Have The Brexit Talks Delivered What Voters Want?

Posted on 28 December 2020 by John Curtice

Following the successful conclusion of the negotiations on the UK’s future relationship with the EU on Christmas Eve, the terms of the UK’s withdrawal from the institution are now known and, subject to ratification of the deal by Parliament on Wednesday, will be put in place on New Year’s Day.

Those on the Leave side of the debate will doubtless argue that the deal fulfills the instructions that were given by voters when they voted to Leave the EU in June 2016. However, exactly what voters hoped would emerge from the Brexit process has always been open to interpretation. During the course of the last four years, this website has conducted a number of its own surveys in which, inter alia, voters were asked what they hoped would emerge from the Brexit negotiations. These surveys addressed a number of the questions that were central to the Brexit debate, including immigration control and the regulation of economic activity.

In the following table, we attempt to evaluate how closely the outcome of the Brexit talks, as detailed by a variety of sources, reflect what our research suggested was the majority view on the topics that we covered. Note that sometimes the relevant provisions were part of the Withdrawal Agreement that was negotiated last year rather than of the Trade and Co-operation Agreement that has just been made. For each survey question, the single most popular view is stated, though in some instances it was only marginally so. Hypertext links provide further details of the distribution of responses for each question. In some instances, the outcome in Northern Ireland is different from that in the rest of the UK, while in others further details of the action that the UK proposes to take are awaited.

Three key conclusions emerge.

First, the decision to end freedom of movement, taken by Theresa May four years ago, clearly accords with the preference of a majority of voters. Immigration control was, of course, a key concern of voters in the 2016 referendum. This concern has not diminished significantly and appears to be shared by many of those who voted Remain. Given that freedom of movement is an essential requirement of membership of the EU single market, that decision inevitably constrained the options that were available to the UK in shaping a new relationship with the EU.

Even so – and this is our second conclusion – most voters were wanting to maintain tariff-free trade with the EU, as has now been negotiated. However, the scope of the trade agreement may be somewhat narrower than many voters were anticipating, not least perhaps in failing to make provision for financial services. Yet, at the same time, voters are willing to accept the introduction of customs checks on goods and people travelling between the UK and the EU – as will now happen.

Third, the priority given by the UK government in the trade talks to minimising the extent to which the UK has to follow EU regulatory standards does not seem to be shared by voters. On various aspects of consumer and environmental regulation – though not labour market standards – voters have been found to be willing to retain EU regulation, presumably because the provisions in question are felt to be beneficial. The political scope for the UK to diverge significantly from EU regulation in the post-Brexit world may prove to be rather less than both the UK government hopes and the EU seemingly fears.

 

Table: The Brexit Deal – Voters’ Majority Preferences and the Outcome Compared

 

Majority PreferenceOutcome
 

Immigration

End Freedom of Movement for EU Citizens moving to the UK

 

Freedom of movement ends on 1 January, and is replaced by a new immigration system in which the rules for EU and non-EU citizens are the same.
End Freedom of Movement for UK Citizens moving to the EU

 

 

The end of freedom of movement means that UK citizens no longer have the automatic right to live and work in an EU country, and will have to apply for a visa.
Allow EU citizens already living in the UK to remain here.

 

This was agreed as part of the Withdrawal Agreement, though EU citizens have to secure their right by applying for settled status.
End EU migrants’ entitlement to welfare benefits

 

As was already the position for non-EU migrants, with the end of freedom of movement EU migrants will only become eligible for welfare benefits if they become permanent residents, a status that is usually only granted after 5 years.
 

