A prominent political commentator has asserted that Great Britain will not rejoin the European Union, despite a vocal minority advocating for such a move. Daniel Hannan, writing for the Daily Mail, argues that several factors, including public opinion shifts during referendums, potential scandals, and the impact on trade and technological development, make a return to the EU an unlikely prospect.
Hannan points to historical precedents, such as the 1972 vote to join the European Economic Community and the 1975 referendum to remain, suggesting that referendums often see a swing toward the status quo or anti-change option as campaigns progress. While current polls may indicate a dissatisfaction with Brexit among voters, Hannan contends that these sentiments would likely change if a new referendum were seriously contemplated.
The prospect of rejoining the EU, he argues, would inevitably bring to the forefront the bloc's perceived flaws and challenges. Issues such as economic instability in member states, immigration, a perceived lack of democracy, and corruption scandals, such as the 2022 banknotes scandal involving MEPs, would likely dominate headlines, potentially swaying public opinion against membership.
Furthermore, Hannan suggests that rejoining would hinder Britain's ability to pursue independent reforms and capitalize on global opportunities. He highlights areas like artificial intelligence development, where he claims Britain is currently third globally, which could be constrained by EU regulations. Other sectors, including agriculture, gene editing, financial services, and freeports, could also face significant changes.
A substantial hurdle to rejoining would be the necessity of abandoning all trade deals negotiated since Brexit. This would include agreements with countries like Australia, India, and Japan, and would likely force Britain to withdraw from growing trade blocs such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). The uncertainty surrounding potential re-entry could also deter international investment and participation in new trade initiatives.
Hannan proposes that a more pragmatic approach would involve improving the existing relationship with the EU through mutually beneficial agreements on issues like professional qualifications, customs procedures, food exports, and energy grids. He criticizes the idea of rejoining the customs union specifically, arguing it would mean sacrificing trade policy sovereignty without necessarily eliminating customs checks.
He suggests that the EU itself may be disinclined to engage in significant bilateral improvements as long as the possibility of full British membership, or customs union membership, remains. Conversely, the potential for Britain to rejoin the EU could make other nations hesitant to negotiate ambitious trade accords with the UK, preferring to focus on opportunities in faster-growing markets.
The argument concludes that while some political figures, like Andy Burnham, may continue to discuss rejoining the EU or its associated markets, the practicalities and potential downsides render such a move improbable. The focus, Hannan implies, should be on leveraging opportunities beyond the EU, particularly in trans-oceanic markets, rather than remaining fixated on a relationship with a bloc he characterizes as a "1950s solution to a 1930s problem."