Hubbry Logo
Glossary of Brexit termsGlossary of Brexit termsMain
Open search
Glossary of Brexit terms
Community hub
Glossary of Brexit terms
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Glossary of Brexit terms
Glossary of Brexit terms
Glossary of Brexit terms
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Look up Appendix: Brexit glossary in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Part of a series on
Brexit

Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union

Glossary of terms
Background
2016 referendum
Campaigns
Leave campaigns
Remain campaigns
Outcome
Notice of withdrawal
Negotiations
Withdrawal agreement
Legislation
Impact
EU–UK relations
Relations with EU member states
Opposition
Calls for a second referendum
Timeline
Bloomberg speech Jan 2013
Referendum Bill blockedJan 2014
European Parliament election May 2014
2015 general election May 2015
Renegotiation begins Jun 2015
Referendum Act passed Dec 2015
Renegotiation concluded Feb 2016
Referendum held Jun 2016
David Cameron resigns as PM Jul 2016
Theresa May becomes PM Jul 2016
Article 50 judgement Jan 2017
Brexit plan presentedFeb 2017
Notification Act passed Mar 2017
Article 50 invoked Mar 2017
Repeal Bill plan presentedMar 2017
2017 general election Jun 2017
Brexit negotiations begin Jun 2017
Withdrawal Act passedJun 2018
Chequers plan presented Jul 2018
Withdrawal agreement plan presented July 2018
Withdrawal agreement released Nov 2018
Scottish Continuity Bill blockedDec 2018
Meaningful votes Jan–Mar 2019
Brexit delayed until 12 April Mar 2019
Cooper–Letwin Act passed Apr 2019
Brexit delayed until 31 October Apr 2019
European Parliament election May 2019
Theresa May resigns as PM Jul 2019
Boris Johnson becomes PM Jul 2019
Prorogation and annulment Aug–Sep 2019
Benn Act passed Sep 2019
Withdrawal agreement revised Oct 2019
Brexit delayed until 31 January Oct 2019
2019 general election Dec 2019
Agreement Act passed Jan 2020
UK leaves the European Union Jan 2020
Implementation period begins Jan 2020
UK–EU trade deal agreed Dec 2020
Future Relationship Act passed Dec 2020
Scottish Continuity Act passed Dec 2020
Implementation period ends Dec 2020
New EU–UK relationship begins Jan 2021
UK–EU trade deal ratified Apr 2021
Windsor Framework released Feb 2023
Windsor framework adopted Mar 2023

In the wake of the referendum held in the United Kingdom on 23 June 2016, many new pieces of Brexit-related jargon entered popular use.[1][2]

The word "Brexit" was named as Word of the Year 2016 by the publishers of Collins English Dictionary.[3]

A

[edit]
Article 50
Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union specifies the procedure of withdrawing from the European Union. It was introduced in the Treaty of Lisbon from 2009. Under the process, once the formal notification has been sent, the withdrawing state and the European Union have a two-year deadline to negotiate a withdrawal agreement. After that time, unless an extension has been agreed or the withdrawing state revokes its intention to withdraw, the membership ends regardless of whether or not an agreement was reached. If an agreement has been reached before the deadline, the withdrawing state may end their membership at any time before the deadline. On 29 March 2017, UK Prime Minister Theresa May triggered the procedure.[4]
Australian-style deal
A euphemism popularised by Boris Johnson to refer to a no-deal Brexit in which the United Kingdom would be placed in the same position in relation to the European Union as Australia which does not possess an existing trade agreement.[5] The term WTO rules has a similar meaning referring to the default provisions governing international trade under rules set by the World Trade Organization (WTO).

B

[edit]
Backstop
See Irish backstop
Blind Brexit
A scenario where the UK leaves the EU without clarity on the terms of a future trade deal.[6][7] EU and British negotiators would then have until 31 December 2020 to complete a future trade deal. During this transition period the UK would effectively be treated as an EU member in many areas, but with the right to negotiate international trade agreements and no voting rights in the EU.[8][9] Also known as a "Blindfold Brexit".
Bremain
A portmanteau of "British" and "remain"; used to refer to the option in the 2016 referendum to remain in the EU.[10][11][12]
Brexit
Brexit (like its early variant, Brixit)[13] is a portmanteau of "British" and "exit". Grammatically, it has been called a complex nominal.[14] The first attestation in the Oxford English Dictionary is a Euractiv blog post by Peter Wilding on 15 May 2012.[15][16][17] It was coined by analogy with "Grexit", attested on 6 February 2012 to refer to a hypothetical withdrawal of Greece from the eurozone (and possibly the EU altogether, although there was never a clear popular mandate for it).[18][19][17] The UK membership of the European Union ended at 11 p.m. GMT on 31 January 2020, when a transition period began until the end of 2020 for UK and EU to negotiate further treaty arrangements in respect of their future trading relationship.[20]
Brexit day
See also: § Exit day
31 January 2020, the day the UK ceased to be a member of the EU. The date was originally set for 29 March 2019 at 11 p.m. GMT, but was moved three times: first to either 12 April or 22 May, depending on whether or not a withdrawal agreement was ratified; then to 1 July or 31 October, depending on whether or not the UK held European Parliament elections; and finally to 31 January 2020.[21]
Brexiteer/Brexiter
See Leaver
Brextremist
portmanteau of "Brexiter" and "Extremist", a pejorative term used by some outlets to describe Leavers of an overzealous, uncompromising disposition.[22][23][24]
Brexshit
A derogatory variant of Brexit, used chiefly by its opponents.[25][26][27] It is a portmanteau of the terms Brexit and shit (a profane word referring to faeces).
Brextension
A word coined to describe the extension granted until 31 January 2020 (a portmanteau of Brexit and extension).[28]

C

[edit]
Canada plus/Canada model
This is shorthand for a proposal in which the UK signs a free trade agreement with the EU. This would allow the UK to control its own trade policy as opposed to jointly negotiating alongside the EU, but would require rules of origin agreements to be reached for UK–EU trade. It is likely this would lead to UK–EU trade being less "free" than joining the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), and result in additional border controls being required, which is an issue of contention, particularly on the island of Ireland. The Canadian–EU deal took seven years to negotiate, but some Brexiteers argued it would take much less time between the UK and EU as the two participants already align on regulatory standards.[29] (Others aimed for regulatory divergence as a matter of principle.)
Chequers plan
A July 2018 white paper by the UK government, setting out its wishes for the UK's future relationship with EU. The plan was agreed at a cabinet meeting at Chequers, and caused a number of resignations.[30] When the UK and EU agreed a draft withdrawal agreement and the related political declaration in November 2018, the Chequers plan was superseded by that political declaration.[31]
Clean break Brexit
See No-deal Brexit. This term is used primarily by proponents of a no-deal Brexit,[2] in particular the Brexit Party.[32] Also known as "clean brexit".
Customs union
See EU Customs Union

D

[edit]
Divorce bill
The UK agreed to settle outstanding financial commitments that it had approved while a member of the EU. The amount owed is officially referred to as the financial settlement but has informally been referred to as an exit bill or divorce bill.[33] The UK's Office for Budget Responsibility estimate of the amount at the original planned date of Brexit in March 2019 was £38 billion.[34] Following delay of the UK's exit until 31 January 2020, after normal member contributions payable up to that date, a final settlement of £33 billion was estimated.[35][36] This estimate was updated in July 2024 to £30.2 billion.[37]

E

[edit]
EU customs union
The customs union of the EU: an agreement that members do not impose taxes on goods imported from one another, and have a common tariff for goods imported from non-members countries.[38] Being in a customs union facilitates trade and economic cooperation, but leaving the EU customs union allows the UK to conduct its own trade policy.[39] In the 2019 withdrawal agreement, all of the UK will leave the EU customs union, which creates a de jure customs border on the Republic of Ireland–Northern Ireland border. In practice, customs checks will be performed at ports and airports in Northern Ireland, and taxes will be paid for goods that are "at risk" of being moved from Northern Ireland into the Republic of Ireland.[40]
See also Irish Sea border, Northern Ireland Protocol, Windsor Framework, and Brexit and the Irish border.
Exit day
See also Brexit day
UK domestic law has defined "exit day" for the purpose of dealing with the domestic consequences of Brexit, but the date is not formally linked to UK's departure from the EU.[41]

F

[edit]
Fish for finance
The juxtapositioning in post-Brexit negotiations of EU access to UK natural resources on the one hand and UK access to the EU financial services market on the other. Fishermen in the eight European countries whose waters border the UK's would like to maintain something close to the level of access they have enjoyed under the EU Common Fisheries Policy, as they depend heavily on many species found in the UK's rich waters, while British fishermen want the European presence in UK waters to be limited. At the same time, UK financial institutions would like to keep the access they presently have to customers in the EU as it currently accounts for a significant part of their business, while the EU wants to make sure Britain's regulations are as strict as its own before it allows this.[42]
Flextension
A "flextension" was how the House of Commons Library described the first extension made to the Article 50 period. That extension was until 22 May 2019 if the Theresa May Withdrawal Agreement was approved by the House of Commons, otherwise it was until 12 April.[43]
A "flextension" was also how European Council president Donald Tusk characterised the extension to 31 January 2020, which allows the UK to leave before the deadline, on the first of any month, if by then a deal has been approved by the UK and European parliaments.[44]

