In light of parliament’s failure to find a way forward on Brexit, we asked our readers which direction they would like to see the process going.
Our poll had more than 1,000 respondents, with a no-deal exit the most popular choice, garnering 46 per cent of the vote. Despite the fact that no-deal is widely accepted as being the worst possible outcome both for the EU and the UK, it appears many have grown tired of the farcical Brexit process and yearn for the perceived simplicity of a clean break. It remains to be seen, however, if such an outcome would actually resolve any of the current issues, or if the UK would inevitably end up back at the negotiating table in a position of diminished strength. Nonetheless, it is clear that there is substantial support for walking away and dealing with the consequences as they arise.
The next most popular option was a second referendum, the confirmatory ‘people’s vote’ that would either validate a negotiated deal or see Article 50 revoked and the UK remaining in the EU. With 39 per cent of respondents preferring this option, it also carries substantial support. Prime minister Theresa May has repeatedly rejected calls for the question to be put back to the people, but Labour’s position seems to change by the hour, depending on which party member happens to be in front of camera. While many are wary of the impact of another referendum campaign, others see it as the only way to move forward with any validity after almost three years of political chaos.
The other options available polled much weaker, with just 4 per cent favouring a general election and the same number backing more indicative voting, despite the latter option coming extremely close to finding a majority in the Commons. Ahead of both was ‘none of the above’, chosen by 7 per cent of respondents.
The conversation will remain open in our comments section below. Tell us why you voted the way you did and how you think the process will unfold over the coming days. Will Corbyn and May reach an unlikely agreement that will pass the Commons? Are a longer extension and European elections inevitable? Or will the UK crash out of the EU this coming Friday at 11pm? Remember to keep the conversation civil and please read our comment guidelines before posting.
I’m a low key supporter of certain ideas held within Brexit. I, however, abstained from the last referendum as I couldn’t put my faith behind the government at the time to handle it properly. I support a second referendum, and would vote remain.
I voted Remain last time, but the result was for Leaving. Its now the duty of the MP’s to get us out of the EU with the best deal possible. The EU will not make it easy for us but we are the ones looking to leave so why should they. We only have two choices – a no deal or May’s deal. So get on with it. MPs do your job.
Government has made a mess of this from the inception of the promise of a referendum that had no coherent strategy to present the relevant cases with accuracy to the abysmal lack of planning for the possible outcomes. Parliament has now been lamentable in its response to the opportunity to exercise some moderation. No matter what side of the debate you are on, those that are provided with the authority to lead the country and elected to make a difference have failed. I fear the only way forward will be either a second referendum (a clear justification is needed to repeal the original however for the sake of democracy) or a General Election and all the turmoil that will then ensue and what abyss we may then be staring into.
What a sad indictment when skilled technical logical (you would think) vote for a no deal brexit in this survey. Clearly the baby boomers or close to that age are at it again. Screw it all up for the next generation of scientists and engineer why don’t you!
You should have voted the first time then. Out means out. Have faith, belief and confidence in our country.
Why do the “Second referendum” camp think it will make any difference? It is just add more confusion.
Why would anyone who voted to leave before now vote to stay?
Perhaps because the realities of Brexit have been laid bare?
I think the whole thing has been a combination of inept government, continual neural programming (brexit means brexit, getting our country back, we can trade with the world) and a total lack of honesty about what can really be achieved and how it will really impact on the people in the streets.
The government should have put the public straight from day one. It was never a trade deal it was about exiting the worlds strongest trade embargo. The unelected leaders are the main negotiators and have run rings round us. We have allowed the supporters to shout from the side. Rather then going this is the best you will get we have this sleep walking over the edge.
All what is happening is business is taking the lead and not waiting for this government to waste any more time. They are just moving. For engineering all plans and investment are on hold so we have gone backwards in 2 years.
But I am ready for anything.
I don’t honestly see why a second referendum would help. Last time it was 52% to leave and 48% to remain. What happens if the result is as close again, (but the other way round). Why should that result make things clearer than they are at the moment and why should it be taken more seriously than the first result? I don’t really want to leave without a deal, but the Government have seriously messed up – they should have been planning for these scenarios 3 years ago, instead of wasting so much time and money trying to find excuses to ignore all those who voted to leave in the 2016 referendum. The Government have put the country in this untenable position and if they can’t sort it out then maybe there should be a General Election so the country can vote in MP’s who can sort it out.
