Brexit: The American Dimension
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 вер 2024
- John Stevens and Brendan Donnelly discuss the crucial American component of the Brexit debate. Many of those arguing for Brexit in 2016 did so because they favoured a closer alignment between the UK and the US. John Stevens and Brendan Donnelly ask how politically and practically feasible such closer alignment might be, particularly under a Trump Presidency.
SPEAKERS
John Stevens is the Chair of the Federal Trust and an analyst and commentator on economic affairs.
Brendan Donnelly is the Director of the Federal Trust and a former Conservative MEP.
ABOUT THE FEDERAL TRUST
The Federal Trust is a research institute studying regional, national, European and global levels of government. It has always had a particular interest in the European Union and Britain’s place in it. The Federal Trust has no allegiance to any political party. It is registered as a charity for the purposes of education and research.
Website: fedtrust.co.uk/
X: / fedtrust
Donate: www.paypal.com...
Support our work:
/ federaltrust
#brexit #rejoineu #trump #farage
Copyright information for images used in thumbnail:
Picture of Nigel Farage:
Author: Gage Skidmore
Member of the European Parliament Nigel Farage speaking at the 2018 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland, 23 February 2018.
en.m.wikipedia...
Licensed under the terms of the cc-by-sa-2.0 (creativecommon...)
Background removed by Federal Trust.
Picture of Joe Biden:
CAuthor: Gage Skidmore
Former Vice President of the United States Joe Biden speaking with attendees at the 2019 Iowa Federation of Labor Convention hosted by the AFL-CIO at the Prairie Meadows Hotel in Altoona, Iowa.
commons.wikime...
Licensed under the terms of the cc-by-sa-2.0 (creativecommon...)
Background removed by Federal Trust.
"Many of those arguing for Brexit in 2016 did so because they favoured a closer alignment between the UK and the US." Then 'many of those weren't paying attention, because the US president of the time Barack Obama clearly warned in 2016 that the UK would be at the “back of the queue” in any trade deal with the US if the country chose to leave the EU.
There were lots of things to which people voting for Brexit in 2016 didn’t pay attention. The UK voted for Brexit in a fit of absent-mindedness.
That's because Cameron told Obama to say that, because Cameron is a creep and traitor.
Rather like many Republicans who then fell for Trump, and who regarded President Obama as an aberration, and un-American, Conservative Atlanticist Brexiteers dismissed those remarks because of their firm faith in the "Special Relationship" and the prospects for an "Anglosphere". Daniel Hannan and John Redwood furnish ample examples of such thinking and of the clear preference for the UK to be a sort of US 51st state over any connections with the rest of Europe.
Britain has the freedom to runaround in circles....
Anti brexiters have the freedom to run a jerk circle. And they do.
The EU is a Politically Driven Federal Project. The eventual Federalist goals of the EU requires the member states to give up their National Sovereignty and self rule-governance
The Bexiters expected the US to tell them "come to daddy" after leaving the EU.
And the Americans said bend over and take it like a man
The EU is a Politically Driven Federal Project. The eventual Federalist goals of the EU requires the member states to give up their National Sovereignty and self rule-governance
Don’t forget that every time a new American president visited, it had to be explained that the Brits expected praise to heaped on 'the Special Relationship'. Most had never heard of it!
The special relationship is with the ROI and Israel.