H

[edit]
Hard and soft Brexit
"Hard Brexit" and "soft Brexit" are unofficial terms that are commonly used by news media[45] to describe the prospective relationship between the UK and the EU after withdrawal. A hard Brexit usually refers to the UK leaving the EU and the European Single Market with few or no deals (trade or otherwise) in place, meaning that trade will be conducted under the World Trade Organization's rules, and services will no longer be provided by agencies of the European Union (such as aviation safety).[46] Soft Brexit encompasses any deal that involves retaining membership in the European Single Market and at least some free movement of people according to European Economic Area (EEA) rules.[47] Theresa May's "Chequers agreement" embraced some aspects of a "soft" Brexit.[48] Note that the EEA and the deal with Switzerland contain fully free movement of people, and that the EU has wanted that to be included in a deal with UK on fully free trade.
Hard border
An Ireland–Northern Ireland border with physical border installations.[38][49] The UK and EU both desire to prevent a hard border, but finding a way to achieve this has proved difficult.[49] A hard border is feared because it might endanger the Good Friday Agreement that in 1998 ended the Northern Ireland conflict.[1][49] With both Ireland and the UK a member of the EU, customs checks were not necessary,[49] and the Good Friday Agreement removed security checks at the border.[1] The draft withdrawal agreement, as updated in October 2019, avoids a hard border by keeping Northern Ireland aligned with some EU regulation, while performing customs checks at the Irish Sea border.[40]

I

[edit]
Indicative vote
Indicative votes are votes by members of parliament on a series of non-binding resolutions. They are a means of testing the will of the House of Commons on different options relating to one issue.[50] MPs voted on eight different options for the next steps in the Brexit process on 27 March 2019; however, none of the proposals earned a majority in the indicative votes.[51] MPs also voted on four options on 1 April 2019 in the second round of indicative votes. Still, none of the proposals earned a majority.[52]
Implementation period
The period ending on 31 December 2020 at 11 p.m. GMT, as stated in section 39 of European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill 2019–20. The UK-EU withdrawal agreement uses the wording transition period, while the EEA-UK separation agreement has implementation period.
Irish backstop
An "insurance policy" intended to prevent a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, and thus respecting the Good Friday Agreement.[4][53] It was included in the 2018 draft withdrawal agreement, and would come in force if no solution to the Irish border problem was found during the transition period. Under the plan, the UK would remain in a customs union with the EU, while Northern Ireland and, to a lesser extent, the rest of the UK would follow additional EU rules.[4] The backstop was controversial because critics feared it would bind the UK to the EU for an indefinite time,[54] and the UK could not withdraw from it unilaterally.[55] In October 2019, the withdrawal agreement was revised, and the Irish backstop was replaced with the Article 18 of the Northern Ireland Protocol which provides for a four-year period in which Northern Ireland would remain aligned with certain EU laws. This arrangement can be extended for further four-year periods for as long as the Northern Ireland Assembly assents by simple majority vote.[56]

L

[edit]
Leaver
Those supporting Brexit are sometimes referred to as "Leavers".[57][58] Alternatively the term "Brexiteers",[59][60] or "Brexiters" has been used to describe adherents of the Leave campaign.[61][62][63][64]
Level playing field
A collective term referring to the proposed commitment to abiding by common environmental, labour and social standards set in EU law as a pre-condition for British access to the Single Market under a prospective trade deal.[65] It is determined by the commitment to avoiding regulatory arbitrage that might bestow an undue competitive advantage to British firms.
Lexit
Also Lexiter. A portmanteau of left-wing and Brexit,[66] referring to left-wing advocacy of EU withdrawal.[67][68][69]

M

[edit]
Meaningful vote
A meaningful vote is a vote under section 13 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, requiring the government to arrange for a motion proposing approval of the outcome of negotiations with the EU to be debated and voted on by the House of Commons before the European Parliament decides whether it consents to the withdrawal agreement being concluded on behalf of the EU in accordance with Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union.[70]
Managed no-deal
"Managed no-deal Brexit",[71] or "managed no deal Brexit",[72] was increasingly used near the end of 2018, in respect of the complex series of political, legal and technical decisions needed if there is no withdrawal agreement treaty with the EU when the UK exits under the Article 50 withdrawal notice. The Institute for Government has advised that the concept is unrealistic.[73]

N

[edit]
No-deal Brexit
This means the UK would leave the European Union without a withdrawal agreement,[74] and/or without a trade deal with the EU.
Further information: No-deal Brexit
Northern Ireland Protocol
The 'Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland', commonly abbreviated to the 'Northern Ireland Protocol', is a protocol to the Brexit withdrawal agreement that governs the unique customs and immigration issues at the border on the island of Ireland between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the European Union, and on some aspects of trade in goods between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom.[75]
Norway model/Norway-plus model
The 'Norway model' is shorthand for a model where the United Kingdom leaves the European Union but becomes a member of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and the European Economic Area. EFTA and EEA membership would allow the UK to remain in the single market but without having to be subject to the Common Fisheries Policy, Common Agricultural Policy, and the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The UK would be subject to the EFTA court for interstate disputes, which largely shadows the ECJ, would have to transfer a large amount of EU law into UK law, and would no longer have any direct say on shaping new EU rules (some of which the UK would be obliged to transpose into UK law). The UK would also retain reciprocal freedom of movement between the EU and UK, which was seen as a key issue of contention in the referendum.[76]
The 'Norway-plus model' proposed a similar but closer relationship with the EU: this proposed in addition that the UK would join the European Union Customs Union.

P

[edit]
People's Vote
An advocacy group launched in April 2018 which calls for a second referendum on the final Brexit deal. The People's Vote march is part of a series of demonstrations against Brexit.
Political declaration
A document setting out the intended future relationship between the UK and EU. The declaration formed the basis for the trade agreement negotiations that started once the UK left the EU.[4] Unlike the withdrawal agreement which is a legally binding treaty, the political declaration had no legal force.[77]

R

[edit]
Rejoiner
Those in favour of the UK rejoining the EU are sometimes referred to as "Rejoiners".[78][79][80][81]
Remainer
Those in favour of the UK remaining in the EU are often referred to as "Remainers".[82]
Remoaner
Portmanteau of "Remainer" and "moan", used pejoratively by Leavers to describe a subset of Remainers, especially those that criticised or campaigned to undo the result after the referendum.[83][61][63]

S

[edit]
Second referendum
A second referendum has been proposed by a number of politicians and pressure groups. The Electoral Commission has the responsibility for nominating lead campaign groups for each possible referendum outcome.[84]
Singapore-on-Thames
A model for the post-Brexit British economy that proposes that the UK deregulate and offer businesses a lower tax burden as an alternative to the EU, much like Singapore does in Asia.[85][86]
Slow Brexit
The term "slow Brexit" was first coined by Prime Minister Theresa May on 25 March 2019 as she spoke to Parliament, warning MPs that Article 50 could be extended beyond 22 May, slowing down the Brexit process. A 'slow Brexit' implies a longer period of political uncertainty in which members of Parliament will debate a sequence of steps of Britain's departure from the European Union.[87][88]

T

[edit]

Take back control:

  • A pro-Brexit phrase implying that Britain's sovereignty and ability to make its own laws had been lost by its membership of the EU and would return after withdrawal.[89][90][91][92][93][94]

W

[edit]
Windsor Framework
The 'Windsor Framework' is a post-Brexit legal agreement between the EU and the UK, designed to address problems with the movement of goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland (and thus to the EU Single Market) arising from the Northern Ireland Protocol.
Withdrawal agreement
A treaty between the UK and the EU, setting out the terms for the UK's withdrawal. The first version was agreed in November 2018[77] but was rejected by the UK parliament three times.[95] The agreement contained the contentious Irish backstop, which was one of the reasons for opposition to it.[49] The failed ratification led to the resignation of the UK prime minister, Theresa May,[95] and her successor Boris Johnson sought to renegotiate it despite the EU's refusal to do so.[96] In October 2019, the EU and the new UK government agreed a new version of the withdrawal agreement, with the backstop replaced by a different solution to the Irish border problem.[56] The new agreement passed its second reading in the House of Commons in December 2019, following a general election in which the Conservatives won a decisive majority.[97]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Glossary of Brexit terms

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A glossary of Brexit terms documents the distinctive lexicon of acronyms, phrases, and concepts that emerged from the United Kingdom's exit from the , an unprecedented geopolitical rupture initiated by the 23 June 2016 in which 51.9 percent of voters opted to leave. This specialized terminology arose amid protracted negotiations under Article 50 of the , addressing citizens' rights, financial obligations, the Irish border, and future trade relations, reflecting the causal complexities of disentangling decades of integrated economic and legal ties. The UK's formal departure occurred at 11:00 p.m. GMT on 31 January 2020, followed by a transition period ending 31 December 2020, during which terms like "Withdrawal Agreement," " period," and "" became central to ary debates and public discourse. Defining characteristics include neologisms denoting strategic divergences—such as "hard " for a clean break from rules versus "soft " for closer alignment—and politically charged labels like " means ," which underscored commitments to sovereignty restoration amid empirical challenges in border management and regulatory divergence. Controversies embedded in the glossary highlight negotiation flashpoints, including the "backstop" protocol for avoiding a hard Irish border, which fueled domestic divisions and accusations of undue EU leverage, as evidenced by its renegotiation into the . Overall, the glossary encapsulates the causal realism of as a sovereign recalibration, prioritizing empirical trade-offs over supranational integration, though revealed persistent frictions in areas like fisheries quotas and state aid rules.