We had a Referendum, Parliament voted to respect it, Parliament voted to invoke Article 50, A bunch of Civil Servants negotiated a rubbish deal that nobody likes (except the EU – well, they would – they wrote it); then the losers, (Remainers) obfuscate everything to prevent the democratic vote from actually happening. Labour change their mind every 5 minutes because their focus is on destabilisation and hopefully winning an election, other Remainers know better than everyone else in the country because, they are MPs. The so-called rebels are the ones sticking out for the democratic vote, and the Remainers, who oppose it, are heroes – go figure. A General Election will change nothing except the Corbynistas will destroy the economy of the country and turn it into Venezuela, A second Referendum, assuming the Remainers win, will mean the Leavers will want a third one, and so on. The Withdrawal Agreement is the only thing that will prevent a No Deal, but Bercow keeps blocking an indicative Vote on the Withdrawal Agreement without a backstop that we can throw back at Barnier. Overall, all this is showing is that Parliament is a ramshackle bunch of people full of their own self-importance and are more interested in personal and political gain and not the democratic wishes of the country. If we leave with No Deal, then after a rough beginning, Parliament will realise that, unlike the last 40-odd years, they will actually have the power to do something and not be dictated to by a foreign power in Brussels.
I voted to leave last time and seeing how the EU has treated the UK, trying to dictate the terms, and we understand there fear of not making it difficult for fear of other countries that may follow. Then I see no reason to change my opinion. If we end up with a general election then I hope all those MP’s who refuse to honour the referendum result are voted out. I cannot see the justification for a second referendum as this would start a never ending cry for a new vote from both sides. In a general election when we do not get the result we would like and the new government sweeps into power with a much lower percentage vote are we then allowed to call for a revote.
Shaun Fowler : Google Brains for Brexit article in the Times
I voted to remain, but still have to accept the albeit slim (considering the issue at stake) margin at the time.
It is now clear that the vote was based on mis-information and it has to said, some blatant lies.
It is even more clear that a large number of ‘Leavers’ have modified their views based on what they have learned subsequently.
It is criminal for Parliamentary parties on all sides to deny this and they must accept that a second referendum is needed.
Unfortunately, they claim that the risk of a second referendum is that it will be inconclusive. Is it not the case that they know the conclusion all too well?
Good to see a high number of votes for No Deal. Momentum seems to be swinging that way. Don’t really understand the obsession with the Single Market just because its the Status Quo. We have a £ 70 B annual trade deficit with the EU , and a £ 10 B Trade surplus with the ROW . Single market works great for the EU, but not so well for the UK
It’s no good seeking to blame Corbyn’s Opposition for what has always been an exercise in trying to hold the Conservative party together, pure and simple. It has even failed dismally in that objective.
Given the total shambles of the present parliament who would bother voting in a second referendum: it would clearly be a waste of ones time. Looks to me as though our elected governors ought to make the decision stay in EU or get out and then have an election on the policy to follow.
David Cameron did the honourable thing and resigned as he didn’t think he should lead the UK out of the EU with a Pro EU stance. Theresa May should never have accepted the job on the same basis
Working internationally, I am aware of the economic and social problems of decoupling from the EU. It is not a matter of what people want but of what is possible and leaving is not possible.
There is also the point that the EU produces a range of international trading rules that are standard over the globe, so even if the UK is outside the EU, it will still be working to all those rules it claims to hate.
The EU desperately needs financial structural reform – the structure that bankrupted Cyprus, Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Ireland and now threatens France is clearly in need of urgent change
Parliament is a shambles, so very few MPs can present a logical or even illogical argument without reading from a script. This is not a dabate its a who shouts last ill fated comedy of errors.
Just tell the EU that the present deal without the Backstop is the only way out of this impass, afterall the Good Friday Agreement is between Eire and the UK and neither want a closed border, so why should the EU interfere in that, other than to be a spoiler for Brexit.
The GFA makes reference to the UK and Ireland as “partners in the European Union”. As Ireland will continue to be a member of the European Union post-Brexit, it will be obliged to enforce a border in the event of the UK leaving without an extensive trade deal and customs union. The desire not to have a hard border is irrelevant. International trade law and EU law requires it.
