Is Great Britain starting to regret Brexit?
Various polls show that the people of Britain seem to be starting to regret Brexit.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/uk-poll-results/
Fewer and fewer want to be out. A few think we have just not done it properly. What do we think?
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/uk-poll-results/
Fewer and fewer want to be out. A few think we have just not done it properly. What do we think?
Comments
Whether the UK will be accepted back in the EU is a difficult question to answer, certainly getting back in wouldn't be on the same terms as when we left with the special concessions that had been negotiated. Nevertheless, I will only be voting for parties committed to joining the EU at the earliest possible opportunity - fortunately in Scotland I've a choice of two major parties to choose from, south of the border it looks like only the Greens would be in that position with even the LibDems not committing to that at present.
I think the worry is that many people who voted for Brexit - even if at the time they thought we'd stay in the SM and CU - have been convinced that only leaving both "counts" as Brexit. The Brexit propaganda machine is highly effective.
"Project fear," that slogan so finely honed to dupe the hard of thinking, is turning out to be project reality. And the promised benefits have proven to be nothing better than lies.
I mention this because often when British people talk about Brexit, they sound like the EU would be as interested in British reentry as the UK (assuming for the sake of argument that that was the British position). I don't think we are. I think the EU would be very wary of getting buggered about by the UK a second time. Because if you change your minds once, who's to say you wouldn't change your minds again? I think a lot of European politicians are going to tell that you've made your your bed and you can lie in it.
All of the above needs to factor into British politicians' electoral promises.
But, there are aspects of seeking to join the EU that UK politicians can commit to regardless of the EU priorities. Top of the list being maintaining UK standards and regulations compatible with the EU equivalents, so that when EU priorities shift and UK membership can progress there's not a barrier caused by divergence between the EU and UK.
Very much this.
And this, too.
Quite, but given the impact of the lack of a single market and customs union on EU member Ireland - I think they might be up for that much with Irish support. Also, because British support to Ukraine is, by extension, also contributing somewhat to the security of the EUs borders.
If I'm reading @la vie en rouge correctly, I think what she's saying is that there isn't going to be an "earliest opprtunity" for Britain to re-join the EU, at least not on terms that anyone in the UK would consider remotely desirable.
Full disclosure(and again, assuming I understood la vie's post), I tend to agree with that analysis. I doubt that Brussels has much of a plan in their files for How To Bring The Brits Back In When The Time Comes.
I agree with you that maintaining EU standards is probably a good idea, in and of itself, but I'd be very hesitant about selling this to the public as a preliminary step toward re-entry.
Yes, although it may be that selling the maintenance of EU standards to the public might, actually, be worthwhile - if one can get past the right-wing Brexit lies...and the number of people still believing those lies seems to be diminishing by the day...
Oh, I think selling EU standards to the public could be VERY worthwhile(assuming those standards are better than what would otherwise prevail). And it might even lead more people to wish they could re-join the EU.
But those are all separate questions from whether or not the EU will wanna take youse guys back.
I realise "ever closer union" is written on the tin (and, we should be clear, was there from the start), but what is there that actually happened (I don't mean proposed, suggested, or agreed but the UK opted out, actually happened to the UK) beyond the harmonisation fundamental to a "common market"?
Indeed. I don't expect the EU will welcome us back with open arms ever, let alone in my (limited) lifetime. The burned hand fears the fire, as the old adage has it.
Good one. Never heard that before. The version I know is "Once bitten, twice shy."
There's also "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me", but that's more about mocking the person who didn't fear the fire after getting burned, so to speak.
I hope I'm wrong, of course, and that steps will be taken to greatly improve relations with our next-door neighbours as soon as may be.
Even with those caveats, I think you would still need the EU to reach the conclusion that it is VERY MUCH in their own non-sentimental, material self-interest to go through the bother of re-admitting the UK.
I've detested Brexit since I heard the specious scoundrels who were advocating it in 2016. Nothing has changed my mind since. No one then and no one since has come up with any argument for leaving the EU that was remotely persuasive or was even founded in values that I could understand or sympathise with.
When the result of the referendum came through, I realised that if over 50% of the electorate had voted moron, I had been living in cloud cuckoo land. The country I thought I had been a citizen of, and the people I thought I identified with had either never existed or no longer did. I feel this is not my country any more.
I've concluded that I have no clue how a large number of my so called fellow countrymen and fellow citizens think or what drives or enthuses them. So I'm not the person to ask on whether the recent changes reported in the statistics on who and how many of them think what have any meaning or not. I have realised I have no ability to guess or predict what anyone else thinks or is likely to do.