A

Article 50

Article 50 of the (TEU) establishes the legal mechanism for a to voluntarily withdraw from the , stipulating that any such state may decide to leave in accordance with its own constitutional requirements and must notify the of its intention to do so. Following notification, the EU negotiates and concludes a withdrawal agreement with the state, accounting for future relations, under the ordinary legislative procedure outlined in Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU); this agreement requires approval by qualified majority and consent. The treaties cease to apply to the withdrawing state upon the withdrawal agreement's or, absent agreement, two years after notification, unless the unanimously agrees with the state to extend the period; the withdrawing state is excluded from relevant EU decision-making during this phase. Introduced by the 2007 Lisbon Treaty, which entered into force on 1 December 2009, Article 50 formalized withdrawal for the first time in law, replacing earlier assumptions of perpetual membership under the founding treaties. Prior to , no provision existed for orderly exit, though Article 50 drew from precedents like the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, emphasizing negotiated terms over unilateral severance. The article's two-year default timeline aims to balance unity with sovereign exit rights, but it permits extensions only by consensus, preventing indefinite delays without mutual accord. In the United Kingdom's case, formally invoked Article 50 on 29 March 2017 by delivering a notification letter to President , initiating after the 2016 endorsed leaving the by 51.9% to 48.1%. This triggered the two-year countdown, originally set to conclude on 29 March 2019, during which talks focused on citizens' rights, financial settlements, and the Irish border; the UK Parliament authorized invocation via the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 after rulings affirmed its necessity. Negotiations yielded the Withdrawal Agreement in November 2018, but parliamentary defeats prompted three extensions: first to 31 October 2019 (agreed 22 March 2019), shortened to 31 January 2020 (28 October 2019), and finally implemented on 31 January 2020 at 23:00 GMT, transitioning to a non-EU status with a subsequent implementation period until 31 December 2020 for trade and other alignments. The process highlighted Article 50's rigidity, as the UK's repeated delays required EU27 unanimity, underscoring the provision's design to incentivize swift resolution while exposing leverage dynamics—e.g., the EU's insistence on sequencing talks (divorce terms before future partnership) to safeguard its legal order. Post-withdrawal, re-accession would revert to Article 49 TEU's full accession procedure, requiring unanimous approval and no fast-track privileges from prior membership. Article 50 has since influenced debates on "ever closer union," with critics arguing it enabled populist exits but proponents viewing it as a democratic safeguard against supranational overreach.

Acquis Communautaire

The acquis communautaire, a French term translating to "Community heritage," denotes the comprehensive corpus of European Union law encompassing primary treaties, secondary legislation, judicial precedents from the Court of Justice of the European Union, international agreements, and fundamental principles that collectively bind member states and form the evolving legal framework of the EU. This body of law, accumulated progressively since the Treaty of Paris in 1951 and expanded through subsequent treaties like Maastricht (1992), Amsterdam (1997), Nice (2001), and Lisbon (2007), requires full acceptance and implementation as a precondition for EU membership or accession, ensuring uniformity across the single market, customs union, and other policy domains. As of 2023, the acquis comprises over 120,000 legal acts, including regulations, directives, and decisions, with ongoing additions via new legislation and rulings. Prior to Brexit, the , as an EU member from 1 January 1973 until its withdrawal, was fully subject to the acquis, which underpinned its participation in the , requiring alignment on trade standards, competition rules, environmental protections, and free movement provisions without veto power over its development. This obligation persisted during the invocation of Article 50 on 29 March 2017 and throughout the negotiation of the Withdrawal Agreement, ratified on 29 January 2020, which formalized the 's exit effective 31 January 2020. A subsequent transition period, extending to 31 December 2020, prolonged adherence to the acquis to facilitate orderly divorce proceedings and trade talks, during which the lacked voting rights in EU institutions but continued paying budgetary contributions estimated at €39 billion net. Post-transition, the UK's European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 transposed the acquis into domestic "retained EU law," preserving approximately 4,000 regulations and 200 directives as of exit day while enabling parliamentary divergence through mechanisms like the repeal of supremacy of EU law and reinterpretation of retained case law. This severance allowed regulatory autonomy, exemplified by subsequent reforms in areas such as retained EU law on data protection (UK GDPR divergence from GDPR via the Data Protection Act 2018 amendments) and financial services, where the UK has pursued equivalence-based access rather than dynamic alignment. However, the Trade and Cooperation Agreement of 24 December 2020 incorporates level-playing-field commitments to prevent drastic unilateral divergence in state aid, environmental standards, and labor rights, reflecting EU insistence on upholding core acquis principles to avert competitive distortions. In Northern Ireland, Protocol arrangements under the Windsor Framework (2023) mandate ongoing alignment with select acquis elements for goods to maintain open borders, highlighting persistent tensions between sovereignty and practical economic integration.

B

Backstop

The backstop, formally the or , was a contingency arrangement in the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement designed to prevent the reintroduction of a hard border on the island of after , thereby upholding the commitments of the 1998 . It would activate only in the absence of a broader EU-UK trade deal ensuring frictionless trade across the Irish border, with the UK remaining in a with the EU and aligning with certain EU rules for goods to avoid regulatory divergence necessitating border checks. Under the backstop provisions outlined in the November 2018 draft Withdrawal Agreement, would continue participating in relevant customs and regulatory frameworks, while would face customs checks on goods moving to , effectively creating an internal border to prevent smuggling or non-compliant goods entering the via . The arrangement required mutual consent from the and to terminate, lacking unilateral exit mechanisms, which was intended as an insurance policy but raised concerns over . The backstop emerged as a core negotiation sticking point after the UK invoked Article 50 on March 29, 2017, with the prioritizing avoidance of physical infrastructure at the Irish border to protect the and market integrity. Prime Minister agreed to the backstop's principle in December 2017, but its full details in the 2018 protocol fueled opposition from Brexit hardliners, who argued it indefinitely subordinated trade policy to veto and partitioned the economically. The rejected May's deal, including the backstop, three times in 2019—on January 15 (432-202), February 12 (391-242), and March 29 (344-286)—citing its permanence as undermining 's purpose. In October 2019, incoming renegotiated the protocol, replacing the full-UK backstop with targeted -specific alignments to rules, allowing the as a whole to exit the while imposing checks on GB-NI goods flows. This revised Protocol on and entered force on January 31, 2020, with the backstop mechanism formally superseded, though ongoing implementations have sparked disputes over trade frictions.

Blue Passport Brexit

The navy blue British passport, reintroduced after the United Kingdom's departure from the European Union on January 31, 2020, marked a symbolic reversion to the pre-1988 design, featuring the words "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" without reference to the EU. This change restored the traditional dark blue cover first adopted in 1921, which had been replaced in 1988 with a burgundy color to voluntarily align with a non-binding European recommendation for machine-readable passports among member states. The decision to revert was announced by the on December 22, 2017, as part of preparations, emphasizing national identity and over supranational uniformity. Initial production began in early 2020, with the first blue passports issued on March 4, 2020, coinciding with the end of the EU transition period's approach. By mid-2020, the burgundy versions were phased out entirely, though existing valid burgundy passports remained usable until expiry. The redesign included biometric features and internal pages showcasing British achievements, but the cover color shift drew public debate over its perceived political symbolism versus practical utility. Production of the new passports was outsourced to a Franco-Dutch firm, Thales DIS, with manufacturing in Poland, leading to criticism that it undermined claims of post- self-reliance despite the design's nationalist framing. As of July 18, 2023, the design updated to reference King Charles III, maintaining the blue cover without substantive changes to functionality or security standards. In discourse, the "blue passport" became a shorthand for regained control over national symbols, though travel requirements for Britons entering the tightened to 90 days in any 180-day period without visa-free work rights.

Brexiteer

A Brexiteer is a supporter or advocate of the United Kingdom's , often emphasizing national sovereignty, immigration control, and economic independence from regulations. The term gained prominence during the 2016 membership , where 51.9% of voters opted to leave, and persisted through the subsequent parliamentary debates and exit negotiations culminating in the UK's formal departure on January 31, 2020. Etymologically, "Brexiteer" combines "Brexit"—a portmanteau of "Britain" and "exit" first used in 2012—and the suffix "-eer," evoking terms like "privateer" or "musketeer" to denote an active proponent or campaigner. In political discourse, it typically refers to figures within the Conservative Party, UK Independence Party (UKIP), or broader Eurosceptic movements who pushed for a "hard" Brexit, rejecting compromises like the Chequers proposal or customs union retention. Notable examples include Nigel Farage, who led the Vote Leave campaign and advocated for zero EU budget contributions post-exit, and Boris Johnson, who as Foreign Secretary in 2018 criticized "Brexit in name only" arrangements as undermining the referendum's democratic mandate.

BRINO

BRINO is an acronym for Brexit in name only, a term originating among Eurosceptic politicians and commentators to criticize proposed UK-EU arrangements that formally end membership but preserve substantial regulatory alignment, access for goods, or elements, thereby limiting restored in lawmaking, trade policy, and borders. The phrase was coined by , Conservative MP and chairman of the , in a January 2018 interview, where he warned against outcomes falling short of full detachment from EU structures. The term proliferated during negotiations under Prime Minister , particularly against the proposal outlined in a on 12 2018, which advocated a "facilitated customs arrangement" and common rulebook for goods to enable frictionless trade while permitting independent trade deals elsewhere. Hardline Brexiteers, including members of the , rejected it as BRINO for subjecting the to dynamic EU rule alignment without reciprocal influence or escape clauses, prompting resignations from ministers like David Davis on 8 2018. Post-withdrawal, BRINO has resurfaced in critiques of the 2020 UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement or implementations, where ongoing EU-derived standards in areas like chemicals regulation (REACH) or are seen by some as perpetuating dependency despite formal exit on 31 January . Analogous to "RINO" in American political discourse, it underscores demands for verifiable divergence to validate the 2016 referendum's 51.9% Leave vote.