Also, isn’t the purpose of Brexit supposed to be the UK regaining control of its money, laws and borders? If so, why would the UK leave its only actual land border with the EU completely unchecked after Brexit? The border issue is a spoiler for Brexit, but it is not manufactured by the EU. It has been there from day one, waiting to be discovered by Brexiteers who willfully ignored its importance for the entire referendum campaign and for most of the time since.
There are some very sensible comments above, but the biggest problem is that we do not have a parliament of any colour that reflects the people, and that has been so for decades, hence we have so many people left behind and feeling hopeless. They feel that leaving with no deal can not be any worse than what they have now. I voted in the seventies not to go in and my view has not changed, we should not be ruled by non electable bureaucrats, also remember we left the commonwealth to join this crowd and they represent about a third of the worlds population, so lets renew our ties to them before it is to late. Just Leave.
Left the Commonwealth??? The UK heads still leads the Commonwealth, headed up by the Queen. Speaking of which, when is she up for reelection?
Okay, here’s my view why a second referendum isn’t a bad idea. On the first one, we had a choice between a known situation, i.e. the EU with all its advantages and disadvantages, or an unknown situation…with the blanks filled in by the various Leave campaigning politicians or by the individual ticking Leave. There always were and still remain great differences of opinion on what Leave means. I personally would say many voted for an imaginary situation, i.e. removing all the things we don’t like (e.g. uncontrolled imigration) and keeping the bits we do (e.g. a big comprehensive trade deal including services).
So a new referendum can make sense if the choice is between: Remain in the EU (as today) or Leave with the Prime Minister’s negotiated deal; Alternatively between Remain and No-deal. I don’t mind which but as long as the choice is clear on what you get by ticking your box.
Ah!…the “hope that springs eternal to the breast…!” Regardless of the (now) obvious pitfalls to leaving (taxation, paperwork, getting exports tested and ratified, passports et al) there are still Little Englander’s ready to stand proudly on the on the deck, as the rising water’s lap around their feet??
Out of curiosity I plotted the results for ‘meaningful votes’ 1, 2 and 3 and contrary to some of the assertions in your opinion piece, the trendlines suggest there is a distinct possibility of Theresa May’s Brexit plan passing on the fourth attempt … http://eyefidelity.co.uk/brexitvotes.png
Your graph suggests the gap will keep narrowing when the facts indicate it will actually widen.
Looking at the vitriol on this board it’s easy to understand why parliament is in such a state. We’ve opened a can of worms that I fear we will have to live with for a very long time. I’m a remainer but don’t think a second referendum is the answer; its just a way of trying to spread the blame. Parliament needs to make a decision and take the consequences, it won’t be pretty but should spare the majority of us the worst of the fall out.
For the first time in my life I am not proud to be British. We must bw the laughing stock of the world now. Also I always thought we lived in a democracy but seams no. The majority voted OUT but MPs are against this and I now doubt it will happen.
The only thing we know for certain is that after the UK voted to leave we did not collapse, unemployement did not soar ,there was no requirement for an emergency budget all of which the “experts ” forcast
Perhaps a coup d’etat would be a way forward. The politicians seem to have lost the plot and appear indifferent to the potential disaster they have collectively created. They aspire to mediocrity
I suspect the electorate will take its revenge in due course. The whole charade has ripped away the major fault lines that penetrate and characterise so much of our system of governance. Some deep seated reforms as to how we are represented and governed are long overdue. Those in the system will fight like cornered rats to prevent this of course.
aren’t empirical correlations the basis of most engineering? 🙂
so if we have a second and it says “remain” are we then going to have a 3rd as a decider?
The result was to leave, so that’s what needs to happen., with a deal or without. the “remain” camp are to blame for the lack of bargaining power we have.
In a general election if 25% of the 17.2 million change their allegiance from Labour or Conservative to say UKIP in protest all these I Know better than you do so called politicians could be out of a job
Sadly, there is one Joke only and its on us! Incidentally, which is the ugliest of the sisters?)
What a bunch of (here I would use a word not dissimilar to bankers, but they are no better?) the Political Parties (and none are excluded) are: and the Whips, and the Cabinet and their Shadows, and the Speaker! [is there anyone else? in that sorry excuse for our apparent Leaders and betters!] Laughably stupid, self-imposed stupidity that is: Brewery -they probably can’t spell that let alone organise anything in one! Lunatics, asylum, take-over. What did Mr Cromwell say to them about 450 years ago: : in the name of God, go! And so say all of us!
