Re-joining the EU

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

spen666

Active Member
I was reading an article online about a British politician (their identity is irrelevant)

One of the comments made was that X would take the UK back into the EU without a Referendum

This set me thinking, does there legally need to be a Referendum to do such a thing? (and conversely could a PM have taken the UK out of the EU without a Referendum?)

If a majority in both Houses of Parliament voted for such a move, is that all that is needed?




I know it would be not the best or most sensible way to act on a major decision, but could it legally happen?




i'm not interested in the merits of joining or leaving the EU, but the legal process
 

Milkfloat

Active Member
Well seeing as the last referendum was advisory only - otherwise the result would have been really challenged, I see no reason why going back into the EU would need anything more.
 
OP
OP
spen666

spen666

Active Member
Well seeing as the last referendum was advisory only - otherwise the result would have been really challenged, I see no reason why going back into the EU would need anything more.

I think you must be right

Can you imagine the controversy if any politician tried to do such a thing without a referendum though
 

Xipe Totec

Something nasty in the woodshed
All UK referenda are advisory/consultative at the time they're held, that wasn't a special condition of Brexit.

It's a lot more likely that in due course the UK will rejoin the CU & SM as part of EFTA or EEA, I think it's wildly unlikely the EU would be willing to accept us as full members after the behaviour of our current administration, at least not for a very long time.

Apropos of nothing, if Brexit had been negotiated to reflect the way people actually voted, rather than what a shady cabal of ultra-right wing psychotic grifters wanted, we would never have left the SM & CU in the first place.
 

stowie

Active Member
After a bit of googling - so nowhere near an expert...

It appears that EU accession does not need a referendum or at least the EU doesn't require it for consideration of membership. In reality, I cannot see a single country that have recently been admitted to the EU (rather than EEC or before) that didn't do so on the back of a referendum.

I think the UK actually joined the EEC without holding a referendum, but held one instead in 1975 to determine if we continued in the organisation.

So, I guess the answer would be that the government of the day could request to rejoin without a referendum. If the majority party had it as part of their manifesto, tradition would indicate that The Lords wouldn't block it either. In reality, I cannot see the EU considering the UK rejoining without a very solid majority in favour for a very significant number of years. As people have written above, slowly moving towards SM/CU alignment is probably as far as it will go - possibly in my lifetime.
 

Rusty Nails

Country Member
Apropos of nothing, if Brexit had been negotiated to reflect the way people actually voted, rather than what a shady cabal of ultra-right wing psychotic grifters wanted, we would never have left the SM & CU in the first place.

The closeness of the vote meant that the result hinged on just 2% of those voting changing their minds.

I would not be surprised if any future important constitutional referendum will require more than a simple majority to effect change from the status quo.
 

Unkraut

Master of the Inane Comment
Location
Germany
The British elect a Parliament to make these kinds of decisions (obviously!), so in theory that would be all that was needed. It would help if a general election were held with one major party for joining and one for staying out, as this would at least give the voters a chance to express an opinion.

In the circumstances of leaving and the polarisation of Britain over this I think a new referendum would be essential, and a significant majority would be needed to rejoin. The last thing the EU needs is Britain divided over the issue, maybe even with a campaign to get out again starting the day after rejoining, or have a govt that creates more trouble than it is worth. It wouldn't be unreasonable for the EU to stipulate any referendum be run on honest lines, and a repeat of the chicanary of the last one would invalidate it, regardless of which way it went.

I think it most unlikely the British could rejoin with any of the previous opt outs granted a second time.
 
I don't think it matters. It seems to me that the current U.K. administration is deliberately poisoning the well such that we will be thought of as unreliable for decades. Yes, we may do some deals but they will be less favourable than they could have been, simply because of the mistrust.
 
Last edited:

Xipe Totec

Something nasty in the woodshed
The closeness of the vote meant that the result hinged on just 2% of those voting changing their minds.

I would not be surprised if any future important constitutional referendum will require more than a simple majority to effect change from the status quo.

Or a proportion of those who didn't vote because they assumed remaining was a done deal, to have turned out. Polls were 55% remain the day before the vote, iirc.

Full details haven't been announced, but if it goes ahead as planned, the 2023 Scottish Independence referendum will require the same simple majority & have the same question as in 2014.
 
D

Deleted member 49

Guest
Can't see it myself,it's still a toxic subject.As above maybe closer relations and re joining the customs union at best.
 
All UK referenda are advisory/consultative at the time they're held, that wasn't a special condition of Brexit.

The EU referendum, and the previous one in 1975, were advisory. The government was absolutely explicit about that in the case of 2016. However, once the Genie was out of the bottle the die was cast. The hi-jacking of the cause by right wing nut jobs preventing a pragmatic Brexit leaving us in the SM/CU is the real tragedy.

Some have been written into legislation as a consent mechanism. That was the case with Labour's first attempt at devolution to Scotland in 1978/9. According to Wiki:

An amendment to the Act stipulated that it would be repealed if less than 40% of the total electorate voted "Yes" in the referendum. The result was that 51.6% supported the proposal, but with a turnout of 64%, which represented only 32.9% of the registered electorate.

The same proviso applied to Wales but the majority there was for "no".

I think the one on the Alternative Vote was similar but only required a bare majority. In practice the only part of the UK voting Yes was Islington.

In the unlikely event the EU would have us then I think re-joining would require, as a minimum need a government standing on a manifesto with re-join at front and centre elected with a large majority. In practice you'd probably still need a referendum, or another election, to approve the terms of re-enter.
 

Craig the cyclist

Über Member
The EU referendum, and the previous one in 1975, were advisory.
I understand why, but this is repeated over and over. The assumption being that the UK government could have effectively rejected the result and remained in, which most on here would have been happy with.

As it was advisory though, the result could have been remain, but we could have come out anyway?

The reality of course is that most of you believe that if we voted remain we should remain, if we voted leave we should remain.
 

Ian H

Guru
I understand why, but this is repeated over and over. The assumption being that the UK government could have effectively rejected the result and remained in, which most on here would have been happy with.

As it was advisory though, the result could have been remain, but we could have come out anyway?

The reality of course is that most of you believe that if we voted remain we should remain, if we voted leave we should remain.

Your reality. Other realities exist.
 

Craig the cyclist

Über Member
Your reality. Other realities exist.
Am I wrong then?

For the last few years we have been told the referendum was advisory and should be ignored, by people who wished to remain.

So remain if the result was remain, remain if the vote was leave.

Feel free to offer another interpretation of that situation.
 
Top Bottom