Post

How about: a) I believe the UK should rejoin the EU; but b) Neither we nor Brussels are ready for a formal negotiation; and c) EU membership would not be a panacea for our national challenges; so c) I will work to build trust and lay foundations with the EU, while advancing other priorities.

202 reposts1.2K likes

Starmer doesn't believe 'a'. Because of 'd' we never will continue divergence so never be ready for 'b' and anyone who needs to be told 'c' probably shouldn't be allowed to vote. Membership of the EU in this modern world is essential for the future wellbeing of the people of GB. Time is wasting.

But not being ready doesn't mean u can't negotiate. EU weren't ready 4Trump but they had 2 negotiate. Or are u saying EU would just ignore a UKs request? Because it wasn't ready yet? Guess that could happen

Without putting too fine a point on it the UK is not really in a political situation, currently and for the foreseeable, which would make it an attractive member state prospect for the EU.

If he'd actually come out and said that clearly, then maybe so. The actual Starmer position seems to be saying as little as possible while making encouraging noises depending on who he's talking to. That's the problem, even when he might be right, he's got the backbone of a damp flannel.

The thing is, he'll be hammered by the right-wing press for literally anything. And the other side aren't doing subtle in the slightest. At some point, you may as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb, the "carefully now" approach doesn't work if you're the only one doing it.

Exactly what Starmer and team have been working on. No way the EU lets UK back within 10 years. UK has to sort it's own internal problems out now, and rebuild relationships with our neighbours. I think we need to steady the ship with Starmer personally and accept that there is no quick fix.

The decision whether to rejoin will always depend on the exact terms of what is offered; that the decision to leave was put to the country in 2016 with no idea what it meant was a mistake we will not repeat

It's not one decision, it's a series of decisions. You decide to open negotiations about joining and then you look at what the EU is seeking and talk about it for ages and then decide again, seperately whether what's on the table is acceptable. You don't know what's on offer before the talks.

Because while it is entirely reasonable, if you took the view that politicians ‘do nothing’ that is exactly what you would expect from them. Nothing in that ‘gets done’ or materially advances where we are now into something else. It’s not a viewpoint I take but it’s something to be mindful of

Yeah, I kind of meant that (or at least, confine yourself to things like bilateral FTAs that technically preclude entry but could just be cancelled if they needed to be).

UK would need to pull out of the CPTPP if it ever rejoined the EU Single Market and Customs Union because CPTPP commits it to have tariffs different to those of the European Union (and the whole point of a Customs Union is one single external tariff).

Which ends up in the position where you put the question as to if you look at joining the EU (rejoin makes it sound too much like going back to the same as before) in the manifesto for the next election in 2029

Most intelligent position. Sadly 40% of UK would stop reading at "EU" in point (a), and another 40% would be pissed off by statement by end of point (b)

Not sure about (b) - because we won’t know until we ask, (c) - it would probably be the closest thing we could have to a panacea and (d) is what we have now and hasn’t worked.

What if private contacts have said "Don't ask, you won't like the answer." The UK doesn't meet the Copenhagen Criteria (eg House of Lords), RefUK Ltd is an active threat (leave the ECHR) and there's still a potential MS veto (Fico).

The EU has shown itself to be remarkably good at dealing with multiple and sometimes conflicting issues and member state positions but the UK will only ever know what challenges lie in the way of rejoining when the UK asks to rejoin.

Reversing brexit may not be a panacea, but it will certainly help to improve thngs while making other necessary changes. A stronger economy and higher tax revenues always make the government's job easier.

a1) but the UK should rejoin on equal terms with all other members, no special treatment, opt-outs or derogations

the only opt-out I would miss is the zero-rate VAT exemptions the UK had, but honestly I think most of those should be adopted by the EU as well as they feel a lot more like an EU thing than a UK thing

Sometime during the 1980's I saw a report on the effect of UK's VAT exemptions on prices. Conclusion was the consumer prices were no lower in the UK, but elsewhere in EC some of the money went back into the public purse while in the UK more went mainly to middle men in the supply chain.

my personal experience as a person who moved from Bulgaria to the UK in the mid-2010s is that things like food and clothes felt noticeably cheaper (even in absolute terms, not adjusted for income) in the UK, despite Bulgaria being on the far low end of the quality of life spectrum of the EU

However either Burnham needs to beat Farage threat off first and saying Rejoin now plays into his hands as he fires up old arguments Or Burnham can beat Farage by nailing him for Brexit's failure and lies and promising to reverse it when appropriate

Why oh why do politicians not listen to people such as yourself. As you state an involved process needs discussion. Why do they go absolutist . I think they are terrified to present an argument and are assuming views of people feeling they have to comply. No intellectual confidence.

C is. EU membership would certainly at least help dealing with most of the national challenges if not solve many, but getting rid of FPTP where the whole country is increasingly being held ransom by an increasingly extremist minority is also essential. 1

It would take sometime for us to meet the standards required to join various institutions of the EU (pesticides is one example) so we might as well go about aligning on these areas on the quiet, in advance of any formal application to rejoin.

Surely we can do more than one thing, especially the rare things with 4%+ GDP impact in near to medium term. We should push ahead on rejoin or maybe re-form with Canada, Ukraine etc. AND do other things too. Create some buzz on things that are real, not flag waving nonsense

I would absolutely agree with that. But there would be a lot of objections from the Reform team, accusing you of betraying Brexit. So you would have to put a campaign in place to constantly highlight the harm Brexit has done. Evidence based.

I'd like to hear one of them say something like this... 'Brexit has been demonstrably awful, and caused the country significant harm, but you voted for it, so we're respecting your choice and continuing down this path of decline that we must assume you still want.'

Start blaming the electorate for their lives getting worse. "You'll no doubt make the same mistake again, by making Nigel Farage your PM, and it will be all your fault when your quality of life decreases significantly. Stop falling for obvious cons."

While a party who wants to tear up the ECHR, TCA, WA and GFA may get into power it is rather wise to deal with that rather than seek to rejoin the EU.

Aspiration instead of grievance sounds sensible. Grown up conversations about Britain's future relationship with the EU are becoming inevitable. The only people still hanging on to brexit are lying grifters or intellectually challenged bigots with a side hustle on X.

No, no, no, Dmitry. That's just defeatist nonsense. We'll fix this country by Deporting All Darkies and Selling Everything That Isn't Nailed Down to our true patriots and saviours, US oligarchs! This will inevitably lead to the establishment a new British Empire, cheered on by our former colonies