All blogs

Research released today by the Food and Drink Federation shows that UK exports of food and drink to the EU are down by almost a third compared to 2019.

The 'trade snapshot', available here, shows UK exports are down 31% on pre-Brexit levels.

It says the huge drop in EU business is due to the complexities of trading with the EU, and calls on the government to help promote British products abroad and prioritise preparing businesses for the SPS Agreement, a deal which would help cut red tape involved in exporting UK products to the EU.

Sir Nick Harvey, CEO of European Movement UK, said:

"We cannot ignore this figure. A 31% loss in our food and drink exports is hammering our growers and producers, many to the point of simply giving up. The damage done by leaving the single market is egregious.

"Anyone claiming that this is a Brexit betrayal simply doesn't understand the dire situation our food industry has faced since the UK left the EU, when it mangled its trading relationship with its best customer.

"Farmers, growers, fisheries - they've all been hammered by extra red tape, which made them so uncompetitive in terms of exports that many of them simply gave up exporting to the EU, or went out of business altogether. The announcement of this deal will help not just them, but all of us in terms of food prices, at a time when the cost-of-living looks again set to increase for all of us on our food costs and energy bills."

David Catt, a fruit and vegetable farmer based in Kent and European Movement member, said:

"This reflects what all farmers already know - that trading with the EU has become much harder in the last five years. You've got dairy farmers going out of business on a weekly basis because they can't export because of the red tape. Producers are in a domestic market which simply doesn't buy enough, so they're stuck with produce they can't sell and can't export.

"Potatoes are down, milk is down, fruit is down - we need to get rid of the extra red tape as soon as possible, and the government making a deal with the EU is the only way to breathe life back into the UK farming, growing and fishing industries. It cannot come soon enough."

Ten years on from the referendum, Ireland shows why Britain should join the EU single market again.

Read more

On Wednesday 11 March, Business with Europe was officially launched at a packed event in the superb setting of the AMPA offices at The Shard, bringing together business leaders, entrepreneurs, professionals and trade organisations from across the UK. 

Read more

By Mark English, policy adviser to European Movement UK – personal views

The war in the Middle East has shown that the UK has no audible voice in Washington – indeed, President Trump has launched anti-British diatribes. So, if we want to be a player on the international stage, we need our voice and our vote in Brussels back - only membership of the EU will give us those, but that will take time. Meanwhile, the UK government’s reset with the EU needs an injection of ambition and urgency, to mitigate the already disastrous economic effects of the war.

The war is bringing major economic challenges

The conflict will not only increase energy bills. Food prices will also be hit in two ways. First, higher oil prices mean higher transport costs. And second, the supply and cost of fertilisers will be seriously affected, with a knock-on effect on food prices and potentially on the security of world food supply.

According to the government’s own Office for Budgetary Responsibility (OBR), all this will likely add a percentage point - possibly more - to UK inflation in 2026. That will make it harder for the Bank of England to keep interest rates low, a precondition for the growth the government hopes for in the run-up to the next election.

The UK now needs urgently to mitigate the coming energy price rises by negotiating -as promised - full participation in the single market for electricity.

It is also now even more urgent to agree a food trade (SPS) deal with the EU. There was a welcome sign this week, as the government began the groundwork to align UK rules with the EU. But even a wide-ranging SPS deal will only partly remove Brexit red tape – what we really need, as European Movement UK is arguing, is a return to the single market and customs union.  

A long-term commitment to Europe

For all of the damaging short-term effects, the most important lesson from the crisis is that the UK must make the long-term strategic choice to commit to Europe.

President Trump’s actions underline that the transatlantic alliance is no longer a basis for European security. This highlights the urgency of delivering on commitments to increase defence and associated spending to 5% of GDP. For the UK this means a rise of about £85 billion, from just over £60 billion annually to roughly £145 billion at current prices.

