The week’s front pages give us a sense of how things are going. “EU demands British vaccines,” declares the Telegraph. “Wait your turn! Selfish EU wants our vaccines,” chides the Express. “No, EU can’t have our jabs!” shrieks the Mail. To the inevitability of death and taxes we can add right-wing tabloids attacking the EU.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the current vaccine row, the incident illustrates two things: that for better or worse, we remain deeply interconnected with the bloc, and that the relationship can easily sour. Hostility has been brewing ever since we formally left the transition period. The UK’s refusal to fully recognise the EU’s diplomatic mission—the only country in the world to take such a stance—signalled bad faith and appeared a statement of intent.
That leaves one large group in a quandary: Remainers. Those who consider both Europe and Britain part of their identity may feel caught in the middle, like children of parents who pledged to separate amicably and now speak only to trade barbs. And yet millions do still identify as Remainers and will always want to stay close to the EU. Where do they go from here?
The good news is that Remainers may, for now, be more unified than Leavers. While the Brexit coalition starts to fray under competing political forces, the losing side is experiencing collective dismay at the outcomes they predicted and protested. Many are banking that the wider population may eventually see the damage done. Some believe there could even be a popular movement to take us back into the EU by the end of the decade. After all, voters never explicitly endorsed this form of departure, and according to polls a significant majority consider Brexit a mistake.
The problem is that the UK government making the leap to actually rejoin the EU, in the short to medium term, is highly unlikely. The Brexit project needs to be proven, comprehensively, to fail. Many will want to move on and make the best of what we have. And the EU, too, does not long for the inevitable quarrels and drama attached to any new bid. Rejoining, just like leaving, would occupy years of political bandwidth—and also require a referendum, with the familiar acrimony and division. That would relitigate all the old battles and include new ones too. Plenty will ask how the UK could enter an organisation defensively and begrudgingly and expect to make it work—exactly as they did when Britain first applied in 1961.
But of course, rejoining needn’t mean the EU itself. The alternative option is to rejoin the single market—or the single market and customs union. If there is to be a division among Remainers in the months and years ahead, it could come here.
The attractions of the single market and customs union are evident. Membership fulfils the 2016 mandate, in that we are still outside the EU. It allows frictionless trade with our largest partner. It bestows many of the rights we enjoyed before. And it keeps the constituent parts of the United Kingdom economically aligned. As the country begins to reopen, and more traders and travellers notice the frustrations of being outside the bloc, the single market at least could emerge as a way to revive the economy and bridge political divides. Importantly, immigration has sharply declined as a pressing public concern since 2016; free movement may not attract the totemic opprobrium it once did. Many people may not even notice.
And yet none of it would be easy. The battle between full membership of the EU and agreeing a “soft Brexit” would return Remainers to the unhappy divisions of the past few years. If we join the customs union, the UK will lose control over much of its tariff regime, without formal input. If we join the single market, we lose the right to vote on our economic regulations. This would also likely require membership of the European Free Trade Association, whose current members would fight to protect their interests. The familiar, unresolved contest between prosperity and rule-taking would again dominate the national conversation. Brexiters might fear, with some justification, that rejoining the single market and customs union represented a staging post back into the EU itself.
For now, the government is refusing to consider even tweaking the current deal, while Labour leader Keir Starmer has ruled out an imminent return of free movement. This may be good politics. If Starmer were to signal any sympathy with the idea, the Conservatives and their media supporters would talk about nothing else. Labour would once again fall into the trap of being a “Remainer” party. This, I’m afraid, is a long game, and Remainers must play it patiently. Labour is still Remainers’ only hope. The outlook in 2024—and the parliamentary term which follows—could be quite different.
Remainers must also be pragmatic. There will be numerous possibilities to build on the relationship without necessarily rejoining the key economic instruments. If a UK government demonstrated the political will, it could forge an agreement over short-term visa-free movement for touring artists. It could also negotiate a food standards protocol with the EU, obviating the need to check agricultural and fish products. Only a government blinkered by dogma would consider either move an infringement of sovereignty; it just so happens that this is the government we currently have.
After the last five years, anyone who confidently predicts the future is fooling themselves. We may agree the current relationship is unsustainable and rejoin the single market in a few years’ time. The government may sabotage the relationship we currently have. Only one thing is certain: a mainstream movement to develop our commercial and political ties with the continent will eventually emerge. Remainers must work and prepare for that moment, then seize it. We must always fight for what we believe, demonstrate the benefits of cooperation, and hope to convince people of a better future. The vaccine row reminds us that, in the end, we will thrive or fail together.
