Would you vote to Rejoin the EU if there was another referendum? - Part 2

[EEexpat]

Advantages and disadvantages?

@EEexpat
Where are all the fabulous trade deals that we were going to negotiate?

You said: “UK deal with US is better than the EU deal” FALSE

https://www.euronews.com/2025/08/08/who-got-the-best-trade-deal-with-the-us-the-eu-or-uk

Although the deal concluded by the EU with the US setting a 15% tariff [cap] for EU goods seems less favourable than the UK’s 10% blanket [base] tariff rate, European Commission officials contend that their agreement was better on balance.

15% is the best available treatment,” a senior EU official said this week, referring to the rate at which the EU has accepted its goods will be tariffed by the US.

“If you specifically want to compare it to the UK, the first point to take note of is that the UK 10% [base] tariff is not an all-inclusive rate,” the official added….

All-inclusive rate
However, according to the EU official, the 10% tariff [base] rate within the US-UK deal did not incorporate existing US import tariffs applied to the UK, the so-called Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rates, that the US applied to foreign counties’ imports before its new tariff policy.

“Unlike other US trade partners, this [EU] 15% tariff rate includes existing Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rates, meaning no stacking above the 15% ceiling,” Commission spokesperson Olof Gill has said of the EU-US deal.
If the 4.8% average US tariffs applied until then to EU imports is deducted from the current 15%, the effective tariff applied to the EU comes closer to the UK’s 10%.

The same senior EU official took the specific example of cheese, “an important product for the EU, but also a very important product, for the UK.” In the EU it will face a 15% tariff, while in the UK it will be 10% plus the 14.9% tariff which applies to that product under the existing terms, which means 24.9 %.

“Of course and in all transparency some products may have a slightly better treatment for UK exporters,” the official admitted, “but there are many products that will be in a better position in the overall situation.”

If the deal of 27 July is respected by the US, the EU’s 15% tariff should apply to all goods, including semiconductors, pharma and cars, Gill said on Thursday. “That is not something that the UK, at least not in writing, has obtained today,” the EU official added.

On cars, the UK deal establishes that UK exports to the US will face 10% tariff only to a quota of 100,000 cars a year, above that quota the US will start applying 25% tariffs. The [EU] Commission on its side said it has secured a 15% rate on cars too, subject to no quota, meaning that an unlimited number can be imported at that rate.

The [EU] Commission also prides itself on not having made the commitments the British did in sensitive agricultural sectors such as beef and ethanol.
On beef, the UK deal creates a preferential duty-free quota for US beef of 13,000 tonnes per year and removes the existing 20% UK tariff. On ethanol, the UK commits to preferential duty-free quota for US ethanol of 1.4 billion litres per year.
For the EU, making concessions on such sensitive products is out of the question.
“The European union will not make commitments in sensitive sectors. So for example, ethanol and beef,” the official said.

@EEexpat
If leaving the EU has damaged the UK, how do you explain the fact that UK is doing better than countries such as, France, Germany and Italy who are in the EU? FALSE

It is clear that the UK would have done much better if we had stayed in the EU
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cyv0m164m84o

“The UK Trade Policy Observatory at Sussex University calculated a rapid 26% reduction in the different types of UK exports by 2023, while a new study from Aston University Business School using five years of more detailed trade data concludes a loss of 53.8% of the type of exports and 31.5% for imports.
These figures for "trade varieties" are falls in the number of products sent to different EU countries.
A decade ago, many economists argued the UK would sustain longer-term economic damage by leaving the EU and many believe that damage has come to pass.”….”"Among economists there is not much debate, but there still is among policy folks. The experts were right. It was, if anything, worse than we thought, but it's taken longer to get there," says Nick Bloom, a British Stanford University professor and author of one of the most prominent recent major studies using Bank of England data.”

