 'how to win an election' is rather more complicated than you seem to believe. It is quite simple to include in a manifesto a seemingly harmless statement under ' general aims' for example, that will allow a rather more generous and broader application in the real world.
Labour cannot do this, because any decision isn't even Britain's to make, let alone Labour's.
What do you think the EU has learned from all this Brexit debacle? Any approach has to be with the fullest British mandates, not just from one party alone, and with full consent of a large, sustained and much better informed majority of the public too, openly and cleanly. Or the EU won't have any of it.
@@htlein , I'm a regular viewer of 'a Different Bias', and I take my news from The Irish Times domestically, and The New York Times and the Guardian in foreign media.
The fear of losing a General Election because the right policy might " spook the horses " is precisely my point. Frankly, if Starmer can't propose his main policy position, he can't defend implementing it.
If he lacks the courage, then let him propose changing the British electoral system to Proportional Representation by Single Transferable Vote. He can at least honestly say that he wants to give all smaller parties a chance to be heard, and the emergence of Coalition prospects will reassure the EU that a reactionary Tory Party will have to work hard to form a government around a contra position again.
I accept it isn't just a matter for Britain, but you shouldn't underestimate the goodwill towards a Britain demonstrating seriousness on the matter.
@@genghisthegreat2034 OK - I see we are in fact in agreement on many points.
"The fear of losing a General Election because the right policy might " spook the horses " is precisely my point. Frankly, if Starmer can't propose his main policy position, he can't defend implementing it. "
Well, the aim of a party not in power is to achieve power by an election. I assume that you are not disputing that all parties will avoid alienating that portion of the electorate which may hold the balance in an election? A very recent 5 point "plan" has indeed been presented - you mention "main policy" that has to be seen still in a manifesto that the labour party will advance prior to the GE - this has not yet been done so main policy is something to await.
PR or transferable vote? Well labour has stated that it will set up what I remember as being stated as councils to evaluate and educate and discuss the idea of PR. PR (or its equivalent) is a novel concept for the UK and I feel that this step is the correct one. People hate change so the subject has to be approached carefully. Were labour to now shout PR from the rooftops, they would encounter severe opposition simply due to the novelty. Starmer has a tendency to look at consensus as shown by his past.
You are of course quite correct that the EU will refuse any membership entry if it is obvious that the next government could unilaterally overturn a one party decision.
Much as I enjoy Brendan's optimism, he doesn't really analyse what would motivate Starmer. It wouldn't be because of Brendan's or my wish or that of Labour members or voters . It'd only be under pressure of big business and the megacorporates - Labour's donor class in waiting. But on the whole brexit hasn't harmed them. It's the SME's it's knocked for six. You think Starmer cares about them?
Labour donors will not be isolated from the rest of society. My sense is that many Labour donors expect Starmer to veer in a more pro-EU direction after the election. Once started the movement back towards the EU may develop an unstoppable momentum.
@@brendandonnelly1853 agree - I hope
@@brendandonnelly1853 : I'm not sure why you sense the big corporates will be any more than indifferent to going back in if a) their margins haven't been hurt and b) they've invested heavily in the exiting adaptations (which of course puts them at competitive advantage).
I'm a passionate Remainer but even I acknowledge that it would be crazy for him to turn this into a Brexit-related election. That's exactly what the Tories and the Right-wing press want. Starmer is doing the sensible thing- he's being cautious - but once he's in power he can oil the wheels of re-join in subtle ways and he can reveal certain facts about the negative consequences of leaving that the Tories would omit.
good comment
It is dangerous though to take the remainer base for granted. I, for one, am wavering
I am sure you are right. But why, precisely, are you "wavering"?
@JohnStevens-gp7ge because I have nothing in common with the brexit supporting red wall voters, I abhor brexit, I abhor anti immigrant rhetoric. I need to see some *concrete* pro EU rapprochement policies or I'm voting green or lib dem. My conscience is more important than tactical voting. Others can vote tactically
@@rnanerd6505 I am sorry I thought you might be wavering towards accepting Brexit. I understand your point about Labour entirely. The Greens are certainly more constructive on Europe. You might even in some places be able to vote for the Rejoin the EU Party.
@JohnStevens-gp7ge I'm in a tory labour marginal so logic would dictate that I vote labour tactically but I can't in conscience do that until I see some concrete EU rapprochement policies, see my dilemma?
