Brexit: The economic toll nobody wants to face

The cost of Brexit in numbers: City, chlorinated chickens and Erasmus

When the 2016 referendum gave Leave a victory by more than a million votes, few imagined that seven years later the UK would still be debating whether the exit was a success or a disaster. The City of London, which generates 10% of UK GDP and directly and indirectly employs more than two million people, has been the epicenter of apocalyptic prophecies. The most optimistic speak of relocating financial services to Dublin, Paris or Frankfurt; the most pessimistic predict a loss of 20% of its capacity. So far, the balance is bittersweet: the City has not collapsed, but it has lost market share in derivatives and investment banking.

The political fight: May, Corbyn and the Westminster circus

The British Parliament has offered a spectacle worthy of a farce. Theresa May, surviving every internal challenge, managed to politically humiliate Jeremy Corbyn, whose party was as divided as the Conservatives. The indicative votes of April 2019 – with 16 options on the table – showed a parliament incapable of reaching agreement. The EU, meanwhile, imposed conditions: a short extension if May's deal was approved, a long one if European elections were called. The result: an extension until 31 October 2019, which later became Boris Johnson's deal and the effective exit on 31 January 2020.

The regulatory wall: from chlorinated chicken to Iberian ham

One of the hottest points was regulatory divergence. The EU requires producers to prove a food is safe; the US shifts the burden of proof onto the consumer. The British, when negotiating a trade deal with Washington, faced the possibility of importing chlorine-washed chicken – something Johnson's government had promised to ban but later silenced. Meanwhile, Spanish exporters of pata zaina ham gained access to the US market after years of certifications, demonstrating that American health controls are not a sieve. The discussion was not (only) about chlorine, but about a change of model: moving from a European precautionary system to one based on consumer responsibility.

Erasmus: the U-turn nobody expected

When the UK left the Erasmus programme, Brexit supporters called it "irrelevant" and "elitist." The data they handle is stubborn: between 2009 and 2012, an average of 12,000 British students went to the EU each year, compared to 23,000 Europeans arriving in the UK. Out of a total of 2.86 million university students, Erasmus students represented barely 0.52%. However, Keir Starmer's Labour government decided in 2023 to rejoin the programme, investing 570 million pounds. The reason, according to some sources, was not philanthropic: the EU linked re-entry to an agreement on veterinary controls. For critics, it is a symptom that promises to replace Erasmus with Commonwealth agreements were smoke.

Security and defence: ghosts of the Cold War

In the most recent messages of the debate, a retired general warns that the British Armed Forces would need at least ten years to be ready for a large-scale conflict, after years of budget cuts. The coincidence with geopolitical tensions (Iran, Greenland) and Mark Carney's speech about the possibility of the US becoming hostile add layers of uncertainty. The UK, which is not part of the single market or the customs union, negotiates ad hoc agreements with Brussels, but defence remains a front where promises of sovereignty clash with the reality of dwindling resources.

The balance after five and a half years

The objective data is elusive. The UK has lost its veto and its direct influence in the EU; it now negotiates bilateral agreements from a position of inferiority. For some, Brexit has been an economic and political suicide; for others, a liberation from a union in which it never fully fit (neither the euro, nor Schengen). The truth is that the country continues to pay fees – albeit smaller – and applying European regulations in many sectors in order to export. Local productivity has not grown as Brexiters promised, and the perception that the EU "is better off without them" has settled in the European collective imagination. Was it worth it? The debate remains open, and the thread that collects it has been active for more than seven years, with no sign of closing.

---

Note: This article is based on an intense digital debate that has been analysing every fold of Brexit for years. It is not intended to be a verdict, but a synthesis of the positions and data that have been emerging.