“This paper examines the impact of the UK's decision to leave the European Union (Brexit) in 2016. Using almost a decade of data since the referendum, we combine simulations based on macro data with estimates derived from micro data collected through our Decision Maker Panel survey. These estimates suggest that by 2025, Brexit had reduced UK GDP by 6% to 8%, with the impact accumulating gradually over time. We estimate that investment was reduced by between 12% and 18%, employment by 3% to 4% and productivity by 3% to 4%. These large negative impacts reflect a combination of elevated uncertainty, reduced demand, diverted management time, and increased misallocation of resources from a protracted Brexit process. Comparing these with contemporary forecasts – providing a rare macro example to complement the burgeoning micro- literature of social science predictions – shows that these forecasts were accurate over a 5-year horizon, but they underestimated the impact over a decade.” https://siepr.stanford.edu/publications/working-paper/economic-impact-brexit

“The overall findings are emphatic: Brexit has made the UK poorer than it would have been had the UK remained in the EU. The best available estimates imply that by the end of 2019 Brexit had reduced UK GDP by 2 per cent to 3 per cent. Quantifying the impacts from 2020 onwards is harder because of the Covid-19 pandemic and energy price shocks following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But recent analysis suggests that the costs have risen over time and that Brexit may have reduced UK GDP per head by as much as 8 per cent by the start of 2025. An 8 per cent decline would represent a loss of £3,300 per person in 2024.The overall findings are emphatic: Brexit has made the UK poorer than it would have been had the UK remained in the EU.”
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/brexit-10-brexit-has-been-an-economic-failure/

Immigration was better controlled when we were in the EU. Note the steep increase in immigration in 2021, when the Post-Brexit immigration system took effect.

The internet did not go away for the .com bubble either?
You do know what a bubble is- it is when revenues do not come close to covering costs while values are wildly inflated to sucker in more investment?

You should know too how sensible regulations do not stifle innovation or development but actually boost it?

Growth in the UK is primarily driven by the tech and services sectors, particularly artificial intelligence (AI) investments, computer programming, and information and communication. Despite high energy costs and global supply pressures, the economy expanded unexpectedly by 0.1% in August 2026 and 0.4% in July, leading the IMF to upgrade its annual growth forecast to 1.3%. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]

Key Growth Drivers

• Artificial Intelligence and Tech: Surges in computer programming and digital infrastructure—anchored by hubs in London, Oxford, Cambridge, and regional tech clusters—are major contributors to economic output.

Growth here is picking up due to tech and AI, would you prefer it wasn’t?

@AmberTigerEyes

Take a look at:

Half of UK wants to rejoin EU and backing it could drive up Labour vote, megapoll finds | European Union | The Guardian

The actual headline is misleading. If you look at the details, it states that 29% strongly support a rejoin and 21% somewhat support a rejoin. So, the Guardian statement that Half of UK wants to rejoin is weak. Even if true, it's still only half. Nowhere near a large majority.

The 29% that strongly support a rejoin might explain the YouGov figure of 31% for those who though their household finances would improve.

As for the statement that UK would have grown more had they remained in the UK, there is a question:

"What advantage would EU membership give to the UK, but not Germany, France and Italy, that would allow UK to outperform those countries by more than they have already done so?"

As for immigration, the chart you have provided is now two years old. As per Labour, immigration is now down to pre-Brexit levels. Also, it's a fact that UK ranks fifth behind, Germany, France, Spain and Italy.

More significantly, if the EU were capable of controlling their borders in both Eastern Europe and the Mediterranean Sea, there would be no arrivals in Calais. Hence no boat crossings from Calais to the UK.

Is the UK responsible for EU failure to control their borders? No, they are not.

Yes, but you are spectacularly missing my point. I was explaining why a section of labour and conservative voters voted 'leave'. They wanted higher wages, and for the occupations I mention, which are the occupations that have seen increases, they got what they wanted.

Of course, in total for the country incomes did not increase by that amount. And as a result the tide has turned from the '90s/00s boom period where the middle classes and businesses benefited from cheap labour to a period where many can't afford to have work done and companies are cutting jobs. It can be simultaneously true that a section of society has benefited from brexit, while the country as a whole has not. That doesn't mean that those who have benefitted will change their vote!

@Tryingtokeepgoing

That doesn't mean that those who have benefitted will change their vote!

I agree and I think there are more people who have benefitted compared to those who have not. Reasons for those thoughts inlcude:

The electorate was given the opportunity to revoke Article 50 by voting for the Liberal Democrat party in the 2019 General Election, and;

A second referendum with option to remain by the Labour Party.

Neither the Labour nor the Liberal Democrat Party won. At the time it was regarded as Labour's worst result in 84 years.