Is there scope for Starmer to put one or more questions about future European Union relations to a citizens assembly or some other institutional enquiry?
Yes but it is not sure that Starmer will want to use that scope.
@@brendandonnelly1853 It occurs to me that it would be an excellent way of engaging in a rational public debate, without soaking up too much government bandwidth, meanwhile Starmer can get on with some other things that the Daily Mail doesn't like.
Try it and he will lose big time
Taking the latest tory mp ? Sorry but if these two guys have no knowledge of how Starmer operates, why are they making a video on commenting on what Stamer is doing? Cast your mind back to th beer and sandwiches party - TWICE demanded by MSM - there was a delay, criticised by the same MSM, between the announcement of Starmer's accused contravention and his statement that he would resign if found "guilty" The reason? He conferred with his colleagues. There is NO WAY Starmer would have accepted the mp before seeking a consensus.
Are you suggesting Ms Elphicke's transformation into a Labour MP is without controversy within the Labour movement? Or that she has a record which in normal circumstances would align her readily with Labour principles? Surely a minority view, and not one confirmed by the undoubted fact that Starmer squared it with his immediate circle in the Shadow Cabinet ..
@@JohnStevens-gp7ge "Are you suggesting Ms Elphicke's transformation into a Labour MP is without controversy within the Labour movement? Or that she has a record which in normal circumstances would align her readily with Labour principles? Surely a minority view, and not one confirmed by the undoubted fact that Starmer squared it with his immediate circle in the Shadow Cabinet ." I am sure that there are those in the party that do not approve - a painful truth, and one which the tories have never seemed to get - if you enter politics and choose a side - be ready for disappointments, HOWEVER the choice was made for the party, NOT for your own private reasons. If you are against some views the party has, there is ALWAYS a choice - leave and form your own party, try and change the party from within or quit politics.
@@htlein I have nothing to do with the Labour Party. I can only re-iterate that non-Labour pro-Europeans regard Ms Elphicke's welcome as a sign of sufficient flexibility by Sir Keir Starmer on his principles and promises that he would, under the right pressures, reverse completely his current stance on re-joining the EU, and thus encourages those of us tempted to support him in this GE. Perhaps you think this hopeful attitude is misplaced?
What will be the effect on the EU and the UK if Trump decides to leave NATO ?
It will reinforce British isolation in Europe.
The EU will become a defence union with its own nuclear deterrent. The UK will have to choose whether to be associated with that or seek a much fuller integration into the US defences, in whatever form that might take outside of NATO. However so extreme and precipitous an abrogation of NATO does not seem to be the most likely course of a Trump presidency, rather a dramatic acceleration of the Europeanisation of European defence, including in the nuclear deterrence domain, which nevertheless falls well short of a total trans-Atlantic divorce (NATO break-up) and thus affords the British somewhat more time and flexibility ahead of deciding where we end up placing ourselves geopolitically. I believe, however, all plausible scenarios suggest Britain would eventually end up in the European, rather than the American strategic sphere, although not without great domestic controversy and even greater disruption.
@@JohnStevens-gp7ge I'm not so confident of the EU getting its act together on matters of defence. It could happen of course and that would cause turmoil in the EU in the process.
Splitting the North Atlantic Alliance into “American” and “European” spheres is exactly what the Russians tried to do for decades. Total idiocy.
@@Purple_flower09 Nothing compared to the turmoil if it fails to "get its act together" on defence.
Why should Labour unpick the Brexit? Keir Starmer (i.e. Labour) recommended Brexit!!!
Corbyn was leader at the time, not Sir Keir Starmer. Corbyn was always anti EU. Labour will gradually have closer ties with the EU. Hopefully eventually rejoining. He knows the damage Brexit is causing the UK.
So far he has kept his powder dry, not wanting alienate the section of society that still think (unbelievably) Brexit was a good idea. That could turn potential labour voters away from the party.
Just for the record, he voted to remain in the EU in the referendum (and said on LBC that he would do the same in any future referendum) He knows its a crock of sh*t. But getting the Tories out is the first priority.
Stop telling blatant lies
@aaaaa5272 "Why should Labour unpick the Brexit? Keir Starmer (i.e. Labour) recommended Brexit!!!" It seems that you have been listening to propaganda - the Express by any chance? you can probably still find this interview on youtube -
When he was asked on radio station LBC about the vote, Sir Keir said he had voted Remain and would do so again should there be another poll on the issue.
