It’s been almost a decade since that fateful day in 2016 when the UK voted to leave the European Union, and yet the question refuses to fade away: did we make the right call? Lately, I’ve noticed more conversations—over coffee, in pubs, even at family dinners—circling back to whether Britain should swallow its pride and try to rejoin. Polls show regret is widespread now, and with economic headwinds still blowing hard, it’s no wonder people are wondering if closer ties, or even full membership again, might be the fix we’ve been missing.
The truth is messier than the headlines suggest. Brexit wasn’t the instant catastrophe some predicted, but it hasn’t exactly delivered the sunlit uplands either. In my experience following these debates closely over the years, the real damage has crept in slowly—through lost investment, quieter high streets in border regions, and a nagging sense that we’re punching below our weight. So let’s unpack this properly, without the spin from either side.
Why the Brexit Question Won’t Go Away
Fast-forward to early 2026, and the landscape looks different. Public opinion has shifted noticeably—many now see the departure as having gone badly. Business leaders quietly grumble about extra paperwork, while younger voters especially feel the pinch of missed opportunities in Europe. It’s not just nostalgia; it’s frustration with stagnant wages, sluggish growth, and the feeling that we’ve been left behind while others move forward.
Yet here’s the thing: even those who campaigned hardest for Leave admit it hasn’t all been smooth. The promised control over borders hasn’t quite materialised the way people hoped, with net migration hitting record highs. The Northern Ireland situation remains a sore point, chipping away at national unity. And economically? Well, the numbers tell a sobering story, though not quite the apocalypse foretold back in 2016.
The Economic Scorecard So Far
Let’s start with the hard data, because feelings alone don’t pay the bills. Recent analyses suggest the UK economy is noticeably smaller than it would have been had we stayed. Some estimates put the hit to GDP per person anywhere from six to eight percent by now, with investment taking an even bigger beating—perhaps down by double-digit percentages compared to similar nations. Productivity hasn’t escaped either; it’s lagged, contributing to that familiar squeeze on living standards.
Trade with the EU has suffered too, especially in goods. Friction at borders means more costs, delays, and sometimes lost sales altogether. Services have fared better—the City still thrives, and digital exports keep growing—but overall, the picture is one of missed connections rather than outright collapse. I’ve always thought the most painful part wasn’t the immediate shock but the slow drip of opportunities forgone: fewer foreign factories built here, less confidence from global investors.
Brexit imposed a large and persistent cost on the UK economy, with impacts accumulating gradually over time.
– Recent economic research summary
That gradual buildup is key. Early forecasts expected a sharper drop, but reality delivered something more insidious. Uncertainty alone delayed decisions—businesses sat on their hands, waiting for clarity that took years to arrive. Add in global shocks like the pandemic and energy crises, and separating Brexit’s unique contribution becomes tricky, but most serious studies agree it hasn’t helped.
Still, it’s worth noting the UK hasn’t fallen off a cliff. We’ve outperformed some European peers in certain areas, and new trade links beyond Europe are starting to bear fruit, even if modestly. The question is whether those gains outweigh the losses—or if we could do better by changing course.
The Current Government’s Approach: Reset, Not Rejoin
Enter the present administration. They’ve tried to chart a middle path—improving practical arrangements without crossing so-called red lines like re-entering the single market or customs union. Recent efforts have focused on smoothing veterinary checks, easing travel for performers, and cooperating on energy. On paper, it sounds sensible: fix what’s broken without reopening the whole debate.
But cracks are showing. Some senior figures have started floating ideas about deeper alignment, even hinting at customs arrangements. Internal party pressure is building, especially as voters demand answers on growth. The public mood has shifted enough that talking openly about Brexit’s downsides no longer feels politically suicidal.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect is how external factors are pushing this along. Global instability, including shifts in American policy, has made the case for stronger European ties feel more urgent to some. In my view, it’s a pragmatic response to a changing world—though whether it leads to meaningful change remains to be seen.
- Practical wins like reduced border friction for food and energy could add modest growth over time.
- Yet the EU often seeks concessions in return, from payments to regulatory follow-through.
- The government’s insistence on maintaining independence limits how far talks can go.
It’s a delicate balance. Push too hard, and you risk reigniting old divisions; stay too cautious, and you miss out on real economic relief.