Turn the clock forward to the 2024 General Election. Labour manifesto was that the UK would not join the customs union nor the single market. They more than doubled their seats from 203 to 412.

I don't think any one thing in isolation was why the referendum vote went the way it did, nor was there one reason the Labour Party won the 2024 GE with a landslide. By far the biggest shift to the Labour Party becoming electable was electing a leader who was more widely acceptable to the electorate rather than just the left wing of the Labour Party. In fact arguably Labour were seen as the least worst option in 2024.

@Needtosoundoffandbreathe

In fact arguably Labour were seen as the least worst option in 2024.

This is very possible. I think the same happened in 1997.

The turnout for general elections is on a downward trajectory over the last few decades. The turnout in 2024 was less than 60%. So, either the remaining 40% don't care or have lost hope. Sadly, I would say it more likely the latter.

Voter turnout at UK general elections 1945 – 2024 | UK Political Info

Also, I think tactical voting is on the increase which is okay as people are free to choose how they vote. Downside is that the Party who gets in think they have more support than what they actually have and can do whatever they wish. Starmer lasted two years even though his party won 412 seats.

Yes I would - leaving has destroyed the UK, made everyone’s standard of living drop and poor and disabled people are getting the blame along with migrants.

@Lemieux7

The subject of migrants has been talked about for decades. The major parties always pledge to reduce the numbers, but it never happens.

Regards your comment that everyone is poorer since Brexit, I am not convinced that is correct. However, that was not the question, but how people would if there were another referendum, advantages and disadvantages?

Those who oppose a second referendum or a rejoin seem to be reasonably consistent with their reasons. However, so far, not a lot has been said about advantages of a rejoin. There must be some as it's rare for anything to be clear cut in either direction.

So, can you please provide examples of advantages of a rejoin.

Advantages of a rejoin:
Full access to Eu single market, reducing trade barriers, increasing economic growth, which more than offsets any benefits from current trade deals outside EU
Ability to influence EU regulations, which uk currently aligns with but currently can’t influence
Reduction in regulation for uk companies exporting to and importing from EU
Ability to live and work in EU
Ability to negotiate better trade deals as part of Eu bloc
Strategic advantages of being part of Eu for defence and foreign policy

The advantages are clear: access to the common market as a member of the EU and freedom of movement. Those two things alone are hugely advantageous.

What right wing parties in the UK tend to do is highlight the cost to the UK of membership. It's basically the same argument they have about properly funded public services. The UK is a wealthy nation, despite the hole in the public finances. I have no issue with some of that wealth being used to raise living standards in other countries in the EU. Just as I have no issue with paying more tax to fund public services in the UK.

The other thing the right wing, particularly the press, do is proclaim certain EU regulations as ridiculous while failing to explain the background properly. It's just eye-catching stupid headlines, rage bait. We'd be better off in the EU as a full member working together with our allies instead of constantly making out we're somehow better, which was certainly the impression some of the conservative administrations of the UK gave. But as the saying goes, culture eats strategy for breakfast.

@NavyViewer
@Needtosoundoffandbreathe

Thanks for listing what you consider would be the advantages of a rejoin. Many posts were a re-run of the past as opposed to looking forward

Should another referendum be held? Or should UK apply to rejoin without a referendum like when UK joined in 1973?

I am not a great believer of polls, but the recent Guardian poll claimed that half the country wants to rejoin. The actual figures were 29% strongly support a rejoin and 21% somewhat support a rejoin.

The word somewhat sounds a bit wishy-washy. So, I would say the Guardian headline of half the Country was a little optimistic.

On 9 June 2026, YouGov poll gave figures of:

57% want to join the EU with the previous opt-outs. Dropping to 35% without opt-outs. 31% thought their household finances would improve if the UK rejoined.

So, is there genuinely a majority support for rejoining the EU? Or is it around the 50:50 mark which is almost identical to referendum result in 2016?

I think personally if it was tomorrow a referendum would be too close to call. I think there needs to be a more informed public debate on all the options for our relationship with EU. Assuming that debate happens, a Labour manifesto pledge to rejoin after next election might be a good enough mandate to negate the need for a referendum, if they win a majority.