@@htlein Excellent response.
As you, say, people see lies printed in right wing anti EU rags, like the Mail and Express, then run with it without a second thought.
The economic problems 2 years in, what direction will UK take ? Will the people be disappointed and look for change ? What can England do? Scotland will be thoroughly fed up with English Brexit Empire Conservative/ Tory Lite deckchair rearranging.
Scotland will be pushing very hard for secession. Northern Ireland will also be thoroughly fed up with deckchair rearranging.
The issue of will UK be looking for a clear path to EU/ UK harmony will be superseded by Scotland and Northern Ireland wanting out of this quagmire.
Make no mistake while England's dithering will be overshadowed by Scotland and Northern Ireland moving on . There will be no ' Federal UK ' . Only secession and dissolution of UK.
The scenarios you describe are certainly possible. Much will depend upon the outcome of the forthcoming elections in the Republic of Ireland and the revival or reconstitution of political Scottish nationalism ahead of the 2026 Holyrood elections.
@@JohnStevens-gp7ge Indeed .
@@robduncan599 so far Brexit hasn't moved the needle at all on polling about Scottish independence. Or maybe it was moving the needle but some other factor was moving it back.
@@Purple_flower09 No. Without Brexit, the 2014 referendum result would have stuck, perhaps for a generation at least. Brexit re-opened the issue completely.and the closer Labour try to get to the EU without fully re-joining (support for which is near 70% in Scotland, compared to c. 50% for independence, and sub 30% for the SNP) the easier making the case for independence (eg regarding borders or the currency) will be. Likewise Irish re-unification was a deeply sleeping issue until Brexit re-awakened it. Now it hangs perhaps upon the outcome of the next GE in the Republic.
@@JohnStevens-gp7ge Granted the EU referendum result provided an additional grievance but it hasn't made a difference to voter intention (as indicated by polls).
One lesson from Brexit might be that it's foolish to make massive change decisions on a simple majority of a dumb referendum. So perhaps independence for Scotland ought to require two thirds of the turnout. Otherwise Scotland might be independent on 51% of the vote - that's a recipe for decades of recrimination and campaigning for further referenda.
My pet theory is that some Scottish people have accepted the idea that independence might be Scotland's own Brexit. Fraught with risk and uncertainty and nobody having convincing answers to basic questions about how it would work.
Even if the UK hadn't left the EU the independence movement wouldn't have gone away. It's an integral part of political life here.
My perception might be skewed though. I'm in Aberdeenshire where there is a lot of oil and gas money, Tory farmers, and English people.
Labour against youth mobility
The two poshest chaps on RUclips who obviously loathe the Tories. Don’t agree Starmer is boxed in. He has boxed off Brexit (for now) but that is not the same thing. I think everyone is going to see what happens- in the UK and EU. Events dear boy, events
Poshness lies in the ear of the listener. Some of the audience will probably find the speakers quite common really.
@@brendandonnelly1853 They sound a lot posher than Prince William!
A huge problem is that while leaving the EU cost us £100BN a year, it's not at all clear that re-joining will get it us back. I was completely against Brexit but the Brexiters may have won because even if we rejoin the economic model we had of essentially arbitraging opportunities between the US and Europe may no longer exist for us, we'd have to find a completely new economic model for growth which may well not be possible within the EU as a re-joined member.
Ultimately growth depends upon size of market. Amongst other things, Brexit was betting the ranch on continuing globalisation of the last 35 years led by the US. Our timing could not have been worse. We called the peak of that process. Globalisation is now in wholesale retreat in the face of growing protectionism, driven by geopolitics and led, again by the US. Ultimately, in such a world economy, deeply fragmented by regionalism, the EU is the only plausible and practical option for the UK. (Anglosphere or 51st US state are fantasies in that regard). But you are right, what we are losing, whilst we are out, will never be recoverable. Which is why the longer we wait the worse our situation will get. Great nations, like great people, can admit mistakes and correct them in a timely fashion. Failure is a sure sign of decadence or debility.
It’s difficult to believe that the reversal of the now growing barriers to trade between the UK and the EU would not have a positive effect on the British economy. There will always be arguments about the precise size of this positive effect.
@paulbo9033 "A huge problem is that while leaving the EU cost us £100BN a year, it's not at all clear that re-joining will get it us back. " Rest easy - there is NO WAY, we will "get it back" - however, our contributions during the years of EU membership is now outweighed by the amount either spent or lost due to leaving. It will always have been a loss - the definition of stupidity is repeating mistakes in the hopes that the outcome will change.
