50 years ago this week the UK voted to enter the European Community (Now the EU) in a national referendum. The vote was 2:1 in favour. The Conservative party was largely in favour, with some dissenters. Labour was moving toward Europe, but retained a substantial number of vocal anti-marketeers (as they were known). The Liberals were almost entirely pro-Europe and had been for many years. A leading liberal politician of the time, David (now Lord) Steel, who took a prominent part in the referendum campaign, talks about the referendum and reflects on the UK’s relationship with Europe then, and since. This video is put out by the European Movement and its worth a watch.
The outcomes of yesterday’s UK/EU conference clearly represent a major move in the right direction. It’s the first time since 2016 that the negotiation process between the UK and the EU has amounted to anything more than hostilities, or (more recently) damage limitation.
Best for Britain’s summary of yesterday’s results is as follows (I quote)
“Easier travel: British holidaymakers will be able to skip queues at border control using EU eGates (and bring their pets on holiday with them).
Youth opportunities: A new youth mobility scheme and re-entry to student exchange programme Erasmus+ is on the horizon.
Cheaper food: Red tape is being cut, keeping food standards high, helping lower food prices and reducing waste.
Working in Europe: Progress is being made on recognising professional qualifications and supporting artists and business travellers.
A Security and Defence Partnership: Support for Ukraine, access to the EU’s €150 billion defence fund, and deeper cooperation on crime and pandemic preparedness.
Lower bills: Energy market cooperation that could cut household costs.”
Best for Britain’s tone is optimistic, and rightly so; we need enthusiasm now to keep the momentum carrying us forward to a more complete reconnection with Europe. And we must not allow ourselves to be unnerved by the ferocity of the Tories and Reform in their denunciations. Reform have already threatened to reverse everything that has been achieved, just as soon as they can. The Tories will doubtless threaten the same. It is hardly surprising that the EU regards the UK with considerable caution, with those voices dominating our political discourse. And it is clearly crucial that the new agreement be seen to work for the benefit of the British people. The realising of those benefits will expose Reform and the Tories for the wreckers they are.
Today (May 9th) is Europe Day. This week the March for Rejoin is organising events around the country, leading up to Rejoin Day 25 tomorrow, May 10th. Please go to the Marchforrejoin website for a list of locations.
The Nuffield Trust has just published a report on the current state of UK Healthcare after Brexit. This is the latest of a series of reports analysing the implications of Brexit for the UKs healthcare system since 2021. Unlike previous reports, this one clearly identifies Brexit as the main cause for ongoing medicine shortages in the UK. Their previous reports stated that the problem of shortages affected EU countries a well, so the blame on Brexit was qualified. Now, says the latest report, other countries in G7 have pulled ahead while the UK lags; and Brexit is the culprit
“The elevated and troubling level of medicine shortages we noted in earlier reports in this series is continuing, with no sign of improvement in key indicators. We have previously concluded that this is not primarily due to Brexit, with other EU countries also suffering significant shortages. However, data now confirm the UK to have had the lowest import growth in medicines of any G7 country, driven by a reduction in EU imports. This does illustrate the particular impacts of leaving the EU.”
Currently, 16, 427 people have signed a recent petition calling on the UK Government to hold a referendum on re-joining the European. The Cabinet Office yesterday issued a response and as one of the signatories, I’m disappointed, albeit not surprised.
The full text is copied below but essentially it’s the usual warm words about a focus on “strategic alliance with the EU” and strengthening “our relationship with our European friends” to “to address wider global challenges” and “to remove barriers to trade.”
While clearly this is a better place to be than we were under the previous Government, the statement contains a reminder that the Government was elected with a manifesto pledge not to rejoin the EU and a rather limiting commitment that “we will not return to freedom of movement, the Customs Union or the Single Market.”
Given the erratic behaviour of the Trump regime and clear polling evidence that Britons favour a European alliance over the ever less special looking US relationship, was it overly optimistic of me to have hoped that the Government’s statement might have been backed off such a definitive and limiting position?
The Government was elected on a manifesto that made clear the UK would not rejoin the EU. We are focused on a strategic alliance with the EU to make the UK safer, more secure and more prosperous.
Since taking office, this Government has been working to strengthen the relationship with our European friends. A closer, more cooperative relationship with the EU is in the UK’s national interest. It will grow the economy, boost living standards, protect our borders and keep the UK safe.
This is about turning the page – reinvigorating alliances and forging new partnerships with our European friends, rather than reopening the divisions of the past. A stronger UK-EU relationship means a stronger Europe.
The Withdrawal Agreement, including the Windsor Framework, and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement underpin relations between the EU and the UK. We are committed to the full and faithful implementation of these agreements, however we believe we can go further to strengthen that relationship.
In particular, we want to work closely with the EU to address wider global challenges including economic headwinds, geopolitical competition, irregular migration, climate change, energy prices, and of course the security of our citizens, which pose fundamental challenges to the shared values of the UK and EU and provide the strategic driver for stronger cooperation.
The manifesto upon which this Government was elected set out that we would seek to remove barriers to trade with the EU. Our markets are highly interconnected, so close cooperation can support growth and deliver investment. The Minister for European Union Relations is taking forward discussions on these areas with his counterpart Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič.
The UK will welcome EU leaders to the UK for the first UK-EU Leaders’ Summit on 19 May. This will provide an opportunity to make further progress on areas which will deliver tangible benefits for the people of the UK.”
There will be issues which are difficult to resolve, as well as areas on which we will stand firm. We have been clear we are not going back to the arguments of the past; we will not return to freedom of movement, the Customs Union or the Single Market. Although we voted to leave the EU, our role as key allies and trading partners remains, and this Government is ambitious, has clear priorities and wants to move forward.
The other week Trump’s Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, said it was unlikely that US tariffs on UK imports would be less than 10%. The message that I took from it was sombre: ‘Don’t get your hopes up. There’s no give there.’
But then last week Vice-President Vance said there was a ‘good chance’ of a trade deal between the UK and the US. I took that as a message of hope and optimism. Phew! Its looking better!
Then it struck me: hot and cold, up and down, its all part of the Trump playbook, isn’t it. Keep changing the message, blow hot and cold, keep them guessing. That way, the other guy is always on the back foot. This was Trump’s preferred technique in his New York real-estate days, and he has carried it into world politics. Its part of his transactional approach, part of the zero-sum game. For Trump to win, the other guy has to lose, so it makes sense to disable and demoralize him as thoroughly as possible. Play cat and mouse with him until he doesn’t know which way is up. That way he’s always the loser.
So far the UK government has allowed itself play the role of loser to perfection. Every time Trump or one of his minions throws a stick, the government goes tearing after it like a keen but none-too-bright retriever. To and fro, up and down. Our behaviour has given Trump all the evidence he needs that his technique works. Clearly it does.
So is there anything we can do to change the game? Can we find a way of giving ourselves some agency, instead of being endlessly reactive?
Yes we can. There’s still time to stop and think: who matters most? who is our closest ally and our biggest trading partner? The answer, of course, is not the USA. Its the EU. If we turn ourselves inside out in order to please Trump, two things will happen. First, Trump will always demand more. And second, we will alienate ourselves from our European partners- an outcome which is almost certainly part of Trump’s agenda already, and reflects his hostility to the EU and his desire for maximum dominance over whoever is within his range. In that scenario we will soon be eating chlorinated chicken, and the possibility of a better and closer relationship with the EU will be lost.
That threatens our economy, but it also threatens our security. Its clear that Trump is not interested in NATO, or in Europe’s security. He has made that clear over Ukraine. He won’t protect us. The UK needs to restore a closer relationship with those countries that have a real stake in mutual security and mutual support. That means the EU.
So, no more cat and mouse Keir! Get your priorities right while you still can.
Stephen Wilmot
P.S. A deeper and more extensive treatment of the bigger picture has recently been offered by journalist Ian Dunt. I recommend it. Click here.
We are writing to you to express our deep concern that the UK is rushing into a trade deal with the United States on purely economic grounds, ignoring the poor reflection this has on our values, both at home to citizens and to our international allies and partners.
We are concerned that mooted proposals to lower our digital safety laws and the digital service tax are an unjust reward for the very same social media companies whose poor online protections have impacted our children’s mental health, allowed online misinformation about multiple subjects, including Brexit and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the thriving of toxic masculinity and misogyny, and who have empowered populists, including the current US administration.
We also worry that this much trailed ‘almost oven-ready’ deal is anything but, and is merely designed to keep the UK separate from its allies and partners, and from expressing public support for the territorial integrity of allies such as Canada (who were never shy of coming forward to support us in the past, in 1939 for example, and are no doubt noticing now how we have failed to publicly support them).
And of course, we worry about lowered food regulations and quality, and another assault on British farmers and food, already hit hard by rushed, one-sided deals with Australia among others. On top of this, having opened our doors to lower quality US produce will make it harder for us to secure improved access to EU markets, to whose standards we are currently closer. And of course, the EU remains our largest trading partner, making it hard to understand why we should stab ourselves in the foot in this way.
We also worry that this potential deal fails to reiterate and reinforce our values of democracy, freedom, and human rights by endorsing a US administration whose president is prepared to ignore his own supreme court over a wrongly deported person to San Salvador.
There are even rumours Trump wants us to repeal hate speech laws.
We are also deeply concerned about the Trump administration’s assault on education and Harvard University in particular. Any democracy that still pretends to be one has to firewall institutions from political interference. Precedents in the past of what happens when educational and other establishments ‘obey in advance’ abound and we must not and cannot condone the same, especially when British politicians openly advocate for policies such as withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights. It’s always said that you can understand people by the company they choose (Putin, Orban, and Germany’s AfD) and those whom they denigrate (Canada, Greenland, Denmark, Democrats, Columbia & Harvard Universities, Zelensky and Ukraine, high ranking female officers in the American armed forces). We must choose more wisely than some short term trade deal.
And of course, in choosing wisely we stand with the large number of US citizens who are appalled at, and actively opposing, what their government is doing in their name, and who do share our values.
Our future does not lie in a special relationship that has never been more than fig leaf. If we must prioritise trade deals, let it be with reliable allies. By rushing into a US deal, the UK merely makes itself look as unreliable and immoral as the current US government, and sides with a country whose current president continues to blame Ukraine for Russia’s invasion.
There are already warnings a US trade deal will setback any EU-UK reset, and this could also affect our ability to arm ourselves independently of the US if we then cannot collaborate with EU based defence companies and funds.
Yours sincerely,
Please find your MP at Write to Them https://www.writetothem.com/ by entering your postcode and share this letter with them. Please feel free to add your own specific concerns and thoughts.
We also encourage you to share it with others, and via social media. Acknowledgement of European Movement Derbyshire greatly appreciated.
1This statement was written by European Movement Derbyshire, who are urging supporters in the country and beyond to share it with their MPs, representatives and local media.
On march 24th the House of Commons debated a petition for the UK to rejoin the EU. The petition had upward of 130,000 signatures, but Parliamentary procedure did not allow for a vote at the end of the debate. In the online record I couldn’t find any indication of who attended, only of who contributed; and the contributions came mainly from Labour, Lib Dem, Scottish Nationalist and Plaid Cymru MPs. They were overwhelmingly in favour of the petition. I could only find three clearly anti-rejoin voices, one conservative, one DUP and one TUV (Traditional Unionist Voice). It would be very interesting to know how many conservative MPs actually attended. Other than those exceptions, reading the transcript frankly felt like a rejoin echo-chamber. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Cabinet Office, Abena Oppong-Asare was present, and at the end she gave the government position, which I guess we know by now. ‘You name it, we have no plans to rejoin it’. I assume she also fed the sense of the debate back to Starmer. If he didn’t already realise the extent of support for rejoin among Labour MPs, he does now.
derby4europe 