A decade on from the Brexit vote, the U.K. will have 7 prime ministers, hit a demographic trap, and taken a 6% hit to its economy

A decade ago today, June 23rd, 2016, 52% of the British electorate voted to leave the European Union. It was a massively consequential moment for the U.K.’s economy and political scene, and kicked off one of the most tumultuous decades in the country’s recent history.

On Monday, Keir Starmer announced he would resign as prime minister after two years in seat—something that may seem short for leaders of some countries, but for the U.K., ranks as one of the longer tenures in recent years. Nominations for a successor will open next month and a next party leader is likely to be decided soon after, at which point Starmer’s resignation will mark the end of a chaotic period filled with political whiplash that saw his Labour Party suffer devastating losses in local elections last month.

Starmer’s resignation paves the way to the premiership for Andy Burnham, the former mayor of Greater Manchester. If chosen by Labour, Burnham will become the U.K.’s seventh prime minister to have held office in the decade since Britons voted on the country’s new trajectory.

The years since have been a time of volatility unmatched in the U.K.’s recent political history, compounded by economic malaise and deep-rooted societal changes that will likely hold repercussions deep into the next decade and beyond.

With Starmer’s announcement, the outgoing prime minister brought a fittingly turbulent end to a chaotic decade, one that began with a similar strain of political upheaval.

This is because Brexit happened in NAME ONLY.

Immigration was their biggest issue, just like here in the States, and not only were the immigrants not deported, they doubled down on bringing more in.

We need to be deporting 10,000 aliens DAILY, just to get back to pre Biden 2020, and there were already 40 million here in the States back then.

Martial Law is the only answer, deport every illegal in the country, then hold honest elections on ELECTION DAY.

No early voting, no late voting, no non citizens voting, paper ballots and no machines that can be manipulated, and NO MAIL IN BALLOTS.

This country is in a democrat and RINO created doom loop, and if it isn’t stopped then America as a free and independent nation will be nothing but a memory, and the treasonous dirtbags who did this will be obscenities in the minds of future generations.

The problems in the British economy are not from Brexit. Those problems have been present since ousting Winston Churchill and embracing socialism in 1945. Unfettered and uncontrolled mass immigration, in a socialistic society burdens resources and forces up taxes. Those tax increases damage economic growth, domestic investment. The same acts force reductions in payments to individual nationals by the dependent migrants resulting in dilution. Thus, instead of creating a ‘safety net’ it becomes a giant trap for the working class, the economy, and the future, as well as the disabled, elderly, and children of the original nationals. You quickly have three classes: 1) The very rich who get richer. 2) The working who quickly become the working poor in larger numbers. 3) The welfare class who continuously vote themselves more benefits.

Britain’s problem is socialism and the use of public money for welfare support. The greed for that money is not only the needy, it’s the infrastructure that provides it. Graft and lack of real productivity created by the nanny system, replaces real goods and services creation. Here is where all ‘socialism’ and its variants end up, with a never ending expansion of public money requirements along with dependents to vote for it, that cripples and kills a Republic/ Democracy.

This ushers in the autocracy, lack of freedom, and the 20th century biggest killers like Mao, Stalin, and Hitler. Socialism always ends badly, and the above is why. The British are incapable, now as a people, to understand the trap, and will vote another socialist who will continue the failure, then blame Brexit.

All due to deliberate sabotage by its elites.

Gaia Worship. Totally unnecessary and a massive hit to the economy. The UK has the highest or 2nd highest energy costs in the world due to Gaia Worship. The result is massive inflation for consumers and impossible conditions for many businesses.

Trade. President Trump offered to fast track the UK for a trade agreement with America. Instead the elites in the UK decided to lick the EU's boot and accept a really crappy trade deal that made it like still being in the EU but now having no say at all about the laws and regulations they would have to enact.

Mass Migration. It was already bad, then there was the Boris Wave of about 4 million more 3rd world savages let into the UK which made things exponentially worse. That includes public services. That includes trash everywhere. That includes crime in general. That includes the systematic gang rape of a quarter million English girls as the Elites covered it up and facilitated it due to their fear of being called "racist" if they did anything to stop it.

All of these were CHOICES. They need not have happened. All of these awful choices have made things much much worse in the UK than they need have been. These are not due to Brexit either though the Yurp sycophants in the UK will try to claim they are so as to force the UK back into the EU which they never accepted being separated from.

“This is because Brexit happened in NAME ONLY.

Immigration was their biggest issue, just like here in the States, and not only were the immigrants not deported, they doubled down on bringing more in.”