@@brendandonnelly1853 I'm not saying it won't have a positive effect, but the mistake will be to think it will be enough to reverse the decline. We threw away our business model and the world has moved on. We need to figure out a new one and that will take a long long time regardless of whether we rejoin.
@@paulbo9033 Indeed, and rejoining the EU out of desperation because no other, independent country business model was created by politicians post Brexit, fell into the British lap or otherwise presented itself fortuitously , would be asking to rejoin for entirely the wrong motives.
Yeah. You want them to be duplicitous.
You cannot "unpick" Brexit - and such language is terribly misleading to your audience. It is either deliberately mendacious or evidence of delusional thinking as exceptionalist as anything the "Brexiters" spouted in the past. Nor can you "rejoin" the Single Market or the EU Customs Union.
You are now a third country. This is not just a phrase - it is the term that denotes the fact that you are now outside the jurisdiction of the EU's court and of the only court which shares joint jurisprudence with that court (EFTA Court).
Starmer, as prime minister of a third country, can approach the EU and ask to negotiate an expansion of the TCA. The EU has said repeatedly that it is open to such an expansion, both in matters of trade and cooperation. However it is not prepared to renegotiate those articles within the existing treaty already agreed.
As long as you guys keep peddling the fantasy that the UK, unique among third countries, can somehow be allowed "back into" either the Single Market or EU Customs Union as a "stepping stone" to eventual full membership then you simply reaffirm a growing certainty in the rest of Europe that the delusional arrogance that got you into the mess you're in is just as evident among those who would like to reverse that stupid move. This continued blatant inability to understand international law and how or why it applies to you will hugely inhibit your chances even of improving the TCA (which you have been in breach of anyway since you signed up to it), let alone ever becoming trusted enough to join an organisation based on an understanding of and respect for international law.
If, as you discuss, an appetite eventually emerges among your population for actually applying to become a member of the EU then you would better serve your audience by informing them of what this entails:
Read and understand the Copenhagen Criteria, and learn how these criteria are assessed by the Commission and the ECJ in respect of applicant members. In particular identify the constitutional and democratic deficits in your polity the application of these criteria reveals and work out how to remediate these deficits. Having worked out how, then do it.
Read and understand the Acquis Communitaire, and assess what laws you have in place that would first have to be repealed to make way for this body of law to be adopted. Having worked out which of these have to be replaced by the Acquis (all 35 chapters of it), then replace them.
Then, and only then, formally apply to the European Council for membership.
Great post but as an EU citizen myself (Irish) I would point out that much of your argument about holding to the Copenhagen Criteria is undermined by the behaviour of Hungary, Poland and Slovakia and even Italy who have come to be quite open that they are ‘illiberal democracies’ and are becoming more and more authoritarian and yet without much reaction from other EU members.
@@epincion An issue due to be addressed within the EU Parliament's next legislative cycle, after the forthcoming elections. However you are talking about a departure from democratic principles among existing members, indeed a problem and one requiring in all probability a newly drafted foundational treaty that must be applied across the board.
However that's the problem of existing members behaving badly. It is much easier to address this issue with regard to applicant members, and this has already been done. Not only do applicants have to produce a constitution clearly upholding basic democratic principles (as both Hungary and Poland did on the way in) but the same constitutions must now also clearly have articles within them specifically preventing amendments and departures from those principles being made arbitrarily by specific governments or other parts of the machinery of state without first having secured the agreement of the people through a referendum (as both Hungary and Poland subsequently did once becoming members).
The UK doesn't even have a constitution that it can put on the table for inspection, let alone offer anything but verbal assertions that it will promise not to dismantle further the democratic principles it claims to have adopted (and which it is presently dismantling anyway in plain sight). To put it bluntly, as an applicant country based on the Copenhagen Criteria it's currently a basket-case.
@@SonOfViking Thanks for the reply, I make a couple of points. First it won’t be easy to recapitulate the foundation principles in a new treaty as that will require unanimous agreement. Just a few weeks ago Viktor Orban hosted a conference of Europeans right wing parties (even the UK right was invited) and with the aim of focusing a collective organised effort on winning big in the next EU Parliament election and forming a powerful bloc in the Parliament to prevent action by the Commission against nations like Hungary. The EU right feel that sentiment is moving their way among voters especially over migrants, cost of living, green measures, and of course ‘wokism’.
