Brexit Mega Thread 16 – Who's Next?

[LouiseCollins28]

We are approaching the 6th anniversary of Brexit, or I suppose the 5th, if you count the period of transition as "in."

Since then, the world has endured Covid-19, seen war in Ukraine and many other things. Brexit has had reduced salience in the minds of many people recently.

When digesting the latest setbacks to befall the elite who govern our islands, a phrase I keep returning to, is “OK, so now do you get it?”

Brexit is undoubtedly the biggest “OK, so now do you get it?” moment directed at our leaders in my life. It’s surely the largest since 1979, since the Labour victory of 1945? or even since the advent of universal suffrage?

The U.K. local elections in 2026, and subsequent national ones, could see a big increase in support for the Green Party and Reform U.K. Two parties with more different attitudes to European integration could scarcely be found, so Brexit’s salience in the U.K. may rise again soon
.
There are many electoral contests in progress or coming across Europe too (the Netherlands and France, for example) which will be worth paying attention to. Maybe the next questions we will face are less about "what next?" and more about "who's next?"

Relations between mainland Europe and the UK remain a worthy topic for discussion, whoever leads the nations of Europe, or leads the E.U. itself.

Sure. Who's going to be the next EU Commission President is one way of looking at it, though since U VDL has only been re-elected mid-2024 a new Commission President seems long way off.

I was thinking more of who will lead the individual countries.

Germany, Italy and Spain among the largest E.U. Member States all seem pretty stable just now.

However, who's going to be France's next PM, and her next President? Who wins in the Netherlands?

and outside of the EU, (currently) who might be the next PM of the U.K and what impact might that choice have on our relations with the EU?

Well, speaking for the Netherlands they haven't been politically very stable right now, but if the VVD can be persuaded to stop being dogmatic and stupid, they could have a solid centre with a little bit of left coalition government under Rob Jetten.

@MaybeNotBob

As per usual, you are only looking at a single bottom line. It's blinkered thinking at it's most pathetic.

It’s simple mathematics. If the expenses are greater than the income, you will go bankrupt unless you keep borrowing.

UK’s GDP to debt ratio is lower than; France, Italy and Spain. And guess what, those three countries have higher immigration and taxes than the UK.

Bulgaria has a very low GDP to debt ratio. And quess what, Bulgaria is a net taker with 10% tax rate and low immigration.

Germany fares better because they have the largest trade surplus of all which can be used to invest outside the EU. However, taxes are high and poverty is rising.

QED

I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you, shocked!...

https://www.politico.eu/blogs/on-media/2016/04/media-monitor-bbc-harsher-on-eu-than-on-vladimir-putin/

It was stated on BBC Question Time 4 April 2019 that the show never had a leave majority on the panel. Sir Jacob Rees Mogg made the statement:

B rexit
B ashing
C orporation

The EU spends more on Russian oil and gas than the aid they provide to the Ukraine. So, not only did the EU cause the Russian invasion of the Ukraine, but they are also prolonging that war.

A bad strategy. The longer the wars last, the greater the number of people will move westwards into the EU. That coupled with greater numbers crossing the Mediterranean Sea, means more will eventually arrive in Calais. Hence boats crossing the channel are rising.

So, not only did the EU cause the Russian invasion of the Ukraine, but they are also prolonging that war.

Hope they are paying you for this pro Putin propganda.

@GlobeTrotter2000
There is no conclusive proof that Brexit is the cause of increased migration.

It does seem to be a heavy coincidence that there has been a spike since the end of the EU transition period. I'd call that pretty conclusive, either that or very coincidental. There are other causal factors for sure, but that doesn't explain the complete spike.

Based on the above, I would say there is no proof that Brexit has increased unemployment.

I didn't say it has. Just that thousands of jobs were moved out of the country. in percentage terms on employment, it's probably negligible, but the impact on the economy was not.

Measureable Benefits.

Fastest growing maybe, but still a much lower growth rate than would have been likely without Brexshit. It's a bit like saying "my arm has been cut off, but I have another arm".

Same for your quote about services. You don't mention the analysis by the OBR, the LSE, the Constitution Society et al which is what I meant by supportable research. You don't say which services? Financial services and transport services (which were responsible for a large proportion of the growth / standing of the UK stock market etc) are much lower than would have been. So, your statement is like saying we are selling more 1p chews these days, just don't worry about all the £1 chews we used to sell.