—> Brexit was never legally structured around mass deportations. The UK’s Brexit withdrawal agreement legally protected the rights of the roughly 3.5 to 4 million EU citizens already living and working in the UK through the “EU Settlement Scheme.”

Note that most of these were white Europeans

as tot he ‘douled down’ - - it was boris johnson, the voice of the LEAVE vote who overhauled the immigration rules to bring in 944,000 non-EU in 2023 —> up from 250,000 in 2015. at the same time the EU numbers turned negative. To fill massive labor shortages in the National Health Service (NHS) and the social care sector, the government loosened visa requirements for countries outside the EU.

Brexit gave the UK government 100% control over its immigration policy. The post-Brexit spike happened because the British government used that control to actively issue hundreds of thousands of work and study visas to non-EU nationals to prop up its economy.

"President Trump offered to fast track the UK for a trade agreement with America. Instead the elites in the UK decided to lick the EU's boot and accept a really crappy trade deal that made it like still being in the EU but now having no say at all about the laws and regulations they would have to enact."

Note that President Trump promised the "massive," "fast-tracked" free trade agreement with the UK once it left the European Union. Formal negotiations actually began in May 2020.

The talks stalled because the US presidency changed. When Joe Biden took office in 2021, his administration deprioritized broad free trade agreements globally, shelving the UK talks. (A narrower "Economic Prosperity Deal" was only resurrected during Trump's second term).

At the same time British negotiators had to secure a deal with the EU because it is their largest, closest trading partner, accounting for roughly 50% of all UK trade.

the deal that Boris johnson's government signed in 2020 was a "hard Brexit" deal designed specifically to maximize UK sovereignty, not satisfy the "elites." It removed the UK from the EU Single Market and Customs Union, ending the jurisdiction of European courts over British laws.

this did NOT make it like still being in the EU - what you are describing is Norway's/Switzerland's relationship tot he EU. Under the current TCA, the UK is not forced to automatically adopt EU laws or regulations. The UK has complete legal autonomy to set its own standards. -- If a British company makes a car or a chemical and wants to sell it in the EU, it must comply with EU standards, otherwise the EU will block the product. This isn't because the UK is forced to enact EU laws domestically; it's the standard commercial reality of exporting to any foreign market.

I remember looking at these numbers - and they were huge, abotu 2.5 million people, but it was not 4 million. Where dod you see 4 million??

The post-Brexit migration spike was actually driven heavily by health care workers - nurses and doctors from India, Nigeria, the Philippines - these have low to no crime rate. The Brits also took in hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and Hong Kongers

The crime was overwhelming committed by those who came BEFORE 2016 and from non-EU countries

Brexit WAS the direct catalyst pushing Boris Johnson's (the leading voice of LEAVE) to increase non-EU migration.

Johnson explicitly created the Health and Care Worker Visa because the NHS was short over 100,000 workers after European nurses and doctors left -- they also had a massive shortage fo heavy goods

Brexit was badly managed:

They did NOT use the 2 year Article 50 countdown clock -- the UK did not use that time at all. The UK could have spent 12 to 18 months undertaking a rigorous, cross-party internal analysis to establish a definitive, realistic blueprint for the future relationship. Only after a clear domestic consensus and negotiation strategy were solidified should the clock have been started.
The UK had not managed an independent trade policy or large-scale customs borders in over 40 years. The civil service was forced to simultaneously negotiate the exit while rapidly hiring and training thousands of customs agents and building entirely new digital tracking systems from scratch under intense time pressure.

They ought to have remembered that this was a highly complex series of events rather than a one-time event,

Note that President Trump promised the "massive," "fast-tracked" free trade agreement with the UK once it left the European Union. Formal negotiations actually began in May 2020.

Note that they could have gotten this done and done pretty quickly and negotiations could have been worked out long before 2020 IF THEY WANTED TO. They didn't want to. Their intention all along was to stay tied to the EU as much as possible and they adopted the position that British voters should be "punished" for voting to leave the EU. UK Elites hate their own country and especially hate their own working class above all things on earth - and have for a very long time. Orwell even talked about how they would rather be caught stealing from the church offering for the poor than be caught singing the national anthem and this was in the 1940s.

This is just an excuse. The deal would have been done already had those in power in the UK wanted it done.

At the same time British negotiators had to secure a deal with the EU because it is their largest, closest trading partner, accounting for roughly 50% of all UK trade.

NOW. It wasn't before Britain joined the EEC and it likely wouldn't be had they adopted a free trade deal with the US, Canada, Australia, New Zeeland, etc. Yes, there would have been an adjustment period but it need not have been particularly painful.

