Anand Menon rightly points out that the disastrous effects of Brexit on trade, tax rises and growth are now becoming apparent (Covid has been an easy scapegoat for economic disruption, but Brexit is biting, 31 January). He’s right, too, to note that Covid has become an easy scapegoat for economic disruption. However, the political realignment also brought about by Brexit seems to offer little chance for reopening the process of rejoining the EU, given that it resulted from a referendum whose legitimacy we all have to accept, however reluctantly.
Membership of the European Economic Area could be the answer. Nothing on the referendum voting slip committed us to the hard Brexit to which we find ourselves condemned. Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway are also outside the EU, but covered by the EEA agreement that guarantees their compliance with EU legislation on the single European market, competition and employment rights. Prof Menon observes that 57% of Britons now think the government is handling Brexit badly, so surely they too will increasingly want to find a way through. EEA membership would allow us to remain outside the EU while regaining some of the practical advantages of EU membership. It would also put us in a stronger position to rejoin the EU if and when the electorate so decided.
Michael Gold
Emeritus professor of comparative employment relations, Royal Holloway, University of London
• Once again it is claimed that the economists who opposed Brexit warned that it would lead to catastrophe (The post-Brexit economic crisis never materialised – Labour is right to move on, 31 January).
At the time (2016), serious observers such as the National Institute of Economic and Social Research and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development predicted that the long-run fall in GDP resulting from a Brexit where we left the single market would be 3.2% and 5.1% respectively. Split the difference and we get a fall of a bit over 4%, roughly what the Office for Budget Responsibility currently believes.
“Long run” means comparing the situation in, say, 2030 with what would have happened if we had stayed in. No catastrophe, no crisis, just a slow-burn decline in national wellbeing.
When Keir Starmer said there was “no case” for rejoining, I take it that meant there is no realistic possibility, not that staying out somehow makes us wealthier.
Simon Price
Professor of finance, Essex Business School
• Last week, I ordered five copies of my book about the Spanish civil war from a UK publisher for delivery to Madrid. The wholesale cost of the books and postage was £48. The carrier then demanded an additional €40 to cover the tariff charged on the delivery of goods from a non-EU country. Evidently, this Brexit tax nearly doubles the cost of the transaction.
Labour’s shadow chancellor, Rachel Reeves, recently made the welcome pledge that the next Labour government would be “pro-business”. But she then said that she saw no prospect of the UK rejoining the single market for the next 50 years. It is hard to reconcile the two statements. Businesses across the country are complaining about the barriers they must now leap to trade with the EU.
Labour’s reticence in talking up the benefits of integration with the EU single market is a policy choice that the party must revise.
Dr David Mathieson
Madrid
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication.