I'm not British, but I keep pretty informed on what's going on in Britain. What I just can't wrap my mind around is what was the tory government thinking? I understand the hostility towards the EU, I understand the lies about the NHS, migrants, and the taking back control. What I don't understand is the obvious lack of the leaders doing due diligence. What were they doing besides breaking lockdown rules and having parties? How can you cut yourself off from your biggest trading partners right across the channel? Did anyone seriously try to put the foundation of a trade deal with the US early on in brexit, because I don't recall reading anything about it until the last year or so. I do not understand. It's almost as bad and incompetent as having Trump in charge. I always enjoyed my time in Britain, and this all makes me sad. It looks as though they're trying to create a third-world nation. I wish you well, and luck, my British cousins. I too have my own battles trying to slay the orange beast before it returns. 🙀
The main hostility towards the EU was manufactured. Before 2016, we hardly even thought about it, which is why we were so uninformed. When the Tories couldn't do something they blamed the EU, even though the EU had nothing to with it, this is where the media failed to do its job. Due diligence wasn't done large scale basically because they didn't think Leave would win and what small scale after the fact diligence was done didn't get officially released. It was too damning. There was no foundation regarding a US trade deal from anyone, just bluster, which is where Boris shone. As for cutting off from the EU, during the campaign this was a non issue as even Farage said this would't happen, it was claimed this wasn't on the cards. Indeed, a few folk even said this would be a stupid thing to do... this was before Leave won. Then things changed. Brexit was pushed by the likes of JR Mogg, the guy who complained about the "Elites" while at the same time was worth over £77m and was a half owner of a hedge fund (which paid him over £14k/w... many time what his ministerial salary paid. It makes you wonder if he had an agenda for getting into politics). It was also pushed by several dark money funded "think tanks" based in Tufton St. who somehow always got their place on TV... maybe something to do with the tory placements on the board of the BBC, but who can tell. James O'Brien is a good source for info.
Thanks for the good wishes and good luck to you too. It's not easy to figure out who's doing well in US politics. UK media barely mentioned Haley actually winning anything and everything on UA-cam is biased. There doesn't seem to be anywhere doing straight down the line reporting, except the FT.
The are a few reasons why the Tories did what they did in my opinion:
1) Farage was a threat to the Tories. Up until Farage, the Tories really didn’t have any competition on the political right. So it was a question of ‘party before country’.
2) Follow the money! There were a lot of seriously wealthy people that backed Brexit and saw it as a great way to turn us into some kind of low tax, deregulated haven. The Tories are backed by millions of £’s from very wealthy donors and that’s who they work for. And don’t forget, many of those wealthy donors were Russian oligarchs - they needed the Tories to turn a blind eye to the money laundering in the City of London.
3) Political and societal change. The Tories continue to pursue their goal of turning us into a right-wing libertarian country. They achieved their goal of dragging us right-wards under Thatcher and they wanted to finish the job by removing us from European social democratic norms, to one which was a cross between the US (politically and socially) and Singapore (financially - low tax, few public services, no welfare safety nets).
Those in government who did the leaving mainly did it out of opportunism. They didn’t care how well or badly the country or the people were affected, just how they could gain power.
The EU is a Politically Driven Federal Project. The eventual Federalist goals of the EU requires the member states to give up their National Sovereignty and self rule-governance
so why do you "get" the hostility towards the EU?
USA don't need UK
EU don't need UK
UK need USA or EU
UK is alone with UK single market
Absolute nonsense. The USA import more from the UK than we sell to them. Our trade deficit with the EU is roughly £86 billion. Without us the EU would lose £86 billion of profit. The UK is not alone. Since the success of Brexit our exports have reached record levels as a percentage of GDP. Educate yourself before passing uninformed dishonest comments.
@@bottleneck4593 AHahaha since the success of brexit??? You live on another planet, investments have fallen, there are budget cuts everywhere and viruses have entered into recession. Stop using cocaine.
@@bottleneck4593 Is that why, according to the Financial Times the UK has lost £100 billion in trade since Brexit. The United States are not interested in the UK it want a trade deal the the EU at some point, but that is a long way off.
@@thomasreilly6362 Trade in goods between the EU and the United States reached nearly 870 billion euros in 2022.
@@axaxx25 Britain is slowly getting poorer as it trade in all directions shrinks. Open your eyes
I think there really is a point to the importance of the UK being roughly the size of France and Germany. Something completely different from becoming a satellite of the United States. Many Americans do not pay much attention to the world outside the United States. The British accent is considered cute and charming by Americans. Many don't even know that the English language originated in England! The good old feeling of having been an important empire once would surely suffer a lot in that context.....