The deal that Boris Johnson's government agreed to was certainly not a hard Brexit. The UK still "aligns with" the vast majority of all EU Regulations (only now they get no say in crafting those regulations). Further, the UK is saddled with making payments to the EU (called the "divorce bill"). The UK still pays fees to various pan European programs, still pays into the EU's foreign aid program, etc. That is anything but a balanced agreement between equals.

this did NOT make it like still being in the EU - what you are describing is Norway's/Switzerland's relationship tot he EU. Under the current TCA, the UK is not forced to automatically adopt EU laws or regulations. The UK has complete legal autonomy to set its own standards. -- If a British company makes a car or a chemical and wants to sell it in the EU, it must comply with EU standards, otherwise the EU will block the product. This isn't because the UK is forced to enact EU laws domestically; it's the standard commercial reality of exporting to any foreign market.

LOL! No. Britain adopts and "aligns with" a lot of EU regulations in order to trade with the EU. How many British regulations does the EU align with in order to trade with Britain? *crickets*. How much does the EU pay Britain for the privilege of trading with Britain? *crickets*. There is no agreement for services (especially financial services) which is the majority of the UK's economy. The EU doesn't recognize product certifications, professional qualifications, etc but UK businesses have to recognize the EU's. You can say that's because the EU is a larger market and yes, that is true BUT....if the UK had made a free trade deal with America, Canada, Australia, etc such that it had alternatives, it would have had the leverage to drive a much harder - read more equal - trade agreement with the EU. The British elites never even tried because they so desperately wanted to stay in the EU all along.

resident Trump promised the "massive," "fast-tracked" free trade agreement with the UK once it left the European Union. Formal negotiations actually began in May 2020.

Note that they could have gotten this done and done pretty quickly and negotiations could have been worked out long before 2020 IF THEY WANTED TO. They didn't want to.

What you are saying "they could have worked out the US-UK trade agreement long before 2020" was/is legally impossible --> The UK voted to leave in June 2016, but it didn't actually legally exit the EU until January 31, 2020. Legally, the UK could not open formal trade negotiations with the US until the clock struck midnight on Brexit day. President Trump and Boris Johnson actually opened formal trade negotiations in May 2020—just four months after it became legally permissible to do so.

The British Parliament completely fractured over how to leave. Some wanted a "Soft Brexit" (keeping close trade ties like Norway), while others wanted a "Hard Brexit" (breaking clean away). This political infighting took four years to resolve, which is why a US trade deal couldn't happen sooner --> this was because the referendum did NOT specify HOW to leave (i.e. what level of Brexit the voters wanted) - there should have been a followup referendum on HOW giving voters the options (and asking them to choose their second option if applicable):

Hard = no deal just WTO terms
like the EU-Canada - an FTA
like the EU-Norway - leave the EU, keep the single market

As the referendum didn't specify the HOW (and we argued about that) - politicians on all sides spent four years arguing that their specific version of Brexit was the one "the people" actually voted for.

"declared that the UK would leave the Single Market, leave the Customs Union, and completely end the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice."

to which he replied "This is just an excuse. The deal would have been done already had those in power in the UK wanted it done."

The real world evidence shows that they TRIED but the exact concessions required were too hard to stomach

under Boris johson, formal talks began almost immediately after Brexit in 2020. The UK aggressively pursued a deal, but negotiations stalled when the US presidency shifted to Joe Biden, who froze all broad free-trade talks.

The reason a massive, comprehensive deal wasn't signed overnight is because the trade-offs were deeply unpopular even with the HARD Brexit folks -- the Brits wanted Donald Trump to give British car manufacturers or tech firms free access to the American market, but did not want US agricultural goods - and this is by the ordinary Brits, even those who supported a HARD Brexit.

A Brit PM could have signed a deal on day one if they were willing to destroy the British farming industry and allow US drug companies to alter NHS pricing -- that would have triggered a massive revolt with Farage being against the deal

I remember looking at these numbers - and they were huge, abotu 2.5 million people, but it was not 4 million. Where dod you see 4 million??

"Grilled on his record on immigration, which has been thrown into sharp relief recently by an emerging narrative of a “Boriswave” that saw — the host noted — “between January 2021 and June 2024 4.3 million migrants” in a period where migrant arrivals gross was running at one million people every ten months, Johnson pointed the finger of blame." https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/10/15/boris-johnson-insists-migration-wave-blame-so-unfair/

Cristopher Caldwell "over 4 million migrants in the Boris Wave" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9bua4XxWQA

There are other sources as well citing the 4 million + number.

Chinese and Ukrainians were a small fraction. Large numbers came from India, Pakistan, Nigeria and the rest of West Africa and the vast majority of course were not NHS workers.