Unless you and your ancestors have been looking away for the past 500 years, we have been ruled (I shall not disgrace the noble word ‘governed’) by the antics of 186,000 second tier lawyers (yes, that is how many there are ) 18,000 upper tier lawyers (hired verbal gunmen) who jointly and severally present battles (cases) that are not theirs to about 2,000 poachers turned game-keepers. They have got away with this farce since they took it over from the clerics and the Monarch. How much longer? Not too much I hope!
Brexit = When a big lad from Barnsley leans back on one of those cheap plastic patio chairs.
Brexit is a disaster waiting to happen and will only benefit a few in society, though others may have feel good factor. Those who will benefit are the insiders vyeing to be the next Prime Minister, and a few businesses who may get some additional busines that the current regulatory regime denies. Meanwhile we are giving up a free trade deal with one of the wealthiest economies in the world for an uncertain and as yet un-negotatied new regime of tariffs. What is missing from the above is cancel Brexit as clearly not enough people are clear of any possible benefits. Significant numbers of people are feeling completely misled over the referendum which in any event was ONLY purpoerted to be an indicative non-binding one. Now hi-jacked as supposedly the will of the people, which only reflects the 25% of the population at that time and does nothing for the remaining 75%. The negotiations have broken all the good governance and business or project management rules by a pig-headed refusal to consider any opinion other than Leave. They locked themselves away in an un-holy cabal and refused to have anything to do with anybody else. It is a valid business decision after the initial idea and enthusiasn of what seemed like a good idea at the time to be reconsidered when the true facts and conseuences come to light.
Apart from the obvious attempts by some to back us out of Brexit, I don’t understand the rationale for a second referendum. After all we only get one pop at a general election and then have to live with the result. Also, the fiasco of the last three years has proven comprehensively that the politicians don’t respect the peoples choice and will do whatever they can to frustrate a result they don’t like, so any other referendum would be subject to the same disrespect.
The government have had three years to sort out our exit, they’ve failed. The backstop will never be agreed and, I suspect, it’s a political device that has more to do with North/South issues than Brexit itself. Three years and some common sense should have been enough time to sort a working deal with the Irish, the time was squandered and no common sense was used.
I voted to leave, I didn’t vote to leave with a deal that meant we remain tied to the EU. The situation we are in now means leaving without a deal is the only viable option. The country needs a decisive solution (no deal) now, else the continued delay will cause more harm than any no deal exit
I think the next referendum should be a one off definite vote with all the main possible strategies in place; i.e We stay in the E.U; We leave the E.U; We have a customs union with free movement. These as I see it are the only possible solutions. But people must know that this is it, no further voting at all; what happens is final. This is the only way it can be done. Also people should be able to vote from the age of 16 for this extremely important vote.
As I have read the comments of all the above it is fairly obvious that many of them do not understand how the E.U works. They have a set of rules & regulations in place & they can’t just change this bit or that bit to suit the UK. The UK government must stand up and say what they really think which has always been to stay in the E.U. They won’t do this as it would get their local constituents in uproar for those who voted to leave. The politicians know that by staying in the E.U it is the best thing for the country. Why else are they trying to get some kind of deal to basically stay in!
As another unchallenged individual once had his PR person admit “the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it!”
Whether you look at parliament (or the population as a whole for that matter), there isn’t an outright majority for any one option – the indicative votes have shown this (I suspect with the MP’s being a bit tactical too, rather than genuinely voting for the limits of what they would accept. Perhaps the way out would be for them to rank the options with a Single Transferable Vote system – where if you don’t get you first choice your vote passes to your second choice and so on until one option gets a majority. Given the fine balance of the 2016 referendum, some sort of compromise is surely justified – rather than any one extreme.
I agree, the UK has become the laughing stock of the work, as it was at the referendum
“giving up a free trade deal with one of the wealthiest economies in the world for an uncertain and as yet unnegotatied new regime of tariffs” about sums it up.
Any developed country would be happy to be part of the EU. What a jingoistic, retrograde step, base on an objetci8on to a few negotiated rules (which the UK could no doubt fix a lot easier than agreeing Brexit).
No doubt you will be leaving with “No deal” the EU really does not need the UK as much as we need them – – and probably losing Northern Ireland (who voted to remain) to the Republic as well.
