Last week, I spoke in a Westminster Hall debate on the UK’s relationship with the European Union — a discussion that, nearly eight years after the referendum, remains as important as ever. The Brexit vote was not an isolated moment in history. It took place against a backdrop of political turbulence, misinformation, and external threats.
We must remember why the referendum was called in the first place. It was not because of an overwhelming public demand to leave the EU — that never really existed, but instead because of deep divisions within the Conservative Party. It was also an attempt to pacify Nigel Farage and the Eurosceptic right — a faction that, as history has shown, would never be satisfied.
At the time, in the wake of Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region, foreign interference was a growing concern. Russia had already begun using disinformation campaigns to undermine Western democracies, and Brexit was no exception. Reports from parliament’s intelligence and security committee have highlighted the extent of Russian influence in the referendum, with cyber campaigns and misinformation spreading instability in the UK and across Europe.
Yet, instead of recognising these threats, Brexit left us weaker — economically, diplomatically, and in terms of our security.
The economic cost of Brexit
We were told Brexit would bring prosperity, but the facts tell a different story.
Research from the London School of Economics shows that 14,000 small businesses have stopped trading with the EU altogether. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research reports that foreign direct investment has dropped by 37% since 2016. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) forecasts that by 2035, Brexit will have left the UK economy 4% smaller than it would have been if we had remained in the EU — a loss of hundreds of billions in trade, investment, and productivity.
Meanwhile, new trade deals with non-EU countries have failed to deliver the promised benefits. The OBR itself has confirmed that these agreements will not have a meaningful impact on economic growth.
A UK-EU ‘reset’ in a changing world
Despite these economic realities, the government has ruled out rejoining the EU or revisiting the fundamental nature of our relationship during this parliament. The manifesto I stood on was clear on that point. I understand why — there is no appetite to reopen those wounds while the country is still recovering from a pandemic and beginning the arduous task of rebuilding public services after years of Conservative mismanagement.
But geopolitics is shifting fast. The war in Ukraine, Russian aggression, and an unpredictable American president, has underscored the importance of European unity in the face of a rapidly changing world. The EU has responded with strength and coordination, while Britain, outside its structures, has played the cards it has well but misses out on new European defence initiatives, and involvement in key technologies, such as the EU alternative to GPS. As new global challenges emerge — trade wars, cyber threats, climate change — the UK cannot afford to be isolated.
That is why we must be pragmatic and push for a genuine reset in our dealings with the EU, ensuring that we work together where it is in our mutual interest. Some progress has already been made—the government is negotiating a veterinary (SPS) agreement to reduce border checks on agricultural goods, working on a new security pact, and exploring ways to support UK artists touring in Europe.
But this is not enough. We must go further.
What more can be done?
In my speech during the Westminster Hall debate, I set out several immediate, practical steps the government should take to improve our relationship with the EU without reopening the Brexit debate:
- A youth mobility scheme — this is clearly on the table and is linked by the EU to co-operation in other areas. This is a great opportunity; young people should be able to live, study, and work in the EU, just as they could before Brexit.
- Joining the pan-Euro-Mediterranean convention — This would ease trade barriers and help British businesses reintegrate into European supply chains.
- A mutual recognition agreement for professional qualifications – British professionals should not face unnecessary restrictions when working across the EU.
These measures would not mean rejoining the EU, but they would help repair some of the economic damage and rebuild trust with our European partners. It also helps set the scene.
Keeping the conversation alive
This parliament will not see the UK rejoin the EU. But the conversation about our future relationship with Europe must not be shut down.
The long-term interests of the UK — our economic security, our trade, and our influence — are inextricably tied to Europe. As global tensions rise and new threats emerge, Britain cannot go it alone.
The Brexit debate will not stay settled forever.
The next parliament will have to ask the fundamental question again: does Britain’s future really lie outside the EU? I believe, in the long run, the answer is no. But for now, we must work to repair what we can, lay the groundwork for a real debate, and be ready when the moment comes for Britain to reconsider its place in Europe.
That conversation must start now. In truth it never went away.
Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.
Source: Politics