As it happens I live in one one the most pro-EU ant-Brexit parts of the country. It was then and it remains so now. However, conversationally, it has become the elephant in the room. So I can't even ask my neighbours. I suspect some of them feel much as I do but less intensely, but I don't know.
It's the first time in my adult life that a political cause has arisen that I've felt strongly about.
I think maybe I can relieve you of your sense of estrangement from your fellow countrymen.
Even before the vote, you must have been aware that europhobia in the UK hovered somewhere above at least, let's say, 40% of public opinion. I mean, the referendum wouldn't have been held in the first place if anti-EU was a position held by a microscopic minority. And once the referendum got underway, polls during the campaign would surely have demonstrated the truth of that.
Now, all I think really happened on voting-day was that alot of Remainers stayed home, under the assumption, driven by polls, that there was no possibility brexit could win anyway. As well, brexit seems to be a position more popular with the older demographics, and it's a pretty established trend across cultures and countries that geezers show up to vote in greater numbers than the young punks do.
So, rather than conclude that the majority of Brits are just ranting Little Englanders, I'd conclude that maybe about 45% of them are, but the 55% who aren't forgot the importance of voting, in what was a pivotal referendum for Britain's future.
Based on my google, the ballot question and choices seem to have been pretty clear.
Was there some concern that people didn't even know what the question was going to be?
Put simply, the leave option was meaningless without a manifesto for that, just like voting for a candidate who doesn't say what they would do if elected.
If political union was there from the start, it was never made clear. As time passed, it was apparent that it was going that way - such that in latter years there was more importance given to Angela Merkel’s views in the media than that of our government, so it seemed. Talk of European forces didn’t help, nor did a kind of helpless feeling that we were stuck with European rules we had no say in. Although we had MEP’s, they didn’t seem to be visible or accountable.
The referendum was dreadfully handled and very divisive. If it had been other than in or out, giving options re: trade etc, we would not be where we are today.
But if that candidate doesn't put forth a statement of his plans, it would be the job of his opponents to point that out. And if that is pointed out, but people still wanna for Mr. No Plan, I guess we can assume those voters weren't very interested in the details anyway.
[And FWIW, my knowledge of Erasmus is derived from two viewings of the movie The Spanish Apartment. Based on that, I would surmise that leaving the EU means leaving Erasmus. I'd be curious to know if I guessed correctly on that.]
He drove a digger through a wall, promised to Get Brexit Done, and even the broadsheets sold him to their readership as having hidden depths.
Well, just for the record, the candidate I was talking about(taking my cue from @Alan Cresswell ) was not supposed to be someone involved with brexit. Rather, he was a hypothetical candidate for an election, being used as a comparison to the Leave side in the referendum.
No Plan Brexit, No Plan Candidate, but the people who voted for both of them didn't seem to care.
"Ever closer union" is in the Treaty of Rome, right up front.
As for "rules" (leaving aside the myth that the UK had no say in them), how is the supposedly desired "common market" supposed to function without common rules?
With good reason - her views (at least as they were reported here) made much more sense than those attributed to UK politicians.
As Arethosemyfeet points out, the "ever closer union" was clearly expressed. Perhaps UK politicians did not read it, or understand it. "Did not read" is the kinder of the possibilities.
Leave played the emotional card. Our borders, political independence, Eurocrats telling us what to do. Not solid facts but emotional manipulation. Proved very effective
You left out "foreigners."
Nothing like a bit of xenophobia to stir up the hard of thinking.
Not far from me, a friend who worked close to the polling station heard plenty of people turning up and saying, 'Right, let's get the foreigners out ...'
I spoke to people who seriously seemed to think that migrants would be deported or it would 'stop more Muslims coming in.'
Ok, we all know about the xenophobia - much of it in traditional 'Red Wall' territory I am afraid - but I don't think it was as simple as that. However, that might be wishful thinking on my part.
I certainly know a small number of 'Lexiters' - left wing Brexiters, but I don't think that explains how the vote went in many traditional Labour strongholds.
I think Hugal is right, that Leave won the emotional argument and that Chrisstiles is also right to highlight how the press largely played it.
As for how things are now ... well, I've come across people who voted Leave and now regret it, others who voted Remain and wished they hadn't. I don't think either represent a significant bloc.
I think the negative effects would be more apparent if it weren't for The Russian invasion of Ukraine which has become a significant scapegoat (which isn't to minimise its effects, of course).
Longer term?
Let's see. I don't see green shoots any time soon but recoveries and recessions seem to be cyclical and have been for some time.