I sometimes think that the only way to resolve this ongoing dispute is for the UK to break up and let Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland go it alone. Then England can enjoy their illusory "sovereignty".
The EU is a Politically Driven Federal Project. The eventual Federalist goals of the EU requires the member states to give up their National Sovereignty and self rule-governance
@@chrislambert9435 Yes. I am well aware of that. That is what is so good about it.
@@chrislambert9435 Yes, so? That is what has been talked about since the 1930s. So it is neither new, nor surprising. And it is not like Scotland or northern Ireland have national sovereignity or self rule-governance now. So what is your point? English exceptionalism?
Those that supported BREXIT would generally see no reason to disagree with entering into a trade deal with the EU, just as they saw no issue with having a trade deal with America, if they wanted one. The bit the anti BREXIT side never understood or understands now. Trade, wealth, was not the issue, with any Country. The issue was sovereignty with political union. It is why my generation could live with the EEC, but once it changed to the EU and a mixture of a Conservative then Labour Government signed-up to it without any consultation or information delivery to the UK people, the back-lash started almost immediately, which resulted in BREXIT. Yes, do a trade deal, but any MP that try's to push a rejoin policy or an acceptance of EU political policies, will get badly burnt (Not physically for those that don't understand the analogy) with the reaction from the general UK public. Doing that would give more nourishment to the far right of UK Politics, that is not a place that the majority who voted for BREXIT also don't want to go. Podcasts like this are just sad fringe discussions that are totally missing what the average working person in UK voted for. Talk about dislocation from reality = The Federal Trust
You’re wrong. The Treaty of Rome stipulated that the goal of the EEC was to build a ‘ever tighter union’ among the European peoples. The treaty of Maastricht is only a consequence of the treaty of Rome.
The EU is a Politically Driven Federal Project. The eventual Federalist goals of the EU requires the member states to give up their National Sovereignty and self rule-governance
The notion that trade can be separated from politics and that economic progress does not demand ever larger home markets is the true dislocation from reality here. As to the "Far Right" in the UK, on the key issue for them of immigration, there is a growing realisation that Brexit has been a monumental betrayal. Add this to the clear economic damage of Brexit and the utterly nebulous status of "sovereignty" in popular discourse, let us see who ends up on the sad fringe of the national debate, and who will be remembered only as deluded wreckers..
@chrislambert9435 How often are you going to repeat your blah-blah? It never was a secret that the member states of the EU give up a certain degree of their sovereignty - voluntary and freely to the benefit for all member state. And that the Union would become closer was known since the Rome conference. That British people didn't know that is not the fault of the EU but the UK government's who failed to educate its citizens
@@marleneMS I'll keep repeating it until it gets into your thick-heads
Until the early 2030s I don't foresee any serious attempt to reverse Brexit, unfortunately. The next government, almost certainly Labour, will have its hands full trying to fix the nation's economic problems. If - and it's a big if - Labour were to win a second term, then reversing Brexit may get on the agenda, but there is no guarantee.
It will be impossible to fix the nation's economic problems without re-joining the EU.
The 2029 (ish) election will have rejoin in the manifesto of most UK parties
Economics and demographics make it nigh inevitable!
*Turncoats, it turns out, are not really welcome anywhere.*
The only good thing to come out of brexit is NO US TRADE DEAL.
The US and the UK have everything in common... Except the language !
Being in the EUdid not make the UK psychologically or culturally independent of the USA, nor militarily and to a large degree economically or politically. This is probably the main reason very few Westminster politicians gave more than armslength support and respect for the EU. I don't recall among them any prominent experts on the EU and certainly hardly any displaying the depth of knowledge of the EU, its benefits and functions, as to be passionate, fully informed advocates for it. Contrast that with the abundance of swooning admiration and cross-Atlantic kneebending. There was a sense that the UK at best tolerated the EU and that went alongside the UK feeling that the US kindly tolerated the UK's membership.