Estimates of Brexit’s hit to UK GDP vary from 4% to 8%. That corresponds to between £40 billion and £90 billion less in tax revenue every year. So at least half the necessary increase in defence spending - and perhaps even the whole lot! The only way to start getting that money flowing back into government coffers is to sweep away Brexit barriers to UK trade.

European countries also need to make defence spending more efficient. A key part of that must be a comprehensive European defence industry policy. Such a policy can only be delivered through the EU institutions. 

The UK cannot afford to be left on the sidelines and the EU cannot afford to leave the UK’s capacities outside its plans. The first step should be to re-open negotiations on UK participation in the SAFE defence investment fund. But UK participation as a ‘guest’ in EU initiatives will not allow us to influence the design of policies and funding schemes, nor to participate on the same level as member states. Only EU membership can do that.

A boost for Russia, a threat to China and to the UK

The war in the Middle East has strengthened Russia. The US is expending weapons and ammunition that may not now be available for Ukraine. And the rise in oil and gas prices and the need for China to replace supplies from Iran will boost Russia’s flagging economy. Ukraine needs more than ever the EU’s support and the prospect of joining soon. The further the UK goes towards reversing the Brexit that so delighted Vladimir Putin, the better placed the EU and the UK will be to back Ukraine.

Some thoughtful commentators see part of President Trump’s motivation for the US interventions in Venezuela and Iran as being to deny China cheap oil. The Chinese economy will certainly take a hit and that could make China even more assertive in defending its perceived geopolitical interests.

The EU is already acting, for example through its Industrial Accelerator Act to protect its economy from unfair Chinese competition. The war will further accelerate the global race for resources. So if the UK remains outside the EU’s drive for more ‘strategic autonomy’ in areas such as access to raw materials, we risk becoming ever more isolated. We cannot compete with highly interventionist trade and supply chain policies from three well-resourced behemoths at once – the US, China and the EU.

Environment, migration and populism

The war is causing catastrophic damage to the environment in the region and experts fear global ecological damage. With the US opting out of global environmental cooperation, coordination between the EU and UK has become all the more important. Environment policy is also inextricably linked with energy policy – as European Commission Vice-President Teresa Ribera said last week, the only way to protect our energy supply from turbulence in fossil fuel producing regions is to speed up the drive for clean and renewable energy. From the UK’s point of view, this is best done by working closely with the EU, until we can join it and argue within it for ambitious policy choices.

The war will create refugees. If it leads to internal conflict in Iran and/or to economic collapse, the numbers fleeing could increase significantly. Many will end up in Europe and some will want to come to the UK. The only way to deal with high levels of migration is through European-level cooperation. This – both in response to the Middle East situation and more generally - is a subject that should also be on the table in the EU-UK reset.

Finally, the war may boost populist parties across Europe, including the UK. In the short-term, Nigel Farage’s unpopular support for Trump is hitting Reform’s poll ratings. But come the next election, voters are likely to blame the government rather than Donald Trump for a darkening economic picture. More could turn to Reform. It is in the Labour government’s electoral interest to seize every opportunity to shore up the economy – and the biggest opportunity is to join the single market.

Time to come inside the tent

In other non-EU European countries, recent events have made public opinion more favourable to coming inside the EU tent. Iceland will hold on 29 August a referendum on reopening negotiations to join. The debate in Norway is at its liveliest for years. There is no doubt about Ukraine’s commitment to seeking membership, nor that of Montenegro or Moldova.

Meanwhile, the cost of staying outside will increase. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on 8 March that the war in the Middle East is the latest illustration that the EU needs to focus on “using our strengths in pursuit of our interests.” That hard-nosed view is likely to get even harder.

Against a global backdrop of conflict and upheaval, the UK’s rightful place is more than ever inside the EU, contributing our own strengths and benefitting from those of our partners. Outside, we risk being buffeted between an unpredictable and detached US, an assertive and resource-hungry China and a new European realpolitik over which we have no influence.  

Today, European Movement UK has launched the petition for the UK to join the EU single market.