The crime was overwhelming committed by those who came BEFORE 2016 and from non-EU countries.

Currently about 9.4 million in the UK are immigrants and the Boris wave was about 4 million. So there were more before, but this made the problem so much worse. The non EU countries part is the problem. The Chinese are OK. Indians don't usually commit a lot of violent crime though they turn every place they live into a giant pig sty throwing their trash all over the streets, just dumping it into the rivers, etc. The Pakis, other muslims and Africans however are violent, organized gang rapists, etc. Albanians are organized criminals and drug smugglers and pimps in vastly disproportionate numbers but then again, they're muslims too.

Brexit WAS the direct catalyst pushing Boris Johnson's (the leading voice of LEAVE) to increase non-EU migration.

The UK Elites panicked because they're former source of cheap labor (ie eastern Europe) was being cut off so they decided to punish UK voters by importing 3rd world savages in huge numbers to serve as cheap labor and didn't care how much harm those 3rd world savages caused.

Johnson explicitly created the Health and Care Worker Visa because the NHS was short over 100,000 workers after European nurses and doctors left -- they also had a massive shortage for heavy goods.

As I said, the elites wanted their sweet sweet cheap labor. Of course many of the 3rd world savages have no job skills and don't speak English and are perfectly happy to live on the public dole and commit crimes to raise money on the side but the Elites in the UK who hate their own people aren't the least bit bothered by that.

Brexit was badly managed:

Deliberately so. Sabotage. Cloward Piven Strategy.

They did NOT use the 2 year Article 50 countdown clock -- the UK did not use that time at all. The UK could have spent 12 to 18 months undertaking a rigorous, cross-party internal analysis to establish a definitive, realistic blueprint for the future relationship. Only after a clear domestic consensus and negotiation strategy were solidified should the clock have been started.

They could have negotiated good trade deals with the rest of the Anglosphere first THEN come to the EU to deal with those already in their pocket and thus with far more negotiating leverage. Instead the chose to not do that and go to the EU cap in hand begging for scraps.

The UK had not managed an independent trade policy or large-scale customs borders in over 40 years. The civil service was forced to simultaneously negotiate the exit while rapidly hiring and training thousands of customs agents and building entirely new digital tracking systems from scratch under intense time pressure.

Yes there would have been a transition period but managing the basics of trade is not rocket science. It could have been done fairly quickly. Lots of other countries do it and they could have brought in a few consultants from other Anglosphere countries to advise them if necessary.

Oh come on! "formal"..."legal"??? This is just a technicality. Send a team. Negotiate behind closed doors. Tell everybody its not "formal" or "legal" but get it done. That could easily have happened if they had WANTED it to happen....and it could have started very quickly after the Brexit vote and been wrapped up within a year? two years? Quite easily.

A government looking out for the best interests of the UK would have carried out negotiations with others in the Anglosphere right away. Then they would have presented parliament with a real alternative option. They could go to the EU holding nothing but their Johnsons begging for scraps and with no leverage OR they could go to the EU and show them the trade agreements they had negotiated with the rest of the Anglosphere and played hardball in the trade negotiations with the EU. This is what anybody with even half a brain would have done.....if they actually WANTED to do what was in the best interest of their country.

Hard = no deal just WTO terms like the EU-Canada - an FTA like the EU-Norway - leave the EU, keep the single market As the referendum didn't specify the HOW (and we argued about that) - politicians on all sides spent four years arguing that their specific version of Brexit was the one "the people" actually voted for.

there is another alternative. "Intelligent = negotiate trade deals with your cousins quickly then go to the EU and tell them "we have the ability to just walk away but we'd prefer to make a reasonable deal with you and gosh, wouldn't we both be better off if we did at least make a reasonable deal with each other?"

Theresa May declared that the UK would leave the Single Market, leave the Customs Union, and completely end the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in 2017 even before formal talks began. By these locks, she ruled out the Norway option, and then she triggered Article 50. Ideally it should have been: 1. a “how do we do this brexit” referendum 2. then negotiate a “grace period” so the UK could conduct trade agreements. It would also need to rebuild trade negotiators.

You don't need a referendum from the voters on how to do Brexit. They elect you to handle such things. They just want Brexit done. OK. Negotiate deals with the Anglosphere so that Parliament has a couple of legitimate options to choose from. Instead they sat on their hands and did nothing. Then they were able to go to Parliament and say "we have no choice but to give the store away to the EU because otherwise we'll be suddenly cut off with no alternatives". That was a CHOICE on their part because they DID NOT WANT to really leave the EU. It was deliberate sabotage to force the outcome they always wanted.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.