I think you underestimate the Europeanisation of the UK over the past 50 years, relative to our Americanisation, but you are right, the latter has been much more pronounced amongst the political class than elsewhere. Nevertheless, it is also important to remember that the ambition to create a truly united Europe owes much to the example of the United States, though obviously on the basis of wanting to be its equal, not its vassal. Ironically, this was particularly true of the first pro-European Conservatives, who saw in Europe the opportunity to recreate the scale and status lost to us by the eclipse of empire.
It is ironic that the most fervent admirers of the USA in the United Kingdom are often those most opposed to attempts to create a United States of Europe. Sauce for the goose is not sauce for the gander.
@@JohnStevens-gp7ge : culturally and psychologically the UK tends not to look at the USA as a federation but as a country like itself which is functionally "whole". This is the concept the brexit fraternity run a mile from in the EU context though they don't hesitate to falsely compare and contrast the EU with the UK as if it should deliver at the levelof a national rather than a supranational entity. It's a weirdly convoluted psychology at play. At the time Thatcher and Reagan were a romantic item, she was at permanent daggers drawn with Jacques Delors. But even the Bennites and the Footites had little respect for the efforts of their socialist _confrères_ (?) in the EC and were, in their own way feeding on the same vein of nationalism associated with Powellism. Sadly, the "real left" (in whatever form it survives and thrives in or out of Labour) has never shown signs of reviewing its long-standing antipathy even after, e.g. Maastricht and the Social Chapter.
It's deep stuff and now we're out, it's very difficult to know if enough of the country will ever again believe that the UK *belongs* in Europe enough to rejoin.
The EU is a Politically Driven Federal Project. The eventual Federalist goals of the EU requires the member states to give up their National Sovereignty and self rule-governance
@@indricotherium4802 You make good points. But the EU is becoming more like one nation and less like a supranational entity. A sense of being European is growing and lies behind much of the politics of the Right, on immigration for example, as on the Left on environmental issues and the more integrated fiscal policy needed to address such challenges. Ukraine is clearly important here. This will make the EU more coherently dominant in UK affairs and a more powerful pole of attraction. At the same time, US identity is becoming less "whole" in your terms, less Europeanheritage (and thus less Anglophile). But it remains a model, especially for parts of the British elite. British (English) identity is now torn between these two magnets, in a modern version of the pull of Catholic Spain and then France, and Protestant Holland, which defined our crisis of identity in the 17th century. One side will have to win, and though the difficulties are immense, for me the most plausible outcome is that the European option ultimately prevails.
Geopoliticist Peter Zeihan probably got the story right on the kind of deal on offer to the UK from both the Trump and Biden administration: just join NAFTA the terms of which would be (are) so draconian that even Johnson winced. They are not likely to be much altered in future. Meanwhile powerful interests on the Continent are building up to thwart any attempt at a fast-track UK re-admission (never mind public opinions). From the EC's perspective, the ideal path is towards a "Norway minus" ou "Switzerland minus minus" kind of deal where the UK is charged each time access to the SM is procured. It's still going to look cheaper in the short term than joining NAFTA (and upending large sections of the British economy). The level of delusion is still staggering among UK politicians. I bet not one of them has read about Macmillan's travails during the negotiations of the first application (read Stuart Ward in George Wilkes, ed. Britain's failure to enter the EC (1997). First time tragedy, second time farce.
Peter Zeihan is an entertainer who couldn’t give a cr*p about this country, or actual facts.
The EU, even though they say they want Britain back, I don't think they mean anytime soon. Britain's economy, right now, would be a great strain on the EU. Perhaps in the future, but make no mistake, that would most likely mean giving up the pound this time, and that's gonna be a non-starter. So, there is no rejoining the EU until Nigel Farage and Boris, and most of that generation is DEAD. The following statement is the opinion of my cat 😺 Please take it with a grain of salt because he's a Russian blu, and you know what that means. 🙀
I think Mr Zeihan rather underestimated not just the downside of the UK joining NAFTA, but the extreme difficulty of doing so with any accommodations for UK interests. The inflexibility of Mexico and Canada would be greater than that of the US (though clearly of less overall weight). We had a taste of this in the recent fiasco of our bilateral negotiations with Canada.