For six years the UK has been outside the European single market, our largest trading partner and closest neighbour. Being outside it has been a catastrophe for our businesses, with more unnecessary trade barriers, more checks, more paperwork, more delays, lost investment, lost growth, lost jobs and business, and a divergence of rules and standards from the world’s largest trading bloc.

Businesses across the UK are speaking more loudly than ever and, hand-in-hand with them, our message to the UK Government is clear: it’s time for the UK to join the EU’s single market.

To deliver the economic growth we need to fund our public services, we need, and are calling for, a full reset of our economic relationship with Europe. We are calling on the Government to:

• Seek to join the single market and customs union.
• Ensure any negotiated arrangement includes the restoration of freedom of movement.
• Include small and medium-sized businesses in future engagement with the European Union.

Together, we can make sure that the Government takes the voice of British business seriously at the negotiation table.

Sign the petition now.

The UK government has today announced that, to cut red tape and costs for importing and exporting with the EU, the UK will align with most EU Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) legislation.

The announcement, published today by DEFRA, can be found here.

David Catt, a fruit and vegetable farmer based in Kent, said:

"UK farming exports to the EU are down 34% since Brexit. You've got dairy farmers going out of business on a weekly basis because they can't export because of the red tape. 

"Potatoes are down, peas are down, milk is down, fruit is down - we need to get rid of the extra red tape as soon as possible, so the government aligning with EU rules is an important step towards breathing life back into the UK farming, growing and fishing industries.

"Now the government should rapidly bring forward the legislation necessary to implement this announcement. At the same time, Ministers must urgently finalise the promised deal with the EU. That is key to providing the mutual confidence for vast swathes of Brexit red tape to be removed. This cannot come soon enough."

Dr Mike Galsworthy, Chair of European Movement UK, said:

"This is long overdue. This commitment to aligning laws is welcome in itself but realising the full benefits depends on getting a deal with the EU. That will make it much easier to export and import food products, reducing the red tape that led to lengthy lorry queues at the border. 

"Equally importantly, it can help keep down the cost of the food shop for British families, at a time when higher energy costs threaten to send the cost of living soaring.

“Anyone screaming that this is a Brexit betrayal simply doesn't understand the dire situation our food industry has faced since the UK left the EU, and cut trading ties with its closest partner."

At the beginning of this Parliament, against some stern opposition, the Government declined to establish a dedicated committee on European relations. As the Foreign Affairs Committee, chaired by former shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry, has now highlighted, that decision must be revisited.

For some time, the Government’s caution in describing its ambitions for the UK’s relationship with the European Union was understandable. Ministers were reluctant to overstate the prospect of a “reset” before there was enough substance behind it, or before the political conditions existed to sustain such a claim. A European scrutiny committee, with no European scrutiny to conduct, could have hung like a millstone around the neck of Keir Starmer. 

That caution was reasonable. But it is no longer sufficient. 

The UK-EU relationship is now moving into a more structured phase. The pattern of engagement is becoming more regular, the agenda more extensive, and negotiations more organised. As that happens, the House of Commons needs a scrutiny structure that reflects the reality of the relationship now taking shape. 

This is a straightforward constitutional point. As the UK’s relationship with the EU becomes more developed and systematic, Parliament must have the means to examine it properly. That requires more than occasional debates, and more than scrutiny dispersed across departmental select committees. Those committees do important work, but they are not designed to provide a continuous, cross-cutting view of the UK-EU relationship as a whole. 

The lack of a dedicated European Scrutiny Committee matters because the issues under discussion do not sit neatly within departmental boundaries. Trade is often bound up with regulation. Security cooperation can involve data, legal frameworks and institutional questions. The alignment of UK law with EU law, or indeed divergence from it, poses challenges in terms of both parliamentary procedure and minimising trade barriers on the ground. Individual agreements may appear limited in isolation, but together they can amount to a significant shift in the overall character of the relationship. The House of Commons should be able to assess that wider picture clearly and consistently. 