Brexit

Brexit denotes the withdrawal of the from the , a process initiated after a on 23 2016 in which 51.89% of valid votes were cast in favor of leaving, compared to 48.11% for remaining, with a turnout of 72.2%. The term combines "Britain" (or "British") with "exit," reflecting the UK's departure from the bloc it joined in 1973. The referendum result prompted to invoke Article 50 of the on 29 March 2017, starting a two-year period for withdrawal terms. Negotiations focused on the 's financial obligations, citizens' rights, the Irish border, and future relations, culminating in the Withdrawal Agreement ratified by the Parliament in 2020. The formally exited the at 11:00 p.m. GMT on 31 2020, entering a transition period until 31 December 2020 during which law continued to apply and trade negotiations proceeded. This period ended without extension, leading to new customs checks and regulatory divergences. Post-transition, the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, signed on 30 December 2020 and provisionally applied from 1 January 2021, established a zero-tariff, zero-quota framework for goods trade while introducing non-tariff barriers such as and sanitary checks. The agreement also covers cooperation in areas like fisheries, aviation, and energy but excludes financial services passporting and . Separate protocols addressed Northern Ireland's status to avoid a hard , incorporating the later amended by the in 2023. Brexit's economic effects included a estimated 4-5% long-term GDP reduction relative to remaining in the EU, per analyses from institutions like the , though proponents highlight regained and deals with non- nations. patterns shifted, with net migration falling post-2016 while non- inflows rose, aligning with voter concerns over expressed in the . over laws, borders, and waters was restored, enabling independent and divergence from standards in areas like and data protection.

C

Canada-Plus

Canada-Plus is a proposed framework for the United Kingdom's post-Brexit economic relationship with the , modeled on the (CETA) between the and , which entered provisional application in 2017 and eliminates tariffs on 98% of goods traded between those parties. The "plus" denotes ambitions for deeper integration than CETA in areas such as services, mutual recognition of standards, and regulatory cooperation, reflecting the UK's larger trade volume with the —accounting for about 44% of UK goods exports in 2016—compared to 's more distant economic ties. This approach envisions the UK exiting the single market and customs union, regaining control over borders, laws, and trade policy, while negotiating a (FTA) to mitigate barriers. The term gained prominence in December 2017 when David Davis, then Brexit Secretary, described the government's target as "Canada plus plus plus," signaling a comprehensive surpassing CETA's scope, including provisions for (which comprise over 7% of GDP) and digital trade, without accepting regulatory oversight or free movement of people. Proponents argued it would preserve sovereignty while avoiding the "cliff-edge" of (WTO) terms, under which average EU tariffs stood at 5.1% for UK exports in 2018, though non-tariff barriers like checks would persist at borders, particularly affecting Ireland-Northern Ireland trade. Critics, including EU negotiators, viewed "plus" elements skeptically, insisting any deal include level-playing-field commitments to prevent undercutting via deregulation, as hinted in EU guidelines emphasizing CETA-like obligations over bespoke enhancements. In practice, Canada-Plus contrasted with closer-alignment options like the Chequers proposal, which sought facilitated customs arrangements and single market alignment for goods to eliminate most checks; Canada-Plus rejected such dynamic alignment, accepting frictions like customs declarations for 15-30% of trade not covered by an FTA. It aligned with "hard Brexit" preferences among Conservative lawmakers, prioritizing regulatory independence over frictionless trade, though economic analyses projected GDP losses of 4-5% long-term under CETA-like deals due to services exclusions and supply-chain disruptions. The eventual UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement, ratified in December 2020, incorporated Canada-Plus features—zero tariffs on qualifying goods, limited services access, and fisheries quotas—but with added EU demands for state aid rules and environmental standards, diverging from pure sovereignty gains. This outcome underscored causal limits: geographic proximity and integrated supply chains (e.g., automotive parts crossing borders multiple times) made full CETA replication impractical without concessions, as evidenced by post-2021 border delays in Great Britain-Northern Ireland trade under the protocol.

Chequers Proposal

The Proposal refers to the framework for the 's future relationship with the agreed upon by the Cabinet during a meeting at Chequers, the Prime Minister's country residence, on 6 July 2018. This agreement was formalized in a three-page cabinet statement and expanded in the The Future Relationship between the and the , published on 12 July 2018. The proposal sought to deliver a "principled and practical" by establishing a for goods, including a common rulebook for industrial goods, , and fisheries to ensure frictionless trade and avoid a hard border , while allowing the to pursue an independent trade policy in services and diverge on rules for chemicals, medicines, and professional qualifications. It also proposed a facilitated customs arrangement using technology to collect tariffs without physical checks, alongside a new framework for replacing free movement but facilitating short-term mobility for and . The proposal's core mechanism involved the UK aligning with EU rules on goods to maintain regulatory compatibility, with joint bodies to manage disputes and updates, though the UK would not participate in EU decision-making. Proponents, including , argued it balanced with restoration, honoring the 2016 by ending EU law supremacy, contributions to the budget, and Court of Justice jurisdiction while preserving just-in-time supply chains vital for industries like automotive . However, it explicitly rejected single market membership for services or a customs union, aiming instead for mutual recognition agreements in areas like and data. Reactions were sharply divided, triggering immediate resignations from senior Brexit supporters including Brexit Secretary David Davis on 8 July 2018 and Foreign Secretary on 9 July, who criticized it as subordinating interests to the EU. The , propping up May's , rejected it for potentially creating regulatory divergence between and , undermining internal market integrity. The deemed the plan unworkable, with leaders at the September 2018 Salzburg summit declaring it unacceptable, particularly the partial alignment and "cherry-picking" of rules, leading May to accuse the EU of disrespect and prepare for no-deal scenarios. Ultimately, the proposal collapsed, influencing but not surviving into the November 2018 withdrawal agreement, which adopted a temporary backstop for instead of the full Chequers framework.

Cherry-Picking

In the context of Brexit, cherry-picking refers to the practice of selectively accessing specific benefits of the European Union's , , or regulatory frameworks without accepting the full package of associated obligations, such as , regulatory alignment, or contributions to EU budgets. The term draws from the of picking only the ripest cherries from a bowl while discarding the rest, symbolizing an approach to EU integration that undermines the indivisibility central to the bloc's architecture. The consistently rejected cherry-picking during , viewing it as incompatible with the integrity of the , which relies on the (goods, services, capital, and persons) operating as an inseparable whole. EU chief negotiator articulated this stance in July 2017, stating explicitly that "there is no cherry-picking on Brexit," emphasizing that partial access would create unfair competitive advantages and precedent for other non-member states. German Chancellor reinforced this in 2017, declaring that Brexit talks could not proceed on a cherry-picking basis, as it would erode the EU's bargaining cohesion among its 27 member states. members echoed this in June 2020, uniting behind Barnier's position against the UK's proposed sector-specific arrangements, such as retaining full access to or fisheries without reciprocal commitments. UK proposals, including the 2018 Chequers plan under , were criticized by the as attempting "double cherry-picking" by seeking facilitated customs arrangements for goods while pursuing independent trade deals elsewhere, a formulation dismissed in a leaked EU assessment as unfeasible without full alignment. This rejection stemmed from empirical precedents in EU external agreements, where third countries like or access markets via comprehensive deals rather than piecemeal selections, as partial deals historically lead to trade diversion and enforcement challenges under World Trade Organization rules. By late 2020, the Trade and Cooperation Agreement formalized the EU's stance, granting the UK tariff-free trade but excluding single market cherry-picking, with provisions for dynamic alignment in areas like state aid to prevent regulatory arbitrage. Post-Brexit, the term's rhetorical intensity waned; by May 2025, EU officials retired the "no cherry-picking" amid improved UK-EU relations under Keir , though underlying principles persisted in specialized pacts like the for , which balanced with safeguards against selective benefits. Critics from pro-EU perspectives argued cherry-picking accusations overlooked the UK's sovereign right to diverge, while EU sources maintained it protected the bloc's causal incentives for membership, where benefits correlate directly with rule adherence to avoid free-riding.

Cliff-Edge

In the context of Brexit, the "cliff-edge" describes the scenario wherein the exits the without a withdrawal agreement or transitional arrangements, resulting in an immediate and unbuffered reversion to (WTO) terms for trade and regulatory relations. This term, prominently used by Brexit opponents during negotiations, evokes the sudden imposition of tariffs, quotas, border checks, and the loss of mutual recognition for standards, potentially disrupting just-in-time supply chains in industries such as automotive manufacturing and pharmaceuticals. Such a no-deal outcome carried risks of acute economic shocks, including estimated GDP contractions of up to 2-5% in the short term according to analyses by organizations like the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, alongside operational halts in cross-border services like financial clearing and licensing, where existing EU passports would expire without replacements. In financial markets, cliff-edge effects could manifest as breakdowns in derivative contracts governed by EU law or restrictions on firms' access to venues, prompting preemptive relocations of operations valued at over €1 trillion in assets by mid-2019. The prospect intensified around key deadlines, such as the original Article 50 exit date of March 29, 2019, when the UK Parliament rejected Theresa May's deal thrice, heightening no-deal preparations that included stockpiling medicines and issuing guidance on food exports facing up to 30% tariffs on certain goods. Contingency measures by the , enacted in December 2018, temporarily mitigated some disruptions in areas like fisheries and citizens' rights but explicitly excluded comprehensive trade safeguards. A cliff-edge was ultimately averted through the November 2018 Withdrawal Agreement, ratified on January 31, 2020, which established a transition period extending access until December 31, 2020, during which negotiations for a future partnership continued. This was followed by the EU- Trade and Cooperation Agreement, provisionally applied from January 1, 2021, replacing WTO defaults with tariff-free quotas in goods trade—though introducing non-tariff barriers like rules-of-origin requirements and sanitary checks that still imposed frictions estimated at 4-5% additional costs on EU- goods flows. Despite avoidance of the acute no-deal drop, residual uncertainties persisted in services, where exports faced ongoing regulatory without full equivalence.