I think you are too pessimistic. The UK economy remains an enormous potential asset to the EU, notwithstanding its multiple problems which Brexit has revealed and exacerbated. Those difficulties make joining the euro most necessary imv, as well as easier to be accepted by UK opinion. The polls on joining the euro, though still negative have been transformed in a positive direction over the past few months, and I think this shift will surely continue and even accelerate. On some questions facing us, such as immigration and Freedom of Movement, hitherto strongholds of Brexit conviction, have also seen dramatic change in favour of the EU. So it will not be necessary either to await the deaths of Brexiteers in order to rejoin. And certainly not of their leaders. However much some of us might occasionally fantasise about accelerating the process in their case, we are not like Mr Putin and his murderous kleptocrats and their lackeys. And whilst on them, we must remember they are our only opponents over Ukraine and their subversion in Europe and around the world, not the Russian people (and certainly not Russian cats), The Russians, after all, are Europeans too, who, like the British, for a range of reasons, do not yet fully feel so, This will change.@@kennethvenezia4400
It's really quite simple: If Trump gets re-elected all the UK has to do is hand him a load of cash in a crumpled brown envelope and tell him he's the greatest president of all time (and that he DID win in 2020, of course) and Trump will give us whatever we want.
The likelihood is that Trump will expect a British government to do all the things mentioned above and still not give anything in return.
You're thinking of your *self* and LABOUR who took money from Bernie Eccleston. Remember?
When you point a finger, you have three pointing back at yourself.
How's "Qatar gate" working out for you?
@@Lucid.dreameris that the same Qatar that your king got caught with bags of money from?
Donny will accept the envelope without even a thank you, consider it an acknowledgement of his superiority and do whatever is in HIS best interest.
The rapist has no chance of becoming president again
This is a very interesting discussion. Thank you.
Farage..The Nucky Thomson of British politics..
Thank you, a very interesting talk.
What Bollocks, The EU is a Politically Driven Federal Project. The eventual Federalist goals of the EU requires the member states to give up their National Sovereignty and self rule-governance
An american deal is not happening, ever, thankfully.
If It does happen expect American insurance companies to devour your NHS
@@kevonslims7269 I bet you're maga, right?
UK/US trade deal will never make it through the House, whoever is president.
Yep, America's demands would be political suicide for any UK government that considers signing up to them
Australia got a trade deal with the United States and it did benefit its economy hugely and it didn’t become a vassal state of the USA despite being a much smaller economy and it didn’t have to give up its health service the fear that a USA trade deal would be bad for the uk is deeply absurd.
Australia's is a completely different economy from that of the UK, since its international trade is dominated by the export of raw materials and is not any sort of rival to US domestic manufacturing and services. Even so, the Australian agriculture sector got more or less nothing.from the accords. Australia was becoming increasingly locked into being simply a supplier to, and thus dependent upon, Asian markets, above all China, for its production and this latter connection has, understandably increasingly caused alarm as Xi's regime reveals the harsher side of Chinese power. Reinvigorating the US connection is clearly critical to preserving the current cultural and moral character of Australia. By the same token, Australia is clearly critical to current US strategic thinking about containing China which is focussed above all on the Western Pacific. No really comparable considerations prevail in US perceptions of the UK. Nevertheless, it seems unlikely that either Biden, or Trump, will bring the US into the CPTPP. (which of course the UK is joining, on the strength of our continued possession of Pitcairn Island).
Australia hadn't destroyed all its other trade deals and then went cap in hand to the USA.
@@grahamthomson6969 but we didn’t destroy all our trade deals did we?
Is American isolationism the friends we made along the way? Can't wait until Mr. Stevens hears about an expanded NATO, AUKUS, American troops in 40+ countries, and more American embassies than ever before.
Those don't relate to trade in any way.
