Brexit, Article 50, The Single Market, Trading Blocs, Immigration, Special Status; this is just a handful of some of the political buzzwords associated with Britain’s departure from the EU. We have been left wondering when Theresa May will really pull the trigger that is Article 50, what the immediate effects will be and most of all, when we can actually start to know what Brexit has done to us. The reality is, none of this will become clear in a short pace of time; it has become fairly evident that even our leaders in the Cabinet don’t have objective facts or knowledge on what will come out of the EU negotiations and talks with global leaders. We are now left asking ourselves what the UK will truly be like outside of the EU bloc and most importantly, how will we be governed as a country?
There has been much emphasis placed on the EU Single Market during recent debate. We are indeed justified in placing the focus on this; after all, the Single Market has been a powerful trading bloc that has benefited the UK enormously. The issue here is, will the aim of securing a tighter hold on immigration levels conflict with our continued participation within the market? The aim of having a status which guarantees access to the trading bloc means ministerial negotiations will have to sell such a status to the EU in a very persuasive light; on the one hand, it will placate many of the remain voters who feared leaving the EU trading bloc, on the other hand, it may frustrate many leave voters whose decision was based on taking back full control of our borders so as to curve immigration levels.
An essential element of the EU Single Market is the free movement of labour and people within the bloc. At surface level, this would seem to be antithetical to Brexit and some of the Leave campaigns launched during the run up to the vote. However, the hopes inside the House of Commons are that we can still benefit from having access to the market, whilst gaining greater control of immigration levels by negotiating a special status for the country. Unfortunately, it is very hard to say how likely we will be able to secure this sort of deal with the EU, especially since May has adamantly repeated that “Brexit means Brexit” (although just how much practical significance this has is unclear).
Throughout the narrative, we have also heard talks of policy models such as Canada or Australia as being potential paradigms for the UK to implement. However, the fact that the history and politics of these countries are so different could mean it may be very hard to move towards such a framework, despite commonwealth ties. As previously mentioned, what we should be striving for is a structure that combines access to a large single market with strong grips on immigration levels. Unfortunately, such structures are few and far between. Prime Minister Theresa May and the Cabinet may be very hard pushed to implement the perfect model they are aiming to achieve; we cannot guarantee that the EU will respond with open arms to our Single Market needs and wants.
Future predictions aside, what must be attained now is a clear, realistic plan for keeping Britain’s access to the Single Market open. If this goal seems unattainable to some in the context of halting immigration, perhaps it is high time we accept the benefits of the free movement of people and understand that immigration is a necessary corollary of Single Market access and is not a reason for us to panic. On the contrary, immigration is an essential element of a thriving political economy and we must not allow Brexit to negatively change how immigrants are received into the United Kingdom. So, what is May’s job in the context of current and future negotiations over our relationship with the EU? In essence, ensure that we continue to be a nation which attracts, not repels, skilled immigrants and one that still has access to the very advantageous Single Market that is the EU bloc.