Customs Union

A customs union is a free trade arrangement in which participating countries eliminate tariffs and quantitative restrictions on substantially all trade in goods between themselves while adopting a common external tariff and unified trade policy toward non-members. The European Union Customs Union, established under the 1957 Treaty of Rome and fully implemented by 1968, encompasses all 27 EU member states and associated territories, enabling the free circulation of goods without internal customs controls or declarations, provided origin rules are met. This union extends beyond tariffs to include harmonized product standards, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, and a common commercial policy, preventing members from independently negotiating trade deals that could undermine the collective external tariff. Prior to Brexit, the United Kingdom participated fully in the EU Customs Union as a member state, subjecting its external trade policy to EU competence since accession in 1973. The UK formally exited the union at the end of the Brexit transition period on 31 December 2020, following the 31 January 2020 withdrawal date, thereby regaining sovereignty over its tariffs, import quotas, and ability to pursue bilateral trade agreements. This departure introduced customs declarations, potential tariffs, and rules-of-origin checks on UK-EU goods trade, contrasting with the prior frictionless internal movement. In Brexit negotiations, the customs union emerged as a central flashpoint, embodying the tension between economic integration and regained regulatory autonomy. Proponents of remaining in or closely aligning with the union, including the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn, argued it would preserve tariff-free access and minimize border disruptions, particularly to avert a hard customs border in Ireland under the Good Friday Agreement. However, the Conservative government under Theresa May and later Boris Johnson rejected permanent membership, viewing it as incompatible with Brexit's core aim of an independent trade policy to strike global deals, such as the UK's post-exit agreements with Australia (2021) and New Zealand (2022). Proposals like May's 2018 Chequers plan for a "facilitated customs arrangement"—using technology to track goods and apply tariffs dynamically—sought to replicate benefits without ceding control but were rebuffed by the EU as tantamount to cherry-picking. The 2018 backstop provision in the Withdrawal Agreement temporarily bound the UK to the union to safeguard Irish border openness, but it was replaced by the Northern Ireland Protocol (later amended by the 2023 Windsor Framework), which aligns Northern Ireland partially with EU rules while allowing the rest of the UK to diverge. Post-exit, the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), effective from 1 January 2021, functions as a rather than a , offering zero tariffs and quotas on most goods originating in either party but requiring procedures, non-tariff barrier compliance, and level-playing-field safeguards. Leaving the union has enabled the UK to reduce tariffs on 47% of imports below EU levels by 2023 and negotiate 14 continuity or new deals covering 51 countries, though empirical analyses indicate a 15-20% drop in UK-EU goods volumes attributable to new frictions. These outcomes reflect the causal : enhanced policy flexibility at the cost of administrative burdens and potential economic drag, with long-term net effects debated amid ongoing adjustments like the UK's Global Tariff schedule.

D

Divorce Bill

The divorce bill, formally known as the financial settlement in the -EU Withdrawal Agreement, comprises the United Kingdom's agreed contributions to discharge outstanding financial obligations arising from its membership in the prior to . These obligations stem primarily from multi-annual budget commitments approved jointly by EU member states, including the , during its tenure, which extend beyond the exit date of , 2020. The settlement ensures the honors its proportionate share of these pre-existing liabilities rather than a punitive exit fee, though negotiations framed it as a condition for orderly withdrawal and future talks. Negotiations on the settlement began in 2017, with the initially seeking up to €100 billion in gross terms to cover budget shortfalls post- departure, while the government under rejected figures exceeding £20 billion as exaggerated. By late 2018, under the framework, the offered around £39 billion, encompassing transition period payments, which the accepted in principle as part of the November 2018 draft withdrawal agreement. The final accord, ratified in December 2020, fixed the 's liability as a of total obligations calculated at withdrawal, adjusted for assets like -held buildings and reserves, without a single lump-sum payment but via scheduled installments through 2064 for certain contingent items like pensions. The settlement breaks down into three main categories: payments during the transition period (July 2020 to December 2020), covering the UK's full pro-rata share of the 2020 budget at approximately €13.6 billion (£11.9 billion); direct settlement of past commitments, including unfunded EU projects and guarantees totaling around €18-20 billion; and long-term provisions for civil servant pensions and other contingent liabilities, estimated at €5-10 billion payable over decades. The UK retains claims on EU assets, such as contributions to the , potentially offsetting up to €10 billion. As of July 2024, the estimated the at £30.2 billion, with £23.8 billion disbursed, though the Office for Budget Responsibility projected €42.2 billion (£38.7 billion) accounting for and fluctuations. Critics, including fiscal conservatives, argued the settlement overstates liabilities by including speculative future EU spending not yet incurred, potentially inflating costs due to optimistic EU budget assumptions, while EU auditors in 2021 valued outstanding commitments at €41.8 billion (£36.7 billion). Proponents emphasized that defaulting would breach international law on state commitments and risk trade barriers, as the EU conditioned future partnership talks on settlement compliance. Payments continue annually, with the bulk front-loaded but tail risks extending far into the future, reflecting the causal reality that EU budgeting locked in multi-year pledges binding departing members proportionally.

E

EEA

The European Economic Area (EEA) comprises the member states of the (EU) and three states of the (EFTA)—Iceland, , and —enabling participation in the EU's internal market through the EEA Agreement. This agreement extends the EU's (movement of goods, services, capital, and persons) to EEA EFTA states, requiring them to adopt relevant EU , contribute to EU cohesion funds, and participate in select EU programs like research and education initiatives, while excluding areas such as agriculture, fisheries, and foreign policy. The EEA Agreement was signed on 2 May 1992 in , , and entered into force on 1 January 1994, following ratification amid initial delays due to a ruling on the agreement's compatibility with EU law. In the Brexit process, the EEA served as a reference for the "Norway option," a proposed post-withdrawal model where the would join EFTA to access the without full membership. This arrangement would have entailed accepting EU rules dynamically (via incorporation into domestic law), compliance with free movement of persons, and limited influence over EU through consultative mechanisms like the EEA Joint Committee, but no voting rights in EU institutions. Proponents argued it minimized disruptions, yet the UK government rejected it, citing inadequate control over borders (due to mandatory free movement), regulatory (as EEA EFTA states must align with EU rules without co-decision), and exclusions from key sectors like fisheries, alongside the inability to pursue independent global deals. The , as an member, was automatically a party to the EEA until its EU withdrawal on 31 January 2020, which simultaneously terminated EEA participation; no transitional EEA status was negotiated, and subsequent UK-EU relations proceeded under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement ratified in December 2020, eschewing EEA-style single market access. EFTA states expressed reservations about UK accession, emphasizing the need for full acceptance of EEA obligations including free movement, which conflicted with UK red lines.

EFTA

The is an intergovernmental organisation founded on 3 May 1960 by seven European states—Austria, Denmark, , , , , and the —to promote free trade in industrial goods among members while avoiding supranational political integration. Unlike the contemporaneous , EFTA focused on tariff elimination without common external tariffs or shared sovereignty. The UK acceded to the EEC and withdrew from EFTA effective 1 January 1973, reducing membership over time as other states joined the EEC or EU; current members comprise (joined 1970), (1991), , and . EFTA operates as a , with members maintaining internal customs unions for goods and negotiating collective free trade agreements (FTAs) with third countries, including bilateral deals with the for non-EEA EFTA states like . Three EFTA members (, , ) participate in the (EEA), granting access subject to EU rules on goods, services, persons, and capital, plus EEA Court oversight, while relies on over 120 separate EU accords. EFTA retains flexibility for members to pursue independent trade policies outside EU frameworks. In , rejoining EFTA emerged as a proposed model for UK-EU relations, often termed the "EFTA/EEA option" or "Norway-plus," enabling participation without EU membership, , or full political alignment. This approach, debated in motions such as indicative vote H on 1 April 2019, would have required accepting free movement of people, dynamic alignment with EU regulations, and financial contributions, but offered no formal influence over EU law-making. Advocates, including some economists and groups, highlighted preserved and regulatory familiarity, yet it faced opposition from Leave proponents for insufficient sovereignty recovery and from Remain supporters for lacking EU decision-making power. The government rejected it, prioritising independent trade policy and border controls, as evidenced by the 2020 Trade and Cooperation Agreement excluding EEA-style integration. Following , the secured an EEA EFTA- agreement effective 1 January 2021, covering goods, services, investment, and other areas to ensure trade continuity with EFTA states, superseding prior EU-mediated arrangements. EFTA Secretariat statements post-referendum indicated openness to re-accession, contingent on resolving internal -EU dynamics.

F

Frictionless Trade

Frictionless trade denotes the aspiration for tariff-free trade accompanied by minimal non-tariff barriers, such as regulatory , customs declarations, and rules-of-origin verifications, enabling to flow across borders with negligible administrative or physical delays. In Brexit discourse, the term encapsulated the UK government's objective to approximate the seamlessness of trade while exiting that framework, regaining sovereignty over regulations, , and . Theresa May first emphasized pursuing "as close to frictionless trade as possible" in during negotiations, explicitly outside the and with an end to free movement of people. The concept featured prominently in May's Mansion House speech on 2 March 2018, where she advocated for mutual recognition of standards—allowing products approved in one jurisdiction to circulate freely in the other—and a "combined " for goods regulation to eliminate duplicative assessments. This vision aimed to preserve efficiencies, particularly for just-in-time sectors like automotive, which relied on integrated EU-UK production. To operationalize frictionless trade, the Chequers proposal of 6 July 2018 proposed a for goods underpinned by a "common rulebook" for product standards and dynamic alignment with select regulations, alongside a facilitated arrangement where imports would pay the higher of or tariffs, with refunds for excess, to avoid border posts. The arrangement sought to track goods via trusted trader schemes and technology, minimizing physical checks while permitting the independent for non- partners. Critics, including EU negotiators and UK Eurosceptics, contended that true frictionlessness necessitated full participation, as divergences in rules inevitably trigger verification needs to prevent unfair competition or safety risks; the EU deemed incompatible with its indivisibility of the and internal market integrity. The proposal fractured May's cabinet and was rebuffed by the in October 2018, leading to its abandonment. The eventual UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement, ratified 29 December 2020, eliminated tariffs and quotas on compliant goods but imposed new frictions including mandatory customs paperwork, origin proofs, and inspections, with UK-EU goods volumes declining 13.2% in 2021 relative to 2019 baselines per . These outcomes underscored the causal : sovereignty gains entailed verifiable controls incompatible with pre-Brexit seamlessness, as partial alignment could not negate all compliance divergences without reciprocal .