American isolationism is the recognition that America faces rising powers challenging the position of unique global dominance which followed the fall of the Soviet Union and preceded the economic rise of China. Afghanistan, which contributed significantly to the fall of the Soviet Union, only to be subsumed in the Islamist ferment of the Middle East has been abandoned. A retreat from the wider Middle East, now oil's geostrategic significance is declining, is underway. Trump would like a retreat from Europe. A divergence of Continental European and US perceptions of Russia and Ukraine seems in any event inevitable, with much more European self-reliance. Africa's growing economic and demographic weight is largely ignored. Trump's advisors wish a larger role in S America, and are keen to engage with India, but there seems little effort to contain this in a new global vision, other than to exclude Chinese influence, and India is a potential geostrategic rival in its own right (and so might be, in the longer run, Brazil). AUKUS is of course merely part of the China containment strategy, though it must be doubted whether the US will really wish to devote resources to Australian submarine cababilities if such an endeavour compromises (as it well might- Groton is very stretched) their own submarine modernisation programme. But the surest measure of the US retreat from global roles, I would submit, is in economic and trade policy, which is becoming dramatically more protectionist. Gone are the days when trade globalisation equalled US global power. Trump, or rather his circle and backers, must be credited with recognising the new multi-polar world which is emerging and in tailoring US policy to it. Democrat foreign policy experts have been slower in this regard. But slowest of all have been Britain's Brexiteers, who have bet the ranch on global free trade and a supercharging of the "Special Relationship" which is increasingly at odds with the geostrategic realities.
Enjoy your discussions. However, you keep referring to the "British Public". This I find too sweeping. I find that you really ought to be discussing more the different opinions, politics and voting pattern across the whole of the UK. Your discussions lack wider acknowledgement of the Scotland, Wales and NIs positions. You are far too much about England iin the guise of Britain. It is no wonder the UK is over as a "Union of Equals" and a "Voluntary Union". You certainly diminish your own credibility by your ignorance of wider UK politics.
I am sorry you are unaware of our coverage of the particular politics of Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland in videos and publications, both from the perspective of the proto-federalism of devolution and of the significance of their markedly more pro-EU attitudes for the likely durability of Brexit.. However, the divide between British and English identities goes beyond these nations to now include the significant immigrant population of the UK. Moreover, the UK was never a "Union of Equals" or a "Voluntary Union" and I fear you reduce your credibility and reveal your ignorance by asserting that it may once have been so.
Always pandering to the sentiment that we need to depend on the kindness of strangers; that the choice is a simplistic choice between which strangers we are doomed to rely on. Pathetic, small minded and defeatist.
Denying the need for partnerships to create scale and strength, is to deny precisely the processes which created the British nation state and propelled us to empire. And a failure to continue those processes, whether in Europe or elsewhere will surely destroy the British nation state, not least because of the legacies of that lost empire. Already, Brexit has made Irish reunification far more likely and keeps Scottish independence on the agenda. Furthermore, issues of differing identities within England are growing as Brexit's economic consequences bite. Ignoring these developments by labelling advocating addressing them as you do, is a delusion. And you are in a minority, since it is clearly not even one shared by many Brexiteers. Most avowedly seek a 51st US state (or United Anglosphere) status as a viable and desirable alternative to the EU. This piece merely indicates that the US option is far less attractive and realistic than that of rejoining the EU. The United Anglosphere is even less viable, but nevertheless may be addressed in a future video.
@@JohnStevens-gp7ge
With the EU? With the pipsqueak SM?
Get real. The SM is diminishing and frankly not worth our attention.
The UK has bigger fish to fry.
The EU is useless.
@@AlexGys9Well, you're not on the team then are you mate?, so just **** ***.
@@Lucid.dreamerThe SM is NOT "diminishing". That is factually untrue.
hahaha, european taxes and american services... good one :) and true
If UK would go for a Troika style austerity in 2010 things could be different. but it is too late for that now probably
We don't need austerity, we need investment. Atlee style tax and spend will work today, just as it did then
@@markwelch3564 lol, when will you guys realize you are not a rich country anymore.
forget the past, its over, you need to adopt to reality. you are poor and you will have poor public services, get over it
@@Beliefish we're not dirt poor, but we're not mad rich either. We can support good public services, or billionaires, but not both
I know which I'm choosing!