A second referendum, this time without the bull, would conclusively show that the UK should stay and this nightmare will finally be over, especially if the vote is compulsory.
What percentage voted? 52% to leave and 48% when so many of you simply thought that it had no chance and didn’t vote is hardly the grounds for such a damaging policy.
Various commenters here have dismissed the 17.4 million leave result as ‘slim’ ‘finely balanced’ or somehow marginal
I’d just point out that Margaret Thatcher’s 1979 ‘landslide’ victory was won with 13.70 million votes; Tony Blairs’s 1997 similarly ‘landslide’ victory was won with 13.52 million votes. The 2010 coalition government attracted a combined Conservative & Liberal Democrat vote of 17.54 million; the largest popular (in the technical sense of the word!) UK general election result ever …
source page 12:
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7529/CBP-7529.pdf
In 10 years time, do you expect to be wiser than you are now? Will experience have taught you more? Will you have gained more knowledge? How about in 20 or 30 years time? Or are you at the peak of your wisdom now? Is it possible that perhaps the so-called baby boomers or close to that age have experience, wisdom & a perspective that someone younger may not have?
Baby boomers also (for the most part) have secure housing, are in or approaching retirement, and have benefited from the most prosperous period in the history of humanity, all while enjoying the freedom to live and work across Europe. Brexit – combined with other factors, granted – has puts all of this at risk for the generation behind.
Yes,
and experience, experiences, ability to think around any issue, rational analysis, seeking worked examples from the past, but with a sceptical approach: standing on the shoulders of giants of the past to watch the future with inspiration, knowing which boundaries to push and how far, and overall never breaking nature’s laws (because if you do both detection and punishment are immediate, inevitable, expected and deserved?
It’s maybe useful to recall that we joined the EU in 1973 and also the so called ‘baby boomers’ are the post WWII generation predominantly born in the 1950’s. Prior to 1973 it was also possible to live and work in most ‘European’ countries – nothing to do with the EU or Brexit. The only limit on freedom of movement then and now was appropriate language skills. Prior to 1973 it was still a challenge for working people to buy a house and to keep it, many people had to have several jobs and with no child care benefits to help out it was no easier than now. Today’s housing problems are nothing to do with the EU or Brexit, it’s all to do with Tory policy.
Let’s not conflate current problems in the UK with our membership, or not, of the EU. Most of the problems we are experiencing today can be traced directly to the UK government (Thatcher, Blair, Brown, Cameron, May). These are the same people who over nearly three years have been unable to broker our exit from the EU. If we leave or stay we are still hamstrung by our incompetent governments.
Any worthwhile project starts with a clear Objective. In this case we need some positive ones that we can all buy into. To gain our complete attention, the project should be global and sustainable in the long term but have strong local ties. Such as fisheries, or localised economies that embrace manufacture, human resource, food production, ecosystem, energy and finance etc. These projects require a collaborative approach that involves us. So, to the plan of action: – Parliament to set up global fisheries organisation that works together to gather, protect, document, sustain the industry. Including elimination of all unsustainable practices such as sea-bed trawling etc. – Parliament too busy to consider leave or remain for another 10 years. And on to the next objective.
The questions on the ballot can now be specific and people can choose what kind of Brexit they want…or none.
3 years is a long time in politics – lots of people have died, many are newly able to vote and the “don’t knows” surely know a bit more by now.
Those who’s livelihoods depend on preparing for and continuing the conflict, not its outcome?
Why would remain be an option on a second vote? Surely, having lost the first time that is now off the table and it just needs to decide how we leave, not if.
I think we should try to look further than we are currently. One question which springs to mind is why do we need 650 MPs? Most of them are simply ‘lobby fodder’ voting as instructed by the Whips in line with the real intent of all parties in getting their hands on the levers of power irrespective of the electorates real wishes. After the shambles which Parliament has revealed over the last few weeks there is a strong case to reduce the numbers to say 200. The candidates should be subject to a rigorous selection procedure and the result should be on the basis of proportional representation (though I never thought I would say that!). Furthermore power must be devolved to regional governments with the proviso that this is not used to employ more, shall we say less productive, local government employees.