G

Global Britain

"Global Britain" refers to the United Kingdom's articulated post-Brexit foreign, security, and trade policy framework, introduced to assert the country's role as an independent global actor unbound by constraints. The term gained prominence after the June 2016 , with first employing it in a December 2, 2016, speech at the Lord Mayor's Banquet, framing the UK as a "" pursuing a "truly global " through enhanced , defense, and commerce beyond . This vision responded to Brexit's disruption of the UK's prior EU-centric orientation, aiming to restore historical attributes of and while consolidating national identity amid internal divisions. Core components include forging independent agreements, bolstering military capabilities for "Global Britain" projection, and upholding a rules-based international system, as detailed in documents like the June 2018 "Global Britain: delivering on our international ambition" collection and the March 2021 of Security, Defence, Development and . The policy emphasized replacing over 40 EU third-country deals via continuity agreements—achieved for most by 2021—and pursuing new pacts, such as the free agreement effective December 2022 and accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for (CPTPP) on July 16, 2023, involving 11 economies representing 15% of global GDP. Foreign Secretary Dominic outlined pillars in 2021, including free advocacy and security partnerships like , announced September 2021 with the and for nuclear-powered submarines. Implementation has yielded mixed empirical outcomes, with rhetoric prioritizing gains but data revealing shortfalls. goods exports to non-EU countries rose modestly post-2020, yet overall intensity with the EU fell by 15% from 2019 to 2022 due to new barriers, contributing to a 4-5% long-term GDP reduction per estimates as of 2023. New deals like CPTPP are projected to add just 0.08% to GDP by 2035, per analysis, while bureaucratic hurdles in ports and supply chains have increased costs, undermining competitiveness claims. Critics, including analyses from think tanks, contend the masks limited diversification, with only 73 continuity deals secured by 2023 and few transformative bilateral wins, prompting calls for pragmatic EU realignment over expansive global ambitions. sources, inherently promotional, emphasize aspirational actions like increased spending pre-2021 cuts, but independent assessments highlight causal links between frictions and stalled "Global Britain" delivery, prioritizing verifiable metrics over declarative successes.

H

Hard Brexit

Hard Brexit denotes the United Kingdom's exit from the without retaining membership in the EU's or , thereby introducing tariffs, non-tariff barriers, and customs checks on unless offset by a bespoke . This scenario emphasizes regaining full over domestic laws, controls, and negotiations, accepting short-term economic disruptions as inherent to disentangling from supranational structures. The absence of a deal would default to terms, with average EU tariffs of around 5% on UK exports and regulatory divergence amplifying frictions in supply chains. Distinguished from soft Brexit—which envisions partial alignment, such as continued single market access via arrangements like the —hard Brexit rejects ongoing EU regulatory oversight or , enabling independent trade pacts with non-EU nations. Advocates, including figures like during the 2016 , framed it as essential for "taking back control," projecting long-term gains from and global orientation despite initial GDP impacts estimated at 2-8% by fiscal analyses. Critics, often from remain-aligned institutions, highlighted risks to just-in-time manufacturing and , with projections of £100 billion annual trade losses under no-deal conditions. The concept crystallized in post-referendum debates, with Prime Minister Theresa May's 17 January 2017 speech endorsing a hard approach by pledging to end EU court supremacy and participation. No-deal variants, termed "very hard" or "cliff-edge" Brexit, loomed as deadlines neared, prompting contingency planning for border queues and stockpiling. In execution, the pursued hard via the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, ratified on 30 December 2020, which secures zero tariffs on most goods but mandates rules-of-origin compliance and excludes automatic services access, marking a baseline separation with ongoing adjustments via the for specifics.

I

Irish Sea Border

The Irish Sea border refers to the customs, regulatory, and sanitary/phytosanitary controls imposed on goods moving between and to enforce 's partial alignment with rules post-Brexit. This de facto internal UK frontier emerged from the , annexed to the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement signed on 24 January 2020 and operative from 1 January 2021, which requires to follow EU customs territory provisions and relevant single market regulations for goods to avert physical border infrastructure on the land frontier with the . The Protocol's rationale stems from UK commitments under the 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement to maintain an open , achieved by shifting checks to maritime routes rather than erecting posts on the 310-mile land boundary, which could risk renewed tensions. Under the Protocol's terms, particularly Articles 4-10, goods from to undergo assessments for "at risk" status—meaning potential diversion to the single market—triggering requirements for customs declarations, origin proofs, and compliance with standards on product safety, labeling, and animal/plant health. Ports like , , and host these operations, with infrastructure including inspection facilities for up to 40% of freight volume initially targeted for checks, though grace periods deferred full rollout; for example, zero-checks applied to certain retail movements until phased introductions proposed in May 2021 for onward. This setup has imposed costs estimated at £1 billion annually for businesses in compliance and logistics, exacerbating supply disruptions in sectors like supermarkets and construction materials. Political and economic frictions prompted revisions via the , agreed bilaterally on 27 February 2023 and implemented from 1 October 2023, which reframes the border through a dual-lane system: a "green lane" for trusted traders' goods proven for / consumption (e.g., via manifests and labeling), bypassing most checks and duties akin to domestic trade, and a residual "red/orange lane" for higher-risk EU-bound items retaining EU-aligned scrutiny. The Framework also eliminates export declarations for -to-Great Britain shipments, permits -specific VAT/excise rates on more items (e.g., energy products), and introduces a "Stormont brake" allowing the to block new EU goods laws if opposed by a cross-community threshold of 30 members from multiple parties. Despite these mitigations, food and agri-food checks persist under green-lane exemptions limited to certified retailers, with full dismantling deferred until at least 2027 per government confirmation in August 2025. Unionist parties, including the , have contested the border's legitimacy, arguing it undermines Article 6 of the by treating as a distinct economic territory, fueling assembly suspensions (e.g., 2022-2024) until Windsor concessions restored . The holds consent mechanisms under Article 18, enabling periodic votes post-2024 on continuing Protocol elements, though none have terminated them to date. Overall, the border sustains intra-UK trade volumes—exceeding £20 billion annually pre-Brexit—but with persistent frictions, as evidenced by 2023-2025 data showing reduced but non-zero inspection rates (under 5% for green-lane goods) and ongoing EU-UK Joint Committee oversight.

L

Level Playing Field

The (LPF) provisions in the context of constitute commitments within the UK-EU and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) to maintain comparable standards in areas such as state aid, taxation, , social protections, and environmental regulations, thereby preventing one party from gaining unfair competitive advantages through or subsidies that could distort . These mechanisms aim to foster open and fair without requiring ongoing regulatory alignment, distinguishing them from the EU's internal market rules where is mandatory. Negotiations over LPF commitments intensified after the UK's 2019 general election victory for the Conservative Party, which prioritized and rejected automatic mirroring of laws, contrasting with the 's insistence on robust safeguards to protect its from potential undercutting—fears rooted in the 's ability to diverge post-withdrawal on 31 2020. The 's position, articulated in its March 2020 negotiation directives, emphasized "core industrial standards" to avoid a regulatory , while the proposed looser non-regression pledges limited to preventing active lowering of protections. This impasse contributed to delays, with the TCA's LPF chapter finalized only on 24 December 2020 after compromises that balanced demands for enforceability against preferences for . Under Title XI of the TCA, effective from 1 January 2021, both parties commit to upholding levels of protection in labor and social standards (e.g., core conventions), environmental measures (aligned with the ), and effective enforcement against and aggressive fiscal planning, with prohibitions on reducing standards below those in force on the agreement's . State aid rules mandate transparency, non-discrimination, and adherence to common principles like market economy investor principles, subject to review by the Partnership Council. Dispute resolution involves mandatory consultation via a Joint Committee, escalating to independent ; significant divergences threatening or can trigger a "rebalancing" process, allowing compensatory measures such as tariffs if unresolved within 30 days. Implementation has seen limited formal disputes, though tensions persist; for instance, the initiated consultations in October 2021 over UK subsidies for British Steel, resolved without escalation, highlighting the provisions' role in facilitating cooperation rather than rigid alignment. Critics from pro-sovereignty perspectives argue the LPF curtails UK regulatory freedom, potentially anchoring policy to EU baselines despite formal divergence options, while EU officials maintain it prevents competitive distortions without imposing supranational oversight. The framework's effectiveness depends on mutual restraint, as unilateral divergence risks retaliatory actions under the agreement's safeguards.