A dedicated European Scrutiny Committee would provide the mechanism to deliver this.  

It would allow MPs to examine negotiations as they develop, consider the cumulative effect of agreements, and hold ministers to account for the broader direction of policy. In other words, it would give the elected House the institutional capacity to scrutinise a relationship that is once again in flux and becoming more complex and consequential. 

They should not be viewed through the lens of the cantankerous European Scrutiny Committee of the “Get Brexit Done” parliaments. On the contrary, stronger parliamentary oversight could make any improvement in our trading and diplomatic relationship with the EU more durable. A closer relationship must carry the legitimacy that comes from visible, serious and democratic scrutiny. A deal done in the dark by ministers will not command the legitimacy that our EU politics now demands. 

There is already cross-party recognition of, and support for, this principle. Stella Creasy, Chair of the Labour Movement for Europe, has been consistent in calling for MPs to have a meaningful role in the reset and realignment of UK-EU relations. Even voices from the opposite end of the argument, such as Richard Tice, have argued that Parliament must not be side-lined in shaping the country’s future relationship with Europe.  

European Movement UK is proud to lead the secretariat of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Europe because it is a forum which has real value. It has helped sustain discussion across parties and keeps the UK’s relationship with Europe firmly on the parliamentary agenda. But an APPG cannot substitute for a select committee of the House of Commons. It does not have the same formal authority, the same powers, or the same role in holding ministers and departments to account. The APPG would instead aim to work alongside a new European Scrutiny Committee, providing a wider channel for both civil society and the public to engage with the open and democratic process of parliamentary scrutiny.

A dedicated European Scrutiny Committee is the sensible and proportionate response to the stage the relationship has now reached. If ministers are serious about building a more constructive and better organised agreement with the European Union, they should also be serious about ensuring that it is properly scrutinised by the elected House. 

Today, the Chancellor has said in her spring statement that Brexit has cut the UK off from its closest trading partners.

Rachel Reeves also said she would announce three new changes in a speech in three weeks' time, including 'breaking down trade barriers with our European neighbours.'

It comes a month after the Chancellor said she would push for closer integration with the EU, to reduce the trade barriers put up by Brexit.

The economic impact of Brexit so far in facts and figures 

• Brexit is on course to cut UK trade intensity by 15%, the Government’s independent financial watchdog has warned. (Source: OBR) 
• Brexit has cut the UK economy by £140 billion, while London's economy has lost more than £30 billion. The same report suggests the UK will be more than £300 billion worse off by 2035. (Source: Cambridge Econometrics) 
• The CER uses a similar estimate, putting the economic loss at 5% of UK GDP, or around £130 billion. (Source: CER) 
• Estimates suggest that by 2025, Brexit had reduced UK GDP by 6% to 8%, with the impact accumulating gradually over time. "We estimate that investment was reduced by between 12% and 18%, employment by 3% to 4% and productivity by 3% to 4%." (Source: National Bureau of Economic Research)

So how much could closer trade ties with the EU help the UK's economy?

Research last year showed that deep alignment in both goods and services could grow GDP by 1.7% to 2.2%. Alignment on goods alone could boost GDP by 1% to 1.5%.

Dr Mike Galsworthy, Chair of European Movement UK, said:

"This decade has seen the UK economy on life-support, with some of the worst growth in a century. There is an obvious treatment right on our doorstep, but the government has so far ignored it. Rachel Reeves's comments today in her Spring Statement perhaps signal that they are finally ready to break down the barriers that Brexit imposed on UK businesses, and take real steps to align with our closest trading partner.

"Every month we delay discussing a customs union or single market access with the EU, or dynamic alignment or a proper sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement, more contracts move to Rotterdam or Düsseldorf and never come back. The UK-EU reset cannot just be a summit photo, it must mean market access. The UK's economic woes are the true cost of a bad deal. It is time to stop managing decline and start rebuilding a trading relationship that actually works for British industry."