Trade

Maintain free trade with the EU

 

The trade agreement provides for tariff and quota free trade in goods but does not cover services, which constitute 80% of the UK economy.
Maintain tariff-free trade with the EU

 

The trade agreement provides for tariff-free trade in goods between the UK and the EU, subject to adherence to certain rules on the origin of the parts of assembled goods and the avoidance of regulatory divergence that distorts patterns of trade.
Reintroduce customs checks between the UK and the EU

 

The UK is leaving the EU customs union, and consequently customs checks are being reintroduced both for passengers and goods.
Mutual recognition of financial services

 

This is not covered by the trade agreement. It is hoped that the EU will grant UK institutions the ability to offer some services by declaring that UK financial regulation is equivalent to that of the EU. The UK government has already granted EU institutions such access in the UK.
Allow EU boats to fish in British waters in return for reciprocal rights

 

 

The EU has retained access to British waters, albeit with a gradual reduction over a five and half year period in the quota of fish that EU boats can take, and the prospect of annual negotiations thereafter.
Regulation
Consumer
Keep EU regulations on design and safety of goods

 

The trade agreement allows the UK to introduce its own system of consumer regulation, subject to constraints. These include a commitment to not lowering standards below those already in place and the possibility that tariffs might be introduced if future regulatory divergence results in unfair competition.
Keep EU rules on flight compensation

 

This is not covered by the agreement, but the relevant European legislation has been incorporated into UK law.
Keep EU regulations on the cost of using a mobile phone abroad

 

This is not covered by the agreement and has not been incorporated into UK law, though UK mobile phone companies have said they will not charge extra for using a mobile in the EU.
Keep EU regulations on labelling of geographically specific foods

 

The UK is introducing its own system of regulating the use of terms like ‘stilton cheese’ and ‘Cornish Pasty’, though existing designations granted by the EU will be carried forward.
Labour Market
End EU regulations on the maximum number of hours people can work and on annual leave entitlement

 

The UK is no longer required to follow EU labour market regulations, but is committed by the trade agreement to not lowering existing standards.
Environmental
Keep EU regulations on quality of bathing water

 

These regulations have been transferred into UK law, but the UK will be able to set its own standards and enforcement mechanisms in future, subject to the commitment in the trade agreement not to reduce environmental standards.
Require UK farmers to follow EU pesticide regulations

 

The UK is establishing its own regulatory regime, though existing authorisations for the use of pesticides are being carried forward. The trade agreement commits the UK to maintaining current environmental standards.
 

Northern Ireland

No passport checks between Northern Ireland the Republic of Ireland

 

The previously negotiated Withdrawal Agreement that, inter alia, was designed to avoid a ‘hard’ border on the island of Ireland means there no such checks. The Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland remains in place.
Northern Ireland should leave the EU on the same terms and conditions as the rest of the UK

 

Northern Ireland remains in the EU single market and, consequently, is leaving the EU on different terms and conditions than the rest of the UK.
Miscellaneous
Only follow some EU Court Judgements

 

Adherence to the terms of the trade agreement will be policed by a joint institutional framework and not by the European Court of Judgement (ECJ). However, UK participation in EU programmes, such as that for university research, will fall under the remit of the ECJ as will aspects of the Withdrawal Agreement.
Participate in EU programmes for university research

 

The trade agreement provides for the UK’s continuation in some EU scientific programmnes including, most notably, the Horizon programme. However, the UK has withdrawn from the Erasmus programme of student exchange.
Keep Free Health Treatment for UK Citizens when Abroad

 

Existing European Health Cards that facilitate emergency health treatment across the EU will continue to be valid and will eventually be replaced by an equivalent scheme.

 

John Curtice

By John Curtice

John Curtice is Senior Research Fellow at NatCen and at 'UK in a Changing Europe', Professor of Politics at Strathclyde University, and Chief Commentator on the What UK Thinks: EU website.

7 thoughts on “Have The Brexit Talks Delivered What Voters Want?

  1. “The trade agreement provides for tariff and quota free trade in goods but does not cover services, which constitute 80% of the UK economy.”

    That is a very strange way of putting it. Services may be 80% of the UK’s domestic economy, but they are only 40% of UK trade.

    What’s more, the so-called “single market” was always mostly about goods, and much less about services. The fact that the FTA doesn’t cover what the “single market” did not cover is hardly grounds for alarm or pessimism.