What I asked for was any analysis supported by a reputable source that can name a single benefit of Brexshit. You haven't been able to point to one. I can list as many that show that it has damaged the economy:

https://consoc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/The-Economic-Impact-of-Brexit.pdf

https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/the-economy-forecast/brexit-analysis/#assumptions
https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/11/article/648593/summary
https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1967545&dswid=-8605

Not sure if I believe the BBC any longer, but in case https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdrynjz1glpo

So, I think I'll carry on calling it Brexshit as the world's leading economists seem to agree that it was a shit thing to do.

Oh, and you may wish to read this analysis about the US trade deal too. It looks under the hood a bit more:
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/trouble-ahead-for-uk-us-trade/

@HappiestSleeping

Maybe you need to look at the difference between correlation and causation.

Coincidences do not establish causation. For example, COVID appeared worldwide soon after the UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.

Did Brexit cause the pandemic? Definitely not.

Fastest growing maybe, but still a much lower growth rate than would have been likely without Brexshit

The key word there was “likely” as opposed to “certain”. ie, they are forecasts as opposed to actual data.

If being in the EU guarantees lower immigration and higher prosperity, how do you explain the current state of countries such as Germany and France?

Before UK left the EU, the only EU member to have a larger economy than the UK was Germany. That fact still remains. So, where is the guaranteed growth for the other 26 EU countries?

As someone who has lost their job due to Brexit, your views will always be subjective as opposed to objective.

@DuncinToffee

Hope they are paying you for this pro Putin propganda

That the EU spends more on imports of energy from Russia than aid given to the Ukraine is a fact.

Using 'the Ukraine' is Russian propaganda.

@DuncinToffee

Using 'the Ukraine' is Russian propaganda.

How does the choice of Ukraine or the Ukraine, change the fact that the EU spends more on imported energy from Russia than aid given to the Ukraine, or Ukraine?

@GlobeTrotter2000

How does any of that change the fact that Russia invaded Ukraine?

https://www.euractiv.com/news/belgian-court-convicts-two-for-eu-funds-misuse-linked-to-nigel-farages-brexit-group/

Belgian court convicts two for EU funds misuse linked to Nigel Farage's Brexit group
Verdict ends decade-long probe into alleged misuse of EU funds by associates of top Brexit campaigner

There were no law changes with the pandemic, whereas there were with migration, hence there are casual factors that can be attributed to Brexshit.

I agree that nothing is certain, however it is fairly obtuse to dismiss pretty much every single economic study. I note you have not been able to point to one as yet that supports your view that there have been tangible benefits.

It was just my job. It was the value of my pension, the businesses of my friends who relied on trade with Europe, the ease of travel, the ability to work in other European countries, and many other factors. The fact that even the proponents of Brexshit didn't actually have a plan showed how little they were expecting the result to be what it was. At very least, I would have expected someone to have said "right, we've got what we wanted, let's get on with doing this" but they were all too busy blinking at each other like rabbits in headlights.

Causal even. Bloody speel chuck.

@HappiestSleeping

hence there are casual factors that can be attributed to Brexshit.

There aren’t. Since Brexit, controls were tightened at both sides of the channel for both ferries and lorries. So, migrants have switched to using crossing the channel by boat.

The most common nationality that arrived by boat are;

Afghanistan
Albania
Eritrea
Iran
Syria

None of those countries are in the EU. So, they must have crossed the border into EU at some point otherwise they could not end up Calais.

As more people enter the EU from across the Mediterranean or Eastern European borders, the more that are able to make their way to Calais.

Also, remember that UK ranks fifth behind; Germany, France, Spain and Italy in terms of immigration. They have not yet left the EU, so what’s their excuse for higher immigration?

I note you have not been able to point to one as yet that supports your view that there have been tangible benefits.

My benefits are;

My fees are paid in Euro. So, I receive more sterling than before.

The Schengen guidelines allow non EU citizens to be present in the EU for 90 days in a rolling 180 days period. So, fly in Monday and leave Thursday is nights per week. This means I never exceed the 90 days per week.

My EU clients are happy too as it costs them less in hotel costs when I was in the EU for more than 90 days per 180.

Not related to Brexit, but the big positive of COVID was it demonstrated how much work could be done from home. Hence non EU persons working on hybrid basis in the EU is easy. Being doing it since 2021.

Unemployment was falling since 2015 up until Labour hiked business taxes in Q4 of 2024. Surely reducing unemployment is good for any country. In anticipation of, that might not be caused by Brexit, I would reply, maybe, but it proves the remain forecast of 500,000 to 800,000 jobs would be just by a vote to leave was wrong.