I didn't see the interview with Ed Davey on the BBC politics programme this morning but will try to catch it on i-player. On the ground - and Lib Dems are spread pretty thinly - I get the impression that many are worn down by the whole thing and beginning to give it all up as a lost cause ...
That said, you will find Lib Dems who still talk of little else.
Your observations about racist and xenophobic Leavers are quite likely accurate, but I'm not sure they disprove my theory that low Remain-turnout is part of the reason they won. It simply proves something about the assholishness of a significant number of Britons, not how many of them voted relative to how many non-assholes voted.
Personally, I believe low youth-turnout to be an Iron Law of politics, so until shown otherwise, I'm going to assume that was a significant factor, along with the misguided assumption that Remain was gonna win no matter what.
As for the "lexiteers", they were IMHO absolutely deluded. Yeah, I know Tony Benn was a big opponent of the EEC in the 1970s, but things have changed since then, and by 2016 it was pretty obvious that almost the only people pushing withdrawl were doing so because they thought it would make Britain more right-wing.
It's 'arse-holery' if you don't mind ...
You may well be right about the effect of a low youth turn out and about 'Lexiters' being deluded but not all Brexiters were Farage-ites.
I think Arethosemyfeet is right about it being partly a vote against anything and everything that people didn't like with the EU standing for whatever that happened to be.
'What are you against?'
'What have you got?'
Did anyone hear the Radio 4 debate this afternoon? Sir Jacob Rees Mogg arguing it was a triumph for democracy.
One of the participants said it was all about sovereignty and having our own say about our own affairs even though there was inevitably going be some economic harm.
I don't think all Leavers were a homogenous bloc anymore than all Remainers were.
We can debate what happened and why till the cows come home. It's what we do now that's the real conundrum.
We can't turn the clock back.
Boris was banking on a big US deal.
That didn't happen. Will it happen in the future? I doubt it.
'We need to get out of Europe and we can be free of stultefying red-tape and bureaucracy.' Try telling that to all the small businesses who can no longer trade with EU countries without walking down labyrinthine corridors on their heads with heavy weights strapped to their wrists and ankles.
Thing is, it's not the fat cats who are feeling the economic effects. Mogg isn't losing out. Some of his constituents will be. Whether they are affected in sufficient numbers to reduce his majority is a moot point.
Grrrr ...
Somehow we've got to bounce back from all this. How? Answers on a manifesto please ...
Sorry, mate. Bit daft tonight, innit?
For the record, I was just riffing on lexiteers because you mentioned them, not because I think they had a major impact on the referendum. The impression I get is they were not a significant force.
(And by "lexiteers", I do NOT include racist, gay-hating old geezers who wanna get out of Europe just because they think the extra money will go to NHS and help them have a more comfortable old-age. Though I suppose if some of those types were lifelong Labour-voters and/or trade unionists, that might give them some grandfathered standing as leftists.)
I would add let’s have a Brexit thread where the racism/xenophobia card isn’t played to close down discussion - as it was during the run-up to the referendum leaving many to simply talk behind doors with similar-minded people, so I understand.
I wonder whether there are parallels between the UK / Europe relationship and the Scotland / UK relationship, in that geography plays upon people psychologically?
Decisions made in Brussels were not always seen to be in the best interests of those living in the UK.
If the UK Parliament was situated in Glasgow rather than in London, might English people be arguing for more MP’s per capita and more decisions made to include their specific issues?
I am sure several countries felt the same about things that were good for us.
We are now stuck with European rules that we have no say in. To train with them we need to produce stuff that matched their rules. While we were in we had a say.
As to Xenophobia? Well no not everyone who voted leave was xenophobic. Some people who wanted it were genuinely concerned about borders. As I said Leave played the emotional game. Some wanted to leave because it would make them a lot of money, enough money to hurt the country for.
Very much so, IMO.
Supporters of Scottish Independence frequently talk of being "dominated" or "ruled" by Westminster, and Brexiteers frequently talk of being "dominated" or "ruled" from Brussels.
In the first case, we're frequently told that Scotland is effectively frozen out of the decision making process in the UK, whereas in the latter we're frequently told that Britain had a significant amount of say in the dealings of the EU parliament and suggestions of being unable to influence it are utterly false.
But the facts are that Scottish seats comprise 9.08% (59/650) of seats in the House of Commons, and immediately prior to Brexit UK seats comprised 9.73% (73/750) of seats in the EU parliament. That's pretty much an identical amount of influence. I'd say the two issues are incredibly similar.
Does Scotland have a veto over UK policy/laws in the way that the UK did over EU policy/laws?
Does the UK have regular meetings of heads of the four governments where all are equal?