I am probably one of the few UK persons who was present (late 1964) in a former colony (B Guiana) when it had an election under this ‘system’. A system Imposed upon it by our Foreign Office and others) with an interest in ensuring that a Marxist, Dr Cheddi Jagan, a close pal and associate of Che and Castro could not win! I was teaching Engineering on VSO.
Troops on the street, riots, ‘cheated not defeated’ was Cheddi jagan’s comment when he indeed lost! -you know, all the mechanisms whereby those really in power intend to stay there.
Poor Guyana suffered about 30 subsequent years of terrible government: finally Jagan was elected again, but by then the damage had been done. I had the privilege of meeting him: (at Warwick Uni in the late 90s) and offering my apology for playing a small part in his original removal!
You ask: what has this to do with Engineering? We , like all movers and shakers, must ‘swim in water of the correct temperature’. [Mao TseTung] I sincerely hope that we will soon be doing so.
“No deal” doesn’t mean what it meant a year ago. There have been agreements and arrangements put in place that mitigate many of the concerns that people had before.
Of course, most of us know that scare stories were a con job designed to get us to stay in the EU. Remainers know it full well too, but continue the charade because it serves them. And how ironic that Germany’s economy is now causing worry yet Britain’s remains very strong. It was supposed to be the other way round!
Having listened to all the rantings of the EU masters against us, I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would want to remain in their dictatorial club, paying in large amounts of our taxpayers money with zero returns or even a say in anything.
Leaving the EU has been presented as the answer to many of the problems people face around the country today. Low wages. Job insecurity. Little or no regeneration in areas blighted by industrial decline. Austerity has magnified discontent and understandably people want to shake up the system and make their lives better. The trouble is that leaving the EU will NOT fix those issues. The research is clear. People were sold a myth and the myth clearly lives on. How will lowering the UK’s prosperity (related to staying in the EU) help fix those problems? How will making ourselves less competitive with our biggest market (the EU) help firms to grow and prosper? Being in the EU doesn’t stop trade with the rest of the world. Maybe we should ask pertinent questions like why Germany exports so much more than we do when the same rules apply to them?
Jacob Rees Mogg says that it will take multiple decades for the UK economy to outperform where it would be within the EU. Even if he is right, and Brexiters have been over confident about how easy it will be to negotiate new trade deals (have our cake and eat it, easiest trade deals in history, we hold all the cards etc), and appear blasé (maybe gung-ho is more apt) about the risks. Is any price is too high for the ERG?
We will be in a comparatively weak bargaining position when on our own. Negotiating trade deals is hard, there will be real pain involved when we have to (e.g. weakening our animal welfare standards is a stated aim of the US agricultural lobby).
May’s deal is an honest attempt at brokering a deal. I’m not sure any more could be achieved with those red lines that the Brexiters insisted she have. The fact it is so unpalatable is reality dawning. Present the hard facts to the people, let them decide whether they still want it. And I hope that people vote take back control and stay in the EU.
I can’t believe that 46% are so sure that No Deal is going to be a good thing. It might suit some, but for the majority it offers nothing but a disaster. Giving up a free trade deal with one of the world’s biggest collective economies, to (start) negotiating with someone like Donald Trump to end up with extra tariffs on everything? One small economy against the US and/or China, who is going to win that debate? All just because our society has become dependant on eastern european labour woth no-one to replace them? And the terrorist potential comes from countries and societies that are not even in EU. As engineers we are supposed to take a holistic and considered view! All brexiteers told us was pie in the sky wishful thinking nothing to base an informed decision on. We now know the consequences!
Answer: because for about 35 years they made no weapons or their means of delivery whatsoever: and what they did make was bought in millions by ordinary citizens using their own money, not in ones-and-twos by Governments with ours? They have literally ten-of-thousands of mittel-sized owner managed firms who have no interest whatsoever in going ‘Public’: they had and have banks which believe a long-term view of investment is NOT the next quarter’s results. they (like our Victorian ancestors) keep the clerks in the counting house and well away from the Board (should that be bored?) room and they make ‘stuff’ adding value, not just profit. Anything else?
Great points Mike. In addition the German education system lauds technical (i.e. numerate) study and rewards it well. The UK has long vacillated between following the EU and the USA at great cost too!
To add to Mike and Jack… The German unions actually work on keeping wages down, in exchange for job stability and security, and work with companies rather than trying to destroy them from within.
There’s a lot that needs fixing with the EU, but surely we are better placed to do this from within?