A response to ac grayling — britain won't “rejoin” | thearticle

So Brexit has happened. As sad a moment as it was for Europhiles, it won’t be long before they dust themselves off and a “rejoin” movement begins contemplating the task ahead. Some have

already started, including the philosopher AC Grayling on these very pages. His piece made some good points but it underestimates the challenges ahead. The majority of British people are

either Eurosceptic or apathetic towards the EU. Converting a clear and consistent majority of the British people to be so positive and enthusiastic about the EU they want to go through the

complex process of re-accession, with all the compromises and change that will entail, will not be easy. The rejoin argument rests too much on the possibility of an immediate, severe

economic impact being felt post-Brexit — that there will be widespread economic misery or perhaps some kind of Brexit induced crash. According to most economic models, the UK will indeed

lose out economically from Brexit, but some of that loss has already taken place, and the full impact will take many years to be fully realised. It will come in the form of slower economic

growth over the next decade and this will not necessarily be noticeable. It will be difficult to prove that things would have been better. Theoretical comparisons showing what could’ve been

are unlikely to lead to a widespread, mainstream public backlash. Beyond the Twitter bubble, the public is suffering Brexit fatigue. Apathy will be the overwhelming feeling as people get on

with their lives, relieved that the news agenda isn’t saturated with Brexit and political deadlock. The 48 per cent movement is largely a myth. The passionate and proactive pro-EU movement

does not constitute half of the electorate, but a minority of the remain vote. Most people who voted remain did so out of a sense of pragmatism, a concern about the economic risk and an

aversion to radical change. It’s ironic that Britain is now home to one of the most impassioned pro-EU movements in Europe. Through the Article 50 process, the country has learnt more about

the EU in the last three years than it has for many of the decades of our membership. There are foundations on which to build a rejoin movement — but there is a long road ahead. The

pettiness and boorish behaviour of the Brexit Party clowns embarrassed this country. They were a reminder that the UK should never rejoin the EU until the public takes the EU seriously, and

we will only know they do this when they begin to take EU elections seriously. Since 1979, turnout for European Parliamentary elections in the UK has ranged from 30-35 per cent. Not exactly

a ringing endorsement from the public. We were never enthused by the European project. Rejoiners need to establish a position in which 60-70 per cent of the public endorse rejoining and a

political party is elected on a manifesto pledge to hold a referendum on re-admission. This would need quite a transformation. Yes, as Professor Grayling said, “demographics are on the side

of Remain,” but it would be a mistake to base your entire case on the same demographic fallacy that leads Labour supporters to believe Tory voters will eventually die off and Labour will

rule forever. For one thing, people do change their minds. For another, not every individual who answers a survey one way, is necessarily going to be prioritising that issue above all else a

few years from now. The danger for the rejoin movement is that the UK settles into its new arrangement over the coming decade and as the UK-EU relationship evolves the UK becomes

comfortable in its new position. Professor Grayling thinks Brexit Britain will be in an untenable position, but Europhile Norwegians have argued the same for decades, and they are no closer

to membership. A mere 16 per cent favoured joining the EU in a 2018 poll conducted by YouGov, with a whopping 68 per cent answering that they’d vote “no” if a third referendum were to be

held on EU membership. If the UK negotiates a reasonable economic and trading settlement over time, the British public may come to feel the same as the Norwegians. It is likely most people

will be getting on with their lives and if the country is ticking over just fine, they are unlikely to be moved by theories of alternative realities. The biggest flaw in Professor Grayling’s

argument is that he doesn’t consider how the EU will evolve. The EU will not stand still and the organisation that Grayling and Co. will advocate joining will be different to the one we

left. The direction of travel, especially after the UK’s departure, is deeper integration. This is likely to mean convincing a sceptical British public to join a political project that has

taken several steps forward in ever-closer union. Europhiles will need to make a whole new argument that the UK should commit to the European project fully and enthusiastically. This is a

hard sell in a Eurosceptic country. With the opt-outs gone, they will need to make a positive case for monetary union, Schengen and full budget contributions, as well as whatever new

policies have been put in place. Any divergence that takes place after Britain leaves will complicate the whole process further. The best hope for Europhiles is to push for the UK-EU

relationship to become ever closer. An association agreement will form the basis of the new partnership, meaning the relationship will be dynamic and can evolve over time. As the EU

federalises and eventually formalises deeper integration via a new treaty, a two-speed Europe may become a reality. Some member states and accession candidates may not be ready for a federal

EU. When the revision of the treaties does come, a new clause may be added to establish the formal category of “associate state” of the Union. Associate membership would require commitment

to the values and principles of the EU and to the principle of sincere cooperation. However, it wouldn’t require commitment to all the political objectives of the EU, including perhaps

monetary union. An associate member would not have a duty to engage in all the activities of the EU. For some this would be a waiting room before full accession, for others it may be a

permanent alternative. This could be one possible future for the UK — it is certainly more likely than full re-admission.