Leaver

A Leaver refers to a supporter of the United Kingdom's exit from the , particularly voters who backed the "Leave" option in the 2016 membership conducted on 23 June 2016. In that advisory vote, 17,410,742 ballots (51.9 percent) favored leaving, compared to 16,141,241 (48.1 percent) for remaining, with a turnout of 72.2 percent across the UK electorate. Primary motivations for Leavers centered on regaining over UK laws, exerting full control over policy, and redirecting funds previously contributed to the EU budget toward domestic priorities such as the . Post-referendum analysis indicated that 49 percent of Leave voters prioritized , while 33 percent emphasized restrictions, reflecting concerns over supranational authority and border management. Demographic patterns showed Leavers skewing toward older voters (over 65 years old supported Leave by 60 to 40 percent), those with lower (Leave won 70 percent among individuals without higher education), and residents in economically disadvantaged regions outside major urban centers. The Leave vote prevailed in (53.4 percent) and (52.5 percent), but faltered in (38 percent) and (44.2 percent), underscoring regional divides tied to historical EU integration experiences and economic dependencies. Prominent advocates included politicians like , who chaired the campaign, and , leader of the , whose long-standing mobilized grassroots support. These figures emphasized democratic accountability and global trade opportunities post-EU membership. The Leaver identity has endured beyond the UK's formal departure on 31 January 2020, shaping subsequent electoral alignments and policy debates.

N

No Deal

A no-deal Brexit, also known as a "hard Brexit" in its most abrupt form, refers to the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union without a ratified Withdrawal Agreement or any transitional arrangements, resulting in an immediate cessation of EU membership benefits and obligations on the specified exit date. Under this scenario, UK-EU trade would revert to (WTO) rules, imposing most-favored-nation tariffs averaging around 3% but reaching up to 10% on automobiles and higher on agricultural products, alongside non-tariff barriers such as customs declarations, verification, and sanitary/phytosanitary checks at borders. This would eliminate frictionless access to the EU and , potentially disrupting just-in-time supply chains for industries like automotive and pharmaceuticals, with estimates suggesting a 40% reduction in UK-EU trade over a decade absent mitigations. The scenario loomed multiple times during negotiations, with original exit deadlines of 29 March 2019, extended to 12 April 2019 and then 31 October 2019, and a final transition end-date risk on 31 December 2020; each time, contingency measures were ramped up to avert immediate chaos. government preparations centered on , a cross-departmental plan assessing "reasonable worst-case" short-term impacts, including three-month delays in and imports, shortages, and increased of public disorder from price rises and stockpiling. By September 2019, updated Yellowhammer documents projected disruptions at ports like Dover (handling 30% of - freight), potential shortages of fresh produce affecting 10-20% of supermarket stock, and £2.1 billion in additional no-deal spending on border infrastructure and military-assisted logistics. The similarly prepared unilateral measures, such as temporary tariff quotas, but emphasized that no-deal would stem from choices, not EU intransigence. Ultimately, no-deal was averted through the ratification of the Withdrawal Agreement on 29 January 2020 and a subsequent Trade and Cooperation Agreement finalized on 24 December 2020, preventing WTO fallback at the transition's end; however, the threat underscored Brexit's leverage dynamics, with negotiators using it to secure concessions on fisheries and level playing fields, while critics argued it heightened economic uncertainty without proportional gains. Post-2020, residual no-deal elements persist in debates over arrangements, where WTO terms could theoretically apply to Great Britain-NI trade absent protocol extensions.

Northern Ireland Protocol

The , formally the Protocol on Ireland/, forms part of the Withdrawal Agreement between the and the , ratified on 24 December 2019 and entering into force on 1 January 2021. It addresses the post-Brexit arrangements for to uphold the commitments of the 1998 by preventing a physical border or related checks on the island of . To achieve this, the Protocol requires to remain aligned with specified EU rules on goods, value-added tax, state aid, and certain environmental and agricultural standards, effectively placing it within the EU's for goods and territory while the rest of the diverges. Key provisions include customs declarations and regulatory checks on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, establishing what amounts to an internal UK border in the Irish Sea to enforce EU compliance and prevent goods from entering the EU single market via Northern Ireland without scrutiny. No such checks apply to goods moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain, and the Protocol includes mechanisms like the Joint Committee for oversight and dispute resolution, as well as provisions for democratic consent by the Northern Ireland Assembly every four or eight years to extend its application. Implementation began with grace periods for certain goods, such as chilled meats, extended multiple times until phased out by 2021, but led to practical disruptions including shortages of supermarket items and increased costs for businesses due to paperwork and compliance. The Protocol generated significant controversy, particularly among unionist communities who viewed the as severing Northern Ireland's seamless integration with the rest of the and eroding its constitutional status, prompting protests, threats, and the Democratic Unionist Party's boycott of the from 2022 onward, stalling devolved until 2024. In response, the introduced the in June 2022 to override elements domestically, though it progressed little amid legal and opposition concerns. Tensions eased with the , agreed on 27 February 2023 and effective from 25 March 2023, which amends the Protocol by introducing a "green lane" for trusted traders moving goods within the internal market (bypassing most checks for non- destined items) and a "red lane" for -bound goods, alongside reduced data requirements and a Stormont Brake for veto on new laws. These changes aim to mitigate economic divergence while preserving openness, though implementation challenges persist, including ongoing business compliance burdens reported as late as 2024.

P

People's Vote

The People's Vote was a cross-party campaign group that advocated for a second , often termed a "confirmatory vote," on the final terms of the United Kingdom's withdrawal agreement with the , with the option to remain in the included on the ballot. Launched on April 15, 2018, by a coalition of politicians, business leaders, and celebrities, it argued that the 2016 had not specified exit terms and that public approval was needed for any deal negotiated under Article 50 of the . The campaign positioned the vote as a democratic check against potential economic harms from leaving without a ratified agreement, though critics, including Conservative and Labour Brexit supporters, contended it undermined the 2016 result, in which 51.9% voted to leave on a turnout of 72.2%. Key activities included large-scale demonstrations in . On October 20, 2018, organizers estimated attendance at over 670,000, described as the largest political rally in the UK's modern history, though police figures were lower at around 100,000-200,000. A follow-up march on March 23, 2019, drew claims of over 1 million participants from campaigners, coinciding with the eve of the original deadline, but independent analysis suggested the figure was inflated, with more realistic estimates in the hundreds of thousands based on route capacity and police observations. The group lobbied for legislation requiring a vote on the withdrawal agreement, gaining support from figures like Liberal Democrat leader and Labour MPs such as , but faced resistance from Prime Minister Theresa May's government and Jeremy Corbyn's Labour leadership, which prioritized its own alternative. The campaign's efforts peaked amid parliamentary gridlock over May's deal but collapsed following the December 12, 2019, general election, in which the Conservative Party secured a of 80 seats on a platform explicitly rejecting a second and committing to complete by January 31, 2020. With no viable path to after Labour's losses—reducing pro-second-vote MPs—and the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement ratified in December 2020, the People's Vote effectively dissolved by late 2019, having raised over £1 million in funding but failed to alter the withdrawal timeline. Proponents cited evolving , with polls showing Remain leads by 2020, as evidence of mandate, but the initiative highlighted divisions over irrevocability, with empirical data from the 2016 vote (17.4 million Leave votes versus 16.1 million Remain) underscoring the narrow original margin that fueled demands for reconfirmation.

Project Fear

"Project Fear" refers to the Remain campaign's strategy during the Brexit referendum, characterized by warnings of severe economic disruption if the voted to leave the , a tactic derided by Leave advocates as exaggerated scaremongering. The term originated as an internal label used by the No campaign in the to describe its own anticipated emphasis on risks of separation, but it gained prominence in Brexit discourse when repurposed by figures such as and to dismiss projections from institutions like the Treasury and . These warnings, often grounded in econometric models assuming a "no deal" scenario without transitional arrangements, highlighted potential immediate effects including a , a 3-6% contraction in GDP, rising to 500,000-800,000 additional jobs lost, and average annual household income reductions of £4,300. Key examples included Chancellor George Osborne's Treasury forecast of an "immediate recession" with house prices falling by 10-18% and the pound depreciating sharply, alongside claims from the International Monetary Fund and Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development of global market turmoil and long-term productivity drags. Leave campaigners countered that such predictions ignored opportunities for independent trade deals and regulatory sovereignty, with Gove arguing that "the British people have had enough of experts" from organizations perceived as aligned with the status quo. The approach drew criticism for lacking a positive vision of EU membership, instead relying on negative scenarios that polls suggested alienated voters skeptical of elite consensus, particularly in regions like the North East where economic anxieties were acute but trust in forecasters low. In the aftermath of the June 23, 2016 vote, short-term outcomes diverged from the most alarmist projections: UK GDP grew by 1.8% in 2016 without entering recession, unemployment remained below 5% through 2017, and while the pound fell 10-15% against major currencies—contributing to inflation peaking at 3% in late 2017—no widespread high street devastation or mass layoffs ensued. Analyses, such as one reviewing Osborne's 19 specific claims, found only two (rising inflation and sterling depreciation) had materialized by April 2017, fueling arguments that the forecasts overestimated downside risks by underweighting adaptive responses like Bank of England interventions and negotiated transitions. However, longer-term data indicate persistent effects, including a 4-5% GDP shortfall relative to pre-referendum trends by 2023 per Office for Budget Responsibility estimates, attributed to trade barriers and supply chain frictions, though causal attribution remains debated amid confounding factors like the COVID-19 pandemic. The episode underscored tensions between model-based forecasting—often from bodies with institutional incentives to favor integration—and empirical resilience, with pro-Leave sources highlighting the former's overreach while Remain-aligned outlets emphasized conditional validity of warnings tied to hard-Brexit paths avoided through the 2020 Trade and Cooperation Agreement.