@@markwelch3564 by new data for last year you have fallen below EU average. if UK would join EU today you would get more money from EU than you would pay in... you need to learn that poor people cant afford what rich people have
@@Beliefish but below average isn't poor! We can afford public services, we just need to prioritise them appropriately
Your economy may be going down the tubes and poverty at huge levels and rising, but at least you now don't have Johnny Foreigner telling you how to run your kingdom 😁
The UK was one of the main 3 countries in the EU and had a lot of say
Trump and Brexit favors Putin who payed for both..If both Trump and Brexit didn’t happen,do you think Putin would have invaded Ukraine.?..Only Covid delayed Putin’s plans by two years..
Minute 0:20 I ask; "when did Britain leave the single market" ? the UK is still an integral part of the so-called single market !
@ralphmacchiato3761 the lack of historical economic education along with politics in USA and UK is what's led to people not understanding what the hell happened and is going on
@ralphmacchiato3761 I asked "when did Britain Leave" ? You did not address this point ! Also, you've stated that "the single market aims to create . . .. " this indicates the so-called Single Market is an aspiration not a reality-actuality. There is no actual Single Market today, therefore its not "a single market" creating or seeking to create something, its actually driven & controlled by Political-Ideology
@@bereal6590 They understood & continue to understand that the EU is a Politically driven Federal Project
@ralphmacchiato3761To create a situation whereby “goods, services, capital and people can move freely across borders without barriers or restrictions among the participating countries” there ultimately has to be one central (federal government) between them.
This is the central point of Brexit: SOVEREIGNTY. All the other issues like EU laws, single market, immigration, etc, hinged on this point. Neither the British people nor the citizens of any nation needed to be rocket scientists to grasp that.
Are you seriously this stupid?
No, the Uk is not part of the SM. It has access to it as a 3rd country under the conditions of the TCA.
Brexit was almost eight years ago and your response is still to cope.
Brexit is still unfolding. This year, after several delays, we will have a customs border with Europe. In the meantime the slow puncture that is Brexit continues.
And next June 2025 Euro clearing is expected to be pulled from the UK along with billions in tax revenue.
We had to cope with the stinking, corrupt EU for decades. Until we fired the shitshow.
We'll manage.
@@kevonslims7269The EU relies on UK financial services.
But frankly, the EU is so "yesterday" that it ranks up there with Paul McCartney's song.
Sayonara, EU!
@@Lucid.dreamer There are 3 spheres of power in the world, The US and western hemisphere, China and the Asian hemisphere and the the EU in the European hemisphere. The UK is in the EU hemisphere so if the EU is “so yesterday” then what’s the UK?
Yeah ... blindfolded chainsaw juggling was a smart idea.
… while playing Ruzzian roulette 🎉
More lies. Since Brexit our exports as a percentage of GDP have reached record levels. Clearly despite not having trade agreements in place our industrious businesses have sold more abroad than ever. Without question this is because we left the EU. Our trade with the USA has also reached record levels since Brexit with Americans buying more from us than we sell to them. You are both ill informed. Our trade with the EU though costs us money every year. We are buying some £86 billion more a year from them than they buy from us. On a trade front the best thing we did was to leave the EU. You continue to make baseless assertions that Brexit is a failure when it clearly isn’t.
What a load of tosh! This is why the country is getting poorer by the day, is it? You are living in a land of make-believe.
I have seen this same information, but cherry picked from a government document, without showing all the figures. Leaving the E.U. definitely has not helped small and mid size businesses that used to trade with them, some of the larger companies that could afford to have just got offices in E.U. countries to fix the issue.
@@jonibz1456 I wholeheartedly agree.
The EU is a Politically Driven Federal Project. The eventual Federalist goals of the EU requires the member states to give up their National Sovereignty and self rule-governance
Did you ever realize that the goods that are imported from the EU have a value that is at least as high as the money paid for them? Making those things at the UK would cost far more!
