European Union: UK Membership

Katie White Excerpts

Monday 24th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Mundell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for opening the debate.

My constituents in Rushcliffe have long been outward-looking, internationally minded and overwhelmingly pro-European. They understand that Brexit has not delivered the promised benefits, and they feel that the economic, social and geopolitical consequences of Brexit can be seen in their daily lives. I thank the 311 people from my constituency who signed the petition, and congratulate the lead petitioner for bringing us to the point of debating this matter today.

As so many of my colleagues have already said, it is clear that the UK’s trade has suffered, its productivity has fallen and investment has stalled since it left the EU. We have heard about the OBR estimates, but I believe that Goldman Sachs suggests that UK GDP has fallen by an even greater amount—maybe 5% or even up to 8%—and is therefore lower than it would have been without Brexit. One of my colleagues has already referenced the fact that 1.8 million fewer jobs were created by 2023. Our small businesses, in particular in sectors like agrifood and manufacturing, are bearing the brunt of new barriers to trade. We have also heard that 16,400 small businesses have ceased exporting to the EU since 2021.

For my constituents, those are not abstract figures; ultimately, they translate into higher prices at the checkout, fewer opportunities for our young people and, for all of us, diminished global influence. However, although rejoining the EU is a goal for many in my constituency, and a position that I would like us to pursue, we must be pragmatic about the challenges that that process will entail.

[Katie White (Leeds North West) (Lab)]

I think the vast majority of people in the room and, certainly, across my constituency have their eyes open to the challenges of Brexit and the obstacles we faced. Does my hon. Friend agree that the world has changed and that, in the new world order, what is possible for Europe, including our own country, will change too? As he says, we need pragmatic and creative solutions to strengthen and protect our place in an increasingly uncertain world. Does he agree that a new bargain, in which we have access to the single market in exchange for security assurances and a mechanism for reasonable, but not legally required, regulatory alignment, where the benefits outweigh the costs—not with free movement—could be a route forward?

[James Naish]

The reality is that there are several routes forward, and a number of them have been mentioned today. I implore the Government to think creatively about them. I will come to a couple of my own suggestions in a moment.

Rejoining would be a long and complex journey. It would require unanimous agreement from all 27 EU member states, and we would need to demonstrate sustained public and cross-party support over several years. I say this as someone who, in 2013-14, was living in Albania and working for the Government there. Albania became an official candidate for accession to the EU in June 2014; 10 years on, it is not a member.