They think that the new bloc in the EUP can be the second largest.
They could be correct.
Secondly on the arcane issue of the lack of a single constitution in the UK there are issues a lot of Europeans don’t understand. The UK is not a single unitary nation but a union of England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland (used to be all Ireland until 1923), the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and the Isles of Scilly.
Each has a unique constitutional status and are joined together by treaties made and amended over hundreds of years and its these treaties and court rulings on them that are collectively the constitutional documents.
All to a varying degree are self governing except the Isles of Scilly which are under direct absolute control of the monarch just like in medieval days.
A single constitution is not possible nor desirable but it does not preclude a single Bill of Rights that includes like the Copenhagen Criteria sets of minimum standards of constitutional democracy.
@@epincion The definition of a constitution in most of the rest of the civilised world, at least among its democracies, is a set of principles defined by the people by which they consent to be governed, firmly placing the people as the ultimately sovereign element within the polity. Whether this is achieved through a standard constitution or, as you say, a Bill of Rights, is moot. And actually the UK currently has a constitutional document called the Bill of Rights. Unfortunately for its citizens however these outline the rights of parliament, not its people, and formed the basis of the seizure of sovereignty from the sovereign by parliament in 1688. A baby-step towards modern democracy, but unfortunately never improved upon in the intervening years. Even worse than Scilly islanders, it has left the people as subjects of a monarch who is himself constitutionally a client of a sovereign parliament - in other words the people are vicariously subject to their own parliament! Democracy, eh?
Until this issue is addressed therefore the UK can only blag its way into organisations requiring it to be a transparent democracy - the old "trust us, we're British" approach that served them so well in the past. I think we can safely say however that any such "trust" went up in smoke in recent years.
Time for a fundamental rethink within the UK, in other words. And on that score I certainly advise against holding one's breath.
I do not think there is anything misleading in our clear position as an institution that the UK should seek to rejoin the EU as a full member, in the euro, Scheghen and all, without any derogations or reservations and completely committed to "Ever Closer Union'. Not for nothing are we called the Federal Trust. Your suggestion indicates I regret an unfamiliarity with our work in the UK ever since the Brexit referendum, including the arguments engaged with in this piece. And with our work on the future of the EU, over all the years of our membership. Your points are well made, but for another audience, one with which we too are engaged, and an engagement that has formed some of the terms employed in our presentation, which are those of our opponents, not ours, for such is the nature of argument....
It's not for government to tell the electorate what they want.
You tried that. We fired the EU.
Gentlemen!
Have a look at Macrons suggestion on a multi tier EU. It could benefit the UK.
_Macrons suggestion_ Don't give 'em false hope. It's merely a proposal by a think tank. Wasn't welcomed very enthusiastically when introduced in a Commission meeting.
We want the UK to rejoin the EU as full members, not as associates.
@@maartenaalsmeer Now it is not up to the commission. They have to do what they are told. I don't know if it will survive, let's see.
@@Gert-DK Indeed, we'll see. But if I read the room correctly.... also, I don't know if a multiple-tier EU is the answer. But as a fan of democracy: if it happens, it happens!
@@brendandonnelly1853 What if it could by a shortcut to single marked? Now the only way for the UK is full membership. EFTA is a non-starter. Full membership might take 40 years or so.
I am Danish, together with Sweden and Finland, there is one thing we really hate. It is corruption. How long would it take to get the UK corruption under control? Because, all the above-mentioned countries will veto the UK in the present state, even Germany may block the UK. And then there are all the other things UK need to fix, you know them.
They cannot put an end to Brexit for one the uk would have to rejoin the eu like every other country. It only takes 1 to veto the uk and the uk won’t be able to rejoin. The uk just has to move on the uk is growing again at 0.6% out of the eu the eu is only growing 0.3% it would be stupid to go and rejoin the eu.
Are you joking? The EU is growing much faster than the uk. Look at the GDP per capita that has grown 5 times faster than the UK in almost every eu country. The uk is stagnant
@@dunnomate3587 no it has not. Provide me with this source
@@dunnomate3587 uk grew 0.6% the eu 0.3%
@@dunnomate3587 Germany and France only grew 0.2%
@@terryj50 mate I’m talking about GDP per capita which is real economic growth per person which the uk is doing very badly. It has actually shrunk, same with real wages which is growing much faster in Germany. Which means quality of life is MUCH better in the eu undeniably
This vlog: Two old fifth columnists pontificating. The end.