In total, the UK has lost market-shares "abroad", especially in the EU. Some minor increases in the US do not make up for that.
If joining the EU was just a trade deal, it'd have overwhelming support.
However, the EU is heading towards federalisation, (as it must with a single currency), and that's not for us.
Remainers can't grasp that independence matters more than trade to a large chunk of the population.
Plenty of countries do well not aligned with the EU, but it does require real leadership which the UK currently lacks.
Would not want to live in the EU or the US over the UK, bad though the UK is at the moment.
Wrong, it was only Brexiters who were convinced your freedom has been compromised by joining the EU. Now being outside the EU we still have to follow EU regulations but now without having any say in the matter. Congratulations.
Everyone who thinks of trade and not peace when he hears EU is not mature enough to join. So be it.
There will ALWAYS be disagreements between european nations. You can solve those by strongarming, by going to war or by that nasty process in the EU Parliament, with its endless discussions and quid pro quo arrangements. The EU way may be messy and ugly, but it has the highest chance of preventing war within Europe.
The Brits seem to be too much in love with strongarming (which will be real fun to watch once Ireland with EU backing starts to strongarm GB) and lost in the bipolar world of "we against the EU". Never able to accept that they are one of many.
After some crash and burn brits will start to migrate to Poland to clean toilets and look after the elderly. That's ok. Nobody dies from Humble Pie.
@@user-nk8co6cg7x not everyone is like the person who made this comment here. It was only a third of voting population who voted to leave and of those, they did not understand trade,NATO, allies etc... very few (after years of gaining more understanding and seeing through the lies) still hold the silly views of isolationism
Well said. As Thomas Sowell says, “There are no solutions, just trade-offs.”
It's not about whether Leave or Remain is the solution; it's that the British people have chosen that national sovereignty is a better trade-off over federalism.
Which countries in Europe are not part of the EU in some way or another? Norway and Switzerland are vassals of the EU in all but name.
Even the UK has agreed to accept most of the new rules the EU makes. So what does that make the UK? Someone who still has to accept the rules made by the EU and the rulings of the ECJ but has no say in them anymore.
Luckily for you guys, Biden has no idea what’s going on. He thought a trade deal could be legit, so he didn’t understand that concept. Someone told him to say ‘no.’
The single market-as defined by the EU-is the free movement of goods, services, capital and people.
Both goods and capital are still freely moving between the EU and the UK. On this basis, for all practical purposes, the UK is still part of the single market.
Utter tosh
No they are going over a customs border, Free movement was what we had before the customs border, its not that hard to understand.
@@jonibz1456 It's also “not that hard to understand” that not everyone we see working out in the gymn is not a member of that gymn.
The EU is a Politically Driven Federal Project. The eventual Federalist goals of the EU requires the member states to give up their National Sovereignty and self rule-governance
@@sirden1521 pointless statement! you trying to say there is or is not a customs border, trying to avoid the point with fluff ain't working, people in this country are waking up to the lies.
He can do fall about it hello my name is Brian Donnelly and I'm a sad little E U loving nutvase
You must love those asylum seekers that you voted to keep, ya Muppet
And you are just another sad Brexit troll.
And all this as f all to do with Brexit you morons
You should not drop an h even when making an insult.
We have a tariff and quota free TCA with the EU.
The SM is a load of s&%t.
Stop whining about it.
It will soon encapsulate less than 10% of global GDP. And it's all downhill from there.
Forget the SM. It's not even worth parliamentary time. We have much bigger fish to fry.
Tell that to all the people that lost their businesses you fool 🤡
Happy fish?
Curiously this was not the view of Mr Sunak when he was last in Belfast extolling the benefits for Northern Ireland of being in the EU and the UK Single Markets, a status which we all had before Brexit. Odd that he did not recognise this for the rest of us. Especially since even the OBR is now computing the constant burden our absence from the EU Single Market is imposing upon our economy.
Course they are, now, back to bed like a good little boy.
Decades of business losses under EU.
Would you like me to list them for you? Or do you prefer to remain ignorant?