Could a Customs Union Actually Help?
One idea gaining traction is negotiating a new customs union. Proponents argue it would eliminate most tariffs and simplify trade. Sounds appealing—until you dig into the details. Most UK-EU goods already move tariff-free under existing arrangements, so the headline benefit shrinks quickly.
The catch? Joining any customs setup would mean adopting the EU’s external tariffs on imports from elsewhere. That could hurt relationships with faster-growing markets we’ve recently courted. Plus, border checks wouldn’t vanish entirely unless we accepted far more rules—rules we’d have no vote on shaping.
Independent trade policy would take a hit too. Renegotiating or scrapping recent deals would damage credibility. In short, the costs often outweigh the gains when you look beyond the slogans.
A customs union sounds simple, but it comes with strings that limit real sovereignty over trade.
– Independent economic commentary
I’ve spoken to business owners who value flexibility over perfect alignment. They worry that locking back in would stifle innovation in areas like tech and finance, where diverging from Brussels has allowed quicker adaptation.
Single Market Access: The Bigger Prize or Bigger Trap?
Going further—aligning more closely with single market rules—promises fewer non-tariff barriers and smoother services trade. Some claim big GDP boosts from even partial integration. But those projections often rest on optimistic assumptions about productivity magic from slightly easier trade.
Reality check: the EU isn’t exactly booming. Persistent overregulation and slow decision-making have left parts of the bloc struggling. Aligning more tightly might import those same problems rather than solve ours. And don’t forget—no voice at the table means accepting rules set by others, precisely what many voted against.
- Regulatory alignment reduces friction but sacrifices control.
- Services might benefit, but goods checks persist without full membership.
- Political cost: reopening old fights could spike uncertainty again.
Perhaps the most compelling argument against is sovereignty. The original vote was about taking back control—of laws, borders, money. Handing chunks of that back feels like undoing the core reason for leaving.
A More Optimistic Vision: Making Brexit Work Better
Instead of looking backward, some argue we should double down on what independence offers. Smarter domestic regulation, agile trade deals with dynamic economies, and bold reforms in growth sectors like AI and biotech. The UK has already shown it can move faster outside the EU framework in certain areas.
Financial services remain a strength, with calls from European banks to copy our lighter-touch approach. Demonstrating success could even encourage others to loosen up. In my experience, real progress comes from focusing on what we can control rather than wishing for a different past.
Immigration policy, too—setting our own rules allows targeted approaches that match economic needs without blanket freedom of movement. It’s not perfect, but it addresses one of the biggest public concerns head-on.
Weighing the True Costs of Reopening the Debate
Here’s where it gets tricky. Even if closer ties bring some benefits, the politics could undo them. Uncertainty spiked investment before; another round of wrangling might do the same. Businesses hate unpredictability more than imperfect arrangements.
Moreover, the EU isn’t desperate for our return. Negotiations often reflect a desire to extract concessions rather than offer sweetheart deals. Any path back would likely involve payments, rule-taking, and years of talks—hardly the quick fix some imagine.
Recent studies highlight how forecasts sometimes overstated short-term pain but underestimated longer-term drag. Yet they also remind us that other factors—energy prices, global competition—play huge roles. Brexit isn’t the sole villain in our economic story, but it’s undeniably part of the cast.
Where Do We Go From Here?
Ultimately, this isn’t just about spreadsheets. It’s about identity, trust in institutions, and what kind of country we want to be. Do we double down on independence, accepting some trade-offs for control? Or do we seek a new accommodation with Europe, recognising interdependence in a volatile world?
Neither path is painless. But continuing the half-hearted search for a perfect middle ground might be the worst option—keeping everyone uncertain and investment on hold. Perhaps the healthiest move is to accept Brexit as settled fact and focus ruthlessly on domestic reforms that boost growth regardless of our EU status.
I’ve watched these arguments ebb and flow for years. My take? The grass isn’t necessarily greener on either side. Success will come from playing our hand smartly—leveraging strengths, fixing weaknesses, and not letting old battles define our future. Whether that means drifting closer to Europe or striking out more boldly alone, only time—and better policy choices—will tell.
And that’s the real challenge ahead: moving beyond recriminations to deliver the prosperity people expected all along.