What others consider to be benefits, I can’t say. What goes through the minds of 10s of millions of people is impossible for anyone to know. However, what is known, is that since the 2016 referendum there has been three general elections none of which have been won by parties who are anti Brexit.

And you miss the fact that the French intercepted many migrants pre-Brexshit that they don't bother with since? And the fact that the controls you mention had been tightened before Brexshit, and the numbers didn't skyrocket until Brexshit.

And you still have not quoted any reliable economic study agreeing with your benefits. Presumably because you cannot find one?

Not to mention the fact that the Dublin Convention allowed us to return them to France, and we left that with Brexit.

But, yeah, it's all just circumstantial...

@HappiestSleeping

And you miss the fact that the French intercepted many migrants pre-Brexshit that they don't bother with since.

France recently claimed they were intercepting approx 70%. However, due to the overwhelming numbers of migrants entering the EU from across the Mediterranean and from
the troubles in the Middle East totalling 2 million in 2020 and over 5 million by 2022, they are unable to to intercept all.

The point, however, remains. If migrants did not enter the EU to begin with, they would never end up in Calais as there are no direct routes from; Syria, Afghanistan, Iran or Eritrea.

Did Brexit cause the troubles that people are fleeing from in the Middle East and hence the millions that are moving Westwards into the EU? No, it didn’t. There have been troubles in that part of the World for as long as I can remember.

Is Brexit responsible for the 250K Mediterranean crossings per year? No, it is not.

Likewise, as France has the second largest level of immigration in the EU, compared to the UK being fifth, is it not in Frances interests to allow immigrants to cross the channel? Also, remember that as those in Calais are not seeking asylum in France, there is no requirement for France to process any applications.

The number of immigrants returned under the Dublin Agreement was measured in the 100s as opposed to 10s of thousands. From 2008 to 2020, there were approximately 6,000 migrants returned, about 500 per year.

If the Dublin Agreement is effective, why do, Germany, France, Spain and Italy all have higher immigration than the UK?

And you still have not quoted any reliable economic study agreeing with your benefits. Presumably because you cannot find one?

I would not expect to find any study that refers to me individually. I was listing the benefits to myself.

It always amuses me that people are surprised that immigration rises
when borders are closed.

Under Free Movement, Hungarians could come to the UK
look for work
if there was none they would head off to France or Spain.
Seasonal veg pickers went back to south east Europe in the down season
now they stay
because if they leave they cannot come back

ditto the illegal migrants working in semi slavery conditions
having paid the whole family's savings to get here
they will never leave
and being illegal are not eligible for a passport

so more and more people come in
and do not go home
while sending the money they earn home
so not adding to the UK economy
(especially the illegals being paid cash)

Allowing workers to get multi entry three year temporary visas
would benefit both countries

OK, so we agreed that the benefits are for you personally, and that in general, there are only downsides. That's what I said right at the start.

@HappiestSleeping

OK, so we agreed that the benefits are for you personally, and that in general, there are only downsides. That's what I said right at the start.

So, such agreement was made. I gave examples of the benefits to myself. That does not prove I am the only person in the UK who has benefited from Brexit.

What is provable is that none of the three general elections held since the 2016 referendum have been won by anti Brexit/Rejoin parties. That tells me I am not the only person who has benefited from Brexit, but the opposite.

If there is evidence that the majority of people in the UK are worse off due to Brexit, what’s the explanation of the results of the last three general elections? Why has Starmer, with his 400+ seats in Parliament, not called for a vote from MPs whether or not to trigger Article 49, the mechanism to apply to rejoin the EU.

Farage won 4.1 million votes in 2024. Almost a sevenfold increase compared to the 594K he won in 2017. Would the number of votes he received not have declined if people thought they were worse off due to Brexit?

As explained before, elections are not won or lost on single issues, no matter how important they are, or are later proved to be.

I do not disagree that there are some outliers, such as yourself, who are better off (although I am concerned that you don't have any form of pension which would undoubtedly have been devalued). My point was that the majority are not better off, for which I have provided much independent analysis.

Until you are able to provide independent analysis to the contrary, we will have to agree that those who benefited are outliers. Such as yourself.

In 2024 my vote was based on

tax and economic policy
womens rights
disability rights
education funding
local government funding
brexit ramifications
climate change

bcause only the deeply entitled are single issue voters

and only the deeply stupid assume that everybody votes on their pet issue