R

Red Lines

In the context of , "red lines" referred to the inflexible, non-negotiable principles established by successive governments as preconditions for any withdrawal agreement or future partnership with the . These boundaries were intended to safeguard national , with the stating that breaching them would render talks untenable and potentially lead to a no-deal outcome. The concept crystallized in Theresa May's speech on 17 January 2017, where she outlined 12 negotiating objectives that effectively set the 's parameters, emphasizing control over laws, borders, and money while rejecting continued integration. May's red lines explicitly rejected permanent membership in the EU's and , arguing that such arrangements would undermine the 2016 referendum's mandate to "take back control" by limiting the UK's ability to negotiate independent trade deals and regulate its economy. She insisted on ending the free movement of people, a cornerstone of EU membership, to enable a , and terminating the supremacy of EU law, with the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) relinquishing jurisdiction over the UK post-exit. Additional priorities included securing reciprocal rights for EU nationals in the UK and British citizens in the EU, achieving frictionless trade in goods via a transitional "implementation period," and ending net financial contributions to the EU budget while negotiating a fair divorce settlement estimated at around €39 billion. These positions were framed as essential to delivering on the referendum result, with May declaring that "no deal is better than a bad deal." Under , who assumed office in July 2019, red lines sharpened to prioritize regulatory independence and UK territorial integrity. Johnson rejected "" provisions that would mandate dynamic alignment with EU standards on state aid, environmental regulations, and labor laws, insisting the UK would diverge as a sovereign actor without automatic adherence to ' rules. He drew a firm line against any regulatory border dividing from , aiming to protect the UK's internal market while complying with the Ireland/ Protocol's requirements to avoid a hard Irish land border. mechanisms were to exclude ECJ oversight, favoring independent of both parties, and Johnson set a deadline of four months from February 2020 for a bare-bones trade deal, or face no-deal consequences. These stances, reiterated in December 2020 talks with EU Commission President , precluded acceptance of EU-proposed enforcement tools like automatic tariffs for non-compliance. The red lines influenced the ultimate EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, finalized on 24 December 2020, which omitted access and free movement but incorporated limited zero-tariff trade in goods, subject to and customs checks—outcomes critics attributed to the rigid parameters limiting concessions. Proponents, including Johnson, hailed them as vindicating gains, while EU negotiators viewed them as overly ambitious, contributing to prolonged deadlock.

Remainer

A Remainer is a person who supported or voted for the to remain a member of the , especially in the context of the 2016 membership held on 23 June 2016. In that vote, 17,410,742 ballots—48.11% of the valid votes cast—favored remaining in the EU, compared to 17,410,742 for leaving. The term emerged in political discourse around the referendum campaign and its aftermath, contrasting with "Leaver" for those favoring departure, and reflects the binary framing of the debate over UK sovereignty, economic ties, and EU integration. Post-referendum, "Remainer" typically denotes individuals, organizations, or media outlets opposing the implementation of Brexit, including advocates for a second referendum, parliamentary delays, or policy reversals. Prominent examples include former Prime Minister Tony Blair and Liberal Democrats leader Nick Clegg, who publicly campaigned for Remain and later criticized the Brexit process. The label often highlights a divide in UK politics, with Remainers drawing support from younger voters (75% of 18-24-year-olds voted Remain), higher-education groups (73% of degree holders), and regions like Scotland (62% Remain) and London (60% Remain). In usage, the term is neutral in formal definitions but frequently pejorative in pro-Leave circles, implying elite detachment or democratic disdain, as seen in variants like "Remoaner," a portmanteau of "Remain" and "moaner" denoting perceived whining over the 52% Leave . This reflects broader tensions, where Remain arguments emphasized economic risks—such as projected GDP losses from trade barriers—while critics of Remainer positions argue they underestimated voter priorities like control and regulatory autonomy. Despite the referendum's binding nature under , Remainer influence persisted through legal actions, like the 2019 ruling against proroguing , shaping Brexit's protracted timeline until the 's formal EU exit on 31 January 2020.

Rejoiner

A Rejoiner is an individual or advocate who supports the United Kingdom's re-accession to the following its withdrawal effective 31 January 2020. The term, analogous to "Remainer" from the pre-Brexit , emerged in post-exit political to denote those seeking to reverse the 2016 result through renewed membership application, often emphasizing perceived economic and geopolitical drawbacks of departure. Rejoiners typically cite empirical indicators such as the UK's estimated 4-5% GDP shortfall relative to remaining in the EU, as projected by fiscal analyses, alongside increased trade frictions evidenced by a 15% drop in goods exports to the EU in 2021 compared to 2019 levels. Proponents, including figures like , argue that rejoining would restore frictionless access to the and mitigate regulatory divergences, framing as a reversible policy error amid shifting public sentiment. However, such positions often originate from sources with pro-EU leanings, including outlets like , which amplify narratives of regret while downplaying negotiation hurdles. Critics of Rejoiners, including conservative commentators, contend that re-accession would entail subordinating sovereignty anew, potentially under stricter terms like eventual euro adoption or diminished rebate privileges, rendering it politically untenable without another —unlikely given major parties' stances. As of 2025, no mainstream party endorses full rejoining; Labour's administration pursues "reset" deals short of membership, while parliamentary debates on e-petitions for re-accession, such as in March 2025, highlight fringe support rather than consensus. Polls indicate conditional backing—54% favor rejoining in isolation but only 36% if requiring the euro—reflecting causal realities of divided opinion and reluctance for hasty reintegration.

S

Soft Brexit

Soft Brexit denotes a proposed form of that prioritizes minimizing economic disruption through continued close alignment with structures, such as membership in the , , or a framework replicating many of their benefits. This contrasts with hard Brexit, which entails full regulatory and institutional separation to maximize , accepting tariffs, checks, and divergence from standards. Proponents, including business groups and elements of the Labour Party, argued that soft would safeguard £350 billion in annual EU by avoiding non-tariff barriers like rules-of-origin checks and maintaining supply-chain integration, particularly in sectors like automotive and finance. However, it typically required concessions on free movement of people and acceptance of EU regulatory oversight without UK influence over decisions, limiting parliamentary sovereignty. During negotiations under Prime Minister , soft-leaning proposals like the July 2018 Chequers —envisioning a common rulebook for and dynamic alignment—faced rejection from both the EU, which opposed à la carte access, and domestic hardliners prioritizing independence. Labour's 2019 manifesto alternatively sought a customs union to prevent a "race to the bottom" in standards, but this too failed to gain parliamentary majority amid votes on indicative options in 2019. Ultimately, no soft Brexit materialized; the December 2020 UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement established a looser zero-tariff deal with level-playing-field commitments but without or participation, reflecting compromises driven by deadlines and leverage imbalances rather than ideal soft models. Empirical analyses post-withdrawal indicate soft options could have reduced GDP losses estimated at 2-5% under harder scenarios, though causal factors like global trade shifts complicate attribution. Sources advocating soft Brexit, often from remain-aligned think tanks, emphasize economic data but underweight sovereignty costs borne by voters in the referendum's 52% Leave mandate.

Sovereignty

In the context of Brexit, sovereignty refers to the United Kingdom's exercise of supreme authority over its internal laws, immigration controls, budgetary decisions, and trade policies, independent of the European Union's supranational institutions such as the European Commission, Council, and Court of Justice. This principle underpinned the Leave campaign in the 23 June 2016 referendum, which secured 51.9% support for departure on a turnout of 72.2%, framed around the slogan "Take back control" to highlight perceived erosions of national autonomy from 1973 EEC accession onward, including the supremacy of EU law over conflicting UK statutes as established by the 1972 European Communities Act. Brexit's legal completion on 31 January 2020, followed by the transition period's end on 31 December 2020, formally repatriated competencies to the UK Parliament, ending automatic incorporation of directives and regulations, and removing the European Court of Justice's jurisdiction over UK matters, thereby reinstating as the unlimited power to legislate without external veto. This enabled unilateral actions such as diverging from standards in areas like state aid and , and negotiating over 70 new trade agreements by October 2023, covering goods trade worth £1.3 trillion annually. Debates persist on the extent of restored , with proponents citing the 's to set migration rules—evidenced by the 2021 points-based replacing free movement—and fiscal , including non-contribution to the EU budget post-2020, while skeptics note voluntary alignments in the 2020 Trade and Cooperation Agreement that maintain level-playing-field commitments enforceable via dispute mechanisms. Arrangements like the , operative from 1 January 2021, introduced hybrid EU alignment in to avoid a hard Irish border, prompting concerns addressed partially by the 2023 , which reduced checks on GB-NI goods by 80% in targeted sectors. Overall, shifted the from pooled to unilateral , prioritizing domestic democratic over integrated supranational .

T

Trade and Cooperation Agreement

The Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) is a bilateral treaty between the United Kingdom and the European Union that outlines their economic and cooperative relations following the UK's departure from the EU, agreed upon on 24 December 2020 and formally signed on 30 December 2020. Provisionally applied from 1 January 2021 to avert a no-deal scenario at the end of the transition period, it received full ratification and entered into force on 1 May 2021 after approval by the European Parliament and UK Parliament. The agreement excludes the UK from the EU single market and customs union, ending free movement of goods, services, capital, and people, while establishing preferential but friction-laden trade terms. At its core, the TCA creates a for goods, eliminating tariffs and quotas on substantially all trade provided goods meet rules-of-origin requirements, such as sufficient or value content. However, it mandates new administrative burdens including declarations, sanitary and phytosanitary checks, and conformity assessments, which have increased trade costs and reduced volumes compared to pre-2021 intra- levels. Services trade receives limited access, with provisions for mutual recognition in select professional sectors but no passporting rights for , which require separate equivalence determinations. Investment and digital trade are addressed through national treatment and prohibitions on , though without the depth of integration. The agreement enforces a level playing field mechanism to curb competitive distortions, requiring alignment on state aid, tax, environmental, and labor standards, with binding arbitration and potential rebalancing tariffs for non-compliance. In fisheries, it grants the UK sovereignty over its