Fool. The end.
Brexiteers were Putin's fifth column. A few even knew it.
@@JohnStevens-gp7ge of course we were. lol.
SHOVE THE E U WE DONT NEED THEM OR THE LABOUR PARTY
Do you think so but who do you think is feeding you. Its the EU feeding the sick man of Europe once again and were getting sick of bailing you lot out time after time. We should have listened to Dr Gaulle and left you starve.
You are right, and Britain is free to do just as Britain wants, but this is no reason to be so rude, is it? Diplomacy always is the better bet, rather than telling others to 'shove it'! Don't you want to have a decent, friendly third country relationship with the EU?
You’re right if you enjoy living in a dying country.
Why dont you remainers ever look at the facts ? On Thursday (05 Oct 2023) the independent ‘European Court of Auditors’ issued a damning report on the EU’s accounts for last year, identifying breath-taking sums of expenditure which have either been fraudulent or which it considers to be at ‘high risk’. For yet another year, the EU’s Auditors concluded that the level of error in the EU’s accounts was “material and pervasive”, and have thus issued an adverse opinion on the EU’s spending in 2022. When companies receive such a report they accept it and act on it. Not in the case of the EU Commission, who have arrogantly rejected many of the findings of this independent body they set up. You are supporting a corrupt organisation only a fool would want in that
Is UK government not corrupt? What about the ppe contracts? Did they account for that? Did you brexiteers ask them for account on that? 😅
At least there was a damning report. Where is the damning report on corruption within the UK’s government?
....and the same auditors have reportedly found the EU accounts error free since 2007! Please show me your ref. to this alternate position, as it is one I am not aware of!! What report, when dated and made to whom please? If this is a 'report' in the Express or the Telegraph or the Spectator, then don't bother!
Fiction.
"Facts" from a parallel universe.
Seems to me that rejoining needs a general UK consensus that rejoining is a good idea for economic and Peace reasons. But a challenge to build that consensus while looking uninterested. Starmer is going to have to feign surprise when rejoining starts to gain momentum. And then try to lead that momentum without looking too keen
All about the UK lying to itself rather than dealing constructively with reality.
You British don't seem to realise that you have no input whatsoever in rejoining.
That will be decided by 27 sovereign nations that are the EU and each country has a veto.
Do you think Ireland might decide that we are better off without the UK who fail to keep their treaties.
@@batcollins3714 I think the EU countries are more grown-up than that. But they will want to see that the UK is united in wanting to rejoin and to play the game properly. The lies the challenge for the UK.
@@keacoqthe point is not about being "grown up" on the EU side.
The EU and its members will make an assessment of wether or not it is good for them to have the UK as a member. Not so much on the financial aspect, but on the nature of the UK that has never shown any commitment to the goals of the EU and only joined for selfish financial reasons, and therefore during membership trying to slow down and / or block deeper cooperation.
If the assessment is that membership would undermine the unity and integration possibilities of the EU by having an untrustworthy UK out to undermine the EU in its midst you may expect another no to join.😂
@@keacoq They are grown up to asess if the UK brings more advantages or more trouble if joining is allowed.
And the UK will get no waivers and need to fulfill Copenhagen criteria and follow the track of article 49.
How do you think the UK is seen after it recent behavior?
Sir Keir has clearly learned his lesson:
- If you want to win UK elections use the a Brexaster ticket; he is now even paraphrasing the ABdPJ "Make Brexit work"
Nothing to be unpicked any time soon anyway. The only items the EU might be willing to discuss would be
- Defence cooperation
- Youth mobility
None of this would move the needle of Brexaster one bit.
Rejoining the single market is a non-starter for a vast array of reasons, as would be a customs union.
Defence cooperation? Of uks 72000 soldiers how many can you send to Europe? 30000? And the kit is according to the soldiers worn out. Europe doesn't need an extra Carrier. That one you built to stay relevant to US. Now all help is always helpful. But Norway and turkey is more important. Sorry.
@@ulfosterberg9116 Defence cooperation, nobody questions Britain's NATO membership.
@@MrsGardiner Noone questioned "our place in the single market" either. And in case trump win there won't be a NATO. Dangerous times ahead. EU has enough power and will step up. But a collapse of NATO would bring some hardships for EU citizens and be a disaster for US.