@NavyViewer

I think there needs to be a more informed public debate on all the options for our relationship with EU.

Sounds good on paper, but how would such a debate be monitored to prevent bias and inaccurate information being spread? I remember prior to the 2016 referendum vastly different claims being made by both sides of the debate. Many of which never materialised.

I think there needs to be a fundamental rethink of the electoral system in the UK. A very high proportion of the electorate is totally disengaged and turnout is poor.

It's too soon to rejoin unless there's a massive wave of rejoin sentiment, the benefits of working with our European allies needs to demonstrate the benefits of closer ties to convince the Eurosceptics.

There was a confirmatory referendum in 1975 asking whether the electorate wanted to stay in the EU, presumably because they weren't asked when we joined after a long period of trying to join.

57% want to join the EU with the previous opt-outs. Dropping to 35% without opt-outs. 31% thought their household finances would improve if the UK rejoined

That’s interesting. Do the polls ever ask opinions on swapping sterling for the Euro?

Full access to Eu single market, reducing trade barriers, increasing economic growth, which more than offsets any benefits from current trade deals outside EU

How much [extra] economic growth, how soon and will it offset the financial contributions we would have to make to the EU budget? What guarantees are there?

Ability to negotiate better trade deals as part of EU bloc

France, Ireland, Austria, Poland and Hungary voted against the EU's provisional free trade deal with Mercosur (South American bloc countries) earlier this year - citing severe risks to European farmers, food self-sufficiency, and environmental standards - nevertheless they were outvoted. France and Poland in particular have tried to block the deal - not all trade deals suit every member state.

I have no issue with some of that wealth being used to raise living standards in other countries in the EU

Plenty of people objected to UK tax-payers funding EU subsidies/grants which helped to set up manufacturing in poorer EU countries (where wages were much lower) - which in turn encouraged good manufacturing jobs to move out of the UK.

Yes, I quite like how enraged the remainers and rejoiners are over it. The whole thing is of little discernable consequence really but the sheer amount of catastrophising and contempt is vastly entertaining. We certainly found out how much people in Britain hate each other. Strange place.

The latest net migration figures are 171,000 - back to 2012 levels (pre-freedom of movement for Romania and Bulgaria).

Also, in theory, if you are unhappy with the number of work visas/dependant visas we have issued since 2021, there's nothing to stop the government cancelling or not renewing those visas. There's more control now if the government wishes to exercise that control.

Pre-Brexit immigration figures were clearly underestimated - hence why the ONS are now using new methodology. Not forgetting that 6.3 million people have applied to the EU Settlement Scheme - the Home Office was expecting 3.7 million people to apply.

Ukraine and Albania are both likely to join the EU. If we rejoin, how many Ukrainians and Albanians will exercise freedom of movement to move to the UK?

In addition, if countries such as France and Germany turn very right-wing/far-right, will this cause mass migration of ethnic minority EU citizens to other member states, including the UK if we rejoin?

AIUI immigration before we left the EU was essentially uncontrolled with respect to immigration from the EU and controlled from the ROW.

After we left the EU we essentially had control over immigration from everywhere (EU+ROW).

The reason we ended up with higher immigration from ROW after we left was because the Tories chose to allow it. Not because they were unable to control it because of some extra conditions that arose because of Brexit.

Happy to be corrected on this.

On cars, the UK deal establishes that UK exports to the US will face 10% tariff only to a quota of 100,000 cars a year, above that quota the US will start applying 25% tariffs. The [EU] Commission on its side said it has secured a 15% rate on cars too, subject to no quota, meaning that an unlimited number can be imported at that rate.

The UK typically exports around 100,000 cars a year to the US, so not many cars over the quota - whereas (presumably) all cars exported from the EU to the US would be subject to the higher tariff.

“The European union will not make commitments in sensitive sectors. So for example, ethanol and beef,” the official said.

Clearly some unhappy beef farmers here (Jan 2026);

Thousands of Irish farmers protest against EU-Mercosur trade deal.

Demonstration follows similar actions in Poland, France and Belgium as EU states approve accord.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/10/thousands-of-irish-farmers-protest-against-eu-mercosur-trade-deal

As stated in my previous post, France, Ireland, Austria, Poland and Hungary all voted against the Mercosur deal (Belgium abstained);