I am starting from the assumption that we can take as given, first, that the EU referendum process in 2016 was deeply flawed and, secondly, that Brexit has proved a disaster on a whole range of fronts. There is, after all, plenty of evidence of the latter, for example in this Liberal Democrat policy document and in this ‘Brexit audit’ commissioned by the Constitution Society and the Federal Trust. It was even frankly acknowledged by Lord Chris Patten, a previous Conservative cabinet minister and sometime chair of the Conservative Party, in a radio interview:
“… until the Conservative Party faces up to the fact – and I am sorry to go over this again – that Brexit was a complete disaster – we do not stand a chance (of presenting) a sensible face to the electorate”.
Getting back into Europe will inevitably be a long, slow process. For example, to enable the UK to align with the single market, the Liberal Democrat policy document cited above identifies a protracted sequence of four preparatory steps that will have to be undertaken. (Note that without the UK being a full member of the EU, it cannot, strictly speaking, ‘join’ the single market, it can only ‘align’ with it). It is a matter of rebuilding confidence – indeed, trust – between the UK and the EU. Gradualism and staging posts will be the name of the game.
How do the various political parties now stand on Brexit?
After 2016, Brexit became the flagship policy of the Conservative party, but as Tim Bale says, “the party is now relatively silent – partly because it is now ‘done’, partly because survey evidence suggests that it is not widely regarded as a success.” But the Tories seem unable to disavow the policy.
Labour, both in opposition and now in government, has been almost as disappointing. Labour party members are largely in favour of moving much closer to the EU more quickly; but the party leadership remains determined to stick to its red lines, a stance largely driven by fear of raising the potentially toxic issue of the of free movement of people. Hence ‘No’ to looking to align with the single market. Nick Thomas-Symonds is Starmer’s EU relations re-set man. On 12th September, in a Guardian interview, he expressed the view that he could not see the UK re-entering the EU in his lifetime. Most Labour supporters will have found Thomas-Symonds’s comments depressing.
With regard to the other parties, the Liberal Democrats have always been internationalist and keen to support closer relations with the EU. The same is true of the Green Party and the nationalist parties. Reform UK Limited, by contrast, is defined by being in favour of Brexit.
Has public opinion changed since 2016?
Matching the failure of leadership in both Labour and Conservative parties is the failure of our mainstream media to engage in commenting on Brexit, such that Brexit has become the elephant in the room. However, behind the front lines, public opinion has shifted.
Richard Corbett was for several years the leader of the Labour Group of MEPs. Corbett is keen for the UK to rejoin and in a recent article wrote:
“…polling shows that (after taking away the don’t knows/don’t cares), over 64% now think Brexit was a mistake and 62% favour rejoining the EU. Interestingly, these figures have been rising slowly but steadily, despite no leading politician publicly making the case to rejoin. By the time the next election manifestoes are written, it might be an idea whose time has come”.
So, if the Labour leadership were to argue that the Brexit ideal is a busted flush, they would be preaching to a public majority already convinced of that fact. If the percentage figures quoted above should shift to something like a solid two-thirds in each case, then Labour will surely have to take note, bite the bullet in persuading the electorate of the clear benefits to our economy of freedom of movement, and erase its current red lines.
Avoiding the risk of a second Brexit
If the Conservative and Reform UK parties were to remain in favour of Brexit, they could confidently be denounced on the soap box, leading, one would hope, to punishment in the ballot box.
Obviously, a change to proportional representation (PR) would help. In the 2019 election Boris Johnson gained an 80-seat majority on 43.6% of the vote. A switch to PR with two thirds of the electorate in favour of EU membership would provide a bulwark against a repeat of 2019.
If we get to this position, we will begin to instil confidence in the EU27 that we can be trusted to remain this time and not to seek a second Brexit.
Will the 27 countries of the EU welcome us back?
Brexit not only brought its costs to the UK but also had downsides for the EU27. The UK was deeply embedded into the single market, with a whole myriad of trading relationships. For example, much industrial production (e.g. automotive engineering) involves an integration of sub-divided international specialisms that rely on the free movement of parts across EU borders. A restoration of the UK’s place in this would be mutually beneficial.
On the political level, the UK continues to operate as a liberal democracy (although performance as such could be improved!). Reintegrated into the EU, the UK would be a useful counterweight to the national populisms that have developed, for example in Hungary and Slovakia. This is on the assumption, of course, that the UK sees off its own emerging danger of flag-waving English nationalism/populism. The UK also needs to continue to commit to the European Convention on Human Rights.
The world stage and European defence
An increased focus on security is perhaps the major change in the EU since the UK left in 2021. As President Trump pulls the rug from under NATO, so the nations of Europe have begun to take a more active role in European defence, in particular in supporting the Ukraine against Russian aggression. Under Keir Starmer, the UK has played an active part in establishing the coalition of the willing and this has brought the UK into a closer defence relationship with EU members. As Richard Corbett states:
“… the EU is beginning to be important as regards security, given Putin to the East and Trump to the West, and this makes British participation even more important than before”.
EU membership depends on reciprocity. Regaining membership (or even aligning with the single market and customs union) will require the UK to take account of the key concerns of EU member states. There will need to be a balance of advantages for all concerned. The Danes will, for example, likely insist on a restoration of their access to ‘our’ sand-eels on the Dogger Bank.
Will the UK be able to regain its previous advantageous conditions?
The short answer is no. The handbag-wielding Mrs Thatcher had carved out a privileged position for our country, in that the UK had a budget rebate and no obligation to join either the single currency or the Schengen area. Previously we had a first-class ticket on the EU train; our next ticket, should we rejoin, will be standard class only.
Pessimists say that the UK will get back in only if we join the euro and Schengen – and there will certainly be no budget rebate. Optimists believe that these latter two points can be fudged – after all, seven of the current members are not in the euro zone.
Schengen membership brings right to the fore the thorny issue for the UK of freedom of movement, but with both the euro and Schengen it may be sufficient for the UK to agree in principle to join, but without any future date being specified. If having the UK as an important component regarding the security of Ukraine becomes more urgent, the greater the tendency may be for the EU to be more flexible on conditions of UK rejoining.
Two other changes involve efforts to agree a more coordinated approach to dealing with migration, together with some efforts on joint industrial procurement. In April 2025, Nick Clegg in The Observer considered ways in which in his view the EU needs to change in order to survive. If the UK were, say, in 10 years’ time, to rejoin the EU, it will be a very different organisation to the one it left – possibly better, less prescriptive and more focused.
Is there an alternative to rejoining the EU?
The bottom line is that the world is in a far more dangerous place than it was 10 years ago. Sadly, we have seen considerable breaking down of the rules-based international order. Trump, Putin and the leaders of China and India are all ‘disruptors’.
Whereas, during the Obama presidency, the UK could see its role with some justification as a bridge between Europe and the USA, that bridge is now shattered. Donald Trump is not a transactional operator – which is how some people describe him. Rather, he seeks to acquire and dominate – evidence his eyes on Greenland and Canada – and he would love to have the UK subject to his will, doing our bit as part of the US empire (note his dismay at the UK’s reluctance to fall into step with his war on Iran). Meanwhile, American money is flooding into right-wing think-tanks in London, seeking to bring thinking in the UK into alignment with right-wing US orthodoxy.
If, instead, the UK wishes to associate itself with nations that share our values of liberal democracy and internationalism, then the closest match – and the closest geographically – is the EU.
Rejoining should be our goal.
