By Dimitris Mavrokephalidis
CORRESPONDENCE LONDON
Ten years after the Brexit referendum, which transformed British politics and reshaped Europe’s geopolitical landscape, the UK remains deeply divided over the implications of its decision to leave the EU.
That was the central message to emerge from the conference, which took place in London on Tuesday and was organized by UK in a Changing Europe in partnership with Flint Global.
B was at the event which brought together senior politicians, diplomats, academics and commentators from both sides of the Channel to assess the legacy of Brexit and discuss the future of UK-EU relations.
The debates highlighted how profoundly Britain has changed since 23 June 2016. The dominance once enjoyed by Labor and the Conservatives has weakened, economic growth remains stubbornly sluggish and political fragmentation has become a defining feature of public life. At the same time, Europe itself has been transformed by the war in Ukraine, geopolitical instability, energy insecurity and the growing competition between the world’s major powers.
Against this backdrop, panelists debated whether Brexit has helped Britain address these challenges, or whether it has left it more isolated in an increasingly uncertain world.
Barnier: Britain has yet to prove the benefits of Brexit
Among the keynote speakers was Michel Barnier, former Prime Minister of France and the European Union’s chief Brexit negotiator during the period 2019–2021.
Speaking with his famous bluntness, Barnier argued that Brexit had failed to demonstrate clear benefits for the UK.
“No one has been able to give me evidence of the added value of Brexit in the last ten years,” he told the audience.
Barnier rejected suggestions that the Brexit process had caused permanent damage to trust between Britain and the EU, although he acknowledged that it had been tested during the row that followed the implementation of the Northern Ireland arrangements shortly after the Withdrawal Agreement was signed.
More generally, he stressed that the decision to leave was always respected by European leaders, even if it was met with regret.
For Barnier, the key issue remains the value of European cooperation in an increasingly unstable world. Faced with challenges such as Russian aggression and economic competition from China and the United States, European countries are stronger when they act together.
“Brexit is and will remain a lose-lose game,” he said.
Andy Burnham’s question
One of the most interesting moments of the conference came when Barnier was asked about a hypothetical future in which a British prime minister would seek the country’s return to the European Union. , former mayor of Greater Manchester and current Labor MP, who is seen by some in the party as a possible future leader and prime minister.
Barnier was asked how long it would take for Britain to return to the EU if a future Burnham government decided to pursue re-entry.
His answer was revealing. He said the process would largely depend on how far Britain deviates from European standards and regulations in the coming years.
“The greater the deviation, the more difficult the process will be,” Barnier said.
While he made it clear that any decision to rejoin would be solely a matter for the British people, he argued that accession negotiations could be completed relatively quickly as long as regulatory alignment remained close.
Barnier also hinted that a future British application could go ahead without requiring it to adopt the euro or join the Schengen zone. However, he insisted there could be no return to the special exemptions and preferential treatment the UK previously enjoyed.
“The rules of the game will be the same,” he said. “There will be no selection of only the elements that are convenient.”
The possibility of a future rejoinder discussion came up several times throughout the day. At a later panel, polling expert Sir John Curtis argued that Labour’s base has become increasingly pro-European, raising questions about whether future party leaders will move beyond Sir Keir Starmer’s cautious European approach.
For now, Labor remains committed to improving relations with Brussels without bringing back the issue of membership. However, the fact that Burnham’s name has come up repeatedly in discussions of Britain’s long-term future suggests that the issue may not remain dormant forever.
The Single Market remains Europe’s red line
Barnier returned several times to what remains the fundamental position of the European Union: the integrity of the Single Market is non-negotiable.
“The Single Market is not just a free trade zone,” he argued. “It’s an ecosystem with common rules, common standards, common regulations and common jurisdiction.”
Any attempt to weaken this framework, he said, could encourage Eurosceptic movements in other European countries as well.
Despite his criticism of Brexit, Barnier repeatedly stressed that European countries valued Britain’s contribution while it was a member of the Union.
“We were very happy to have the UK with us,” he said. “And we would be very happy to have it again.”
Lord Frost’s defense of sovereignty
If Barnier represented the European perspective, Lord David Frost, Britain’s former chief Brexit negotiator and one of the architects of the withdrawal agreement, presented a vigorous defense of Brexit.
Opening the conference, Frost argued that too many political leaders still do not accept the result of the referendum even ten years later.
He argued that the strongest argument in favor of Brexit was never economic but democratic.
According to Frost, membership of the European Union limited the ability of voters to influence politics through national elections, as important decisions were increasingly made at the European level.
“It’s hugely important to be able to change things through your national elections,” he said.
For Frost, Brexit restored democratic accountability by returning decision-making powers to Westminster. He argued that sovereignty offers flexibility, allowing governments to adapt to changing circumstances and more easily correct policy mistakes.
Acknowledging that Brexit has come at a cost and that successive governments have not always effectively capitalized on the opportunities it has created, he insisted that Britain is ultimately better off outside the European Union.
“Independence means choice,” he argued.
Rather than reignite the Brexit debate, Frost suggested Britain should focus on governing itself more effectively and making better use of the freedoms it gained after leaving the Union.
A political system that has been transformed
The conference also considered the deep political implications of Brexit.
A panel featuring journalist Evan Davies, polling expert Sir John Curtis, Guardian political editor Pippa Crerar, Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesman Callum Miller and Resolution Foundation chief executive Ruth Curtis discussed how the referendum accelerated long-term changes already underway in British politics.
Sir John Curtis has argued that Brexit has fundamentally changed voting behaviour, introducing a new cultural and identity divide that cuts across traditional class lines.
As a result, the political center has shrunk, creating space for parties such as Reform UK and the Greens to challenge the dominance of Labor and the Conservatives.
“The old demographics are no longer valid,” Curtis observed.
In his view, both Labor and the Conservatives are still struggling to form stable electoral alliances to replace those that supported them for most of the post-war period.
Economic questions remain unanswered
The economic consequences of Brexit are still hotly contested.
While critics point to weaker trade performance, reduced investment activity and lower growth, Brexit supporters argue that many of Britain’s economic difficulties are due to wider international developments such as the financial crisis, the pandemic and geopolitical instability.
Ruth Curtis noted that Brexit coincided with an acceleration of the UK economy’s shift towards services, raising questions about whether the referendum achieved the economic transformation that many Leave supporters had hoped for.
In her view, communities that hoped Brexit would reverse the effects of globalization may feel disappointed by the results so far.
On the other hand, Lord Frost challenged much of the mainstream economic analysis, arguing that analysts focus solely on the costs of leaving the Single Market, overlooking the potential benefits of regulatory freedom and independent policy-making.
Ten years after the vote, however, there was no sign of consensus.
The shadow that won’t go away
Speaking to “BIMA”, Simon Asherwood, professor of Politics and International Studies at the Open University, said that Britain still lacks a clear vision for its future relationship with Europe.
“Ten years after the referendum, it is not clear that the UK has any better idea of what kind of relationship it wants to have with the European Union,” he said.
“Politicians from across the political spectrum still do not fully understand the basic principles of how the Union works, what it seeks and what it is willing to accept.”
Asherwood described Brexit as a continuing drag on the country’s economic performance and a symbol of Britain’s withdrawal from international cooperation.
At the same time, he noted that the issue remains politically toxic, discouraging politicians from investing the necessary time and effort to formulate a more stable and coherent long-term strategy.
“As a result,” he said, “the shadow of Brexit will continue to loom over British politics for many years to come.”
A conclusion that resonated throughout the Conference
This conclusion seemed to permeate the entire conference.
A decade after the referendum, Britain has left the European Union, but the debate surrounding the meaning, consequences and future direction of Brexit remains open.
Institutions have changed, governments have come and gone and the political landscape has been transformed.
And yet, the question that dominated British politics in 2016 still remains unanswered in 2026:
What kind of relationship does the UK ultimately want to have with Europe?
Ten years on, no one seems quite sure of the answer.