    The EU will use UK financial, design, educational and medical services to the extent they need them, so our best strategy here is enhanced performance, not some gift from the EU.Report

  2. As a former member of staff at the University of Manchester, until I retired in 2006, I spent several
    years mentoring students of Biomedical Sciences who spent much of their 3rd year in German-speaking countries via the Erasmus Scheme operated by the EU. I found that students who enrolled on this were usually very competent and highly motivated. Often, their fathers had experience with multinational companies and family movements had resulted in the students becoming competent in more than one foreign language before embarking on the scheme as well as self-confident. I was extremely sorry to see that Brexit has led to termination of Britain’s involvement in Erasmus. This need not have happened as I visited several British Erasmus students whose placements were outside the EU (in Switzerland). Britain will be a big loser here, as in my experience, Erasmus students were highly employable. I have personal experience of this as one of my sons attended a University of which I
    had no previous knowledge and graduated with a first in Production Engineering after spending his Erasmus time in Germany. He now has a successful business in Germany that assists Japanese car companies to produce advertising literature and user manuals that are well-targeted to European clients. He was advised that he might not be able to continue his business post-Brexit but managed to become a German citizen.Report

  3. Isn’t it misleading to imply that the Trade and Co-operation Agreement has by-passed services which account for 80% of GDP? AS:
    – it does cover professional services such as legal (apparently beneficially) and accountancy services
    – most financial services firms have adapted and found other ways of trading within the EU
    – there is a strong commitment to ‘codify’ norms of equivalence within the financial services industry. This suggests business yet to be concluded, allowing the discussions to focus on the essentials of jurisdiction, level plying field and the movement of goods and people before the transition period ends on 31st December.Report

  4. I consider that the adverb ‘successfully’ in the title to this item is deeply inappropriate.
    A very few chestnuts have been pulled from this quite unnecessary fire.Report

  5. Keep free health treatment for UK citizens when abroad?

    It is not free, but the UK Govt reimburses 80% of the local fee. The EHIC doesn’t actually facilitate emergency treatment, or certainly that is my understanding. Emergency treatment is carried out regardless because it is the right thing to do for the Dr’s. I was actually told this by a Hospital Dr in Austria. The EHIC allows for non emergency treatment such as at a GP. The EHIC card makes it clear that it may not cover the full cost of treatment. Treatment in the UK is free, but is not in any other country as far as I know. My experience is in Austria, so I know I had to pay 20% of a reasonable fee which amounted to 13.40 Euros for a one night stay in a cardiac ward. But in Ireland 60 euros for a GP visit, Netherlands a mandatory health insurance for residents which normally means residents pay the first 800 euros of treatment. So guessing quite high charges for EHIC card owners.

    A word about ambulances. Ambulance services are not even covered whether air or road in Austria. Because they are all run by private for profit companies. I received a bill of some 2,000 Euros for an air ambulance which I didn’t ask for. If they had said 2,000 euros, I would have said no thanks.Report

  6. Put another way – we have waited a great deal of time and effort pandering pointlessly to xenophobes. Because, as has already been illustrated elsewhere, all those NHS staff who used to come from the EU are still coming, but now from the Philippines etc etc. Immigration had not and will not reduce, but by claiming to be “in control” the EU haters have extracted us from the most beneficial economic and social arrangements of the century.
    And damaging ourselves economically and in terms of international standing as a serious collaborative partner. You only have to listen to Gove spouting his tissue of lies about how this is setting up U.K. industry for “global trade” – which the EU did nothing to prevent! – to realise this was always about dislike of Europe (ie xenophobia about our nearest neighbours) and very little else.
    That half the populous fell for it is a tragedy. Report

  7. Thank you, John, for a very succinct and accurate analysis of what the agreements do and fail to do. Unfortunately some people the hypertext links show that the research on what the majority expected was carried out 3 or 4 years ago. It would be interesting to establish whether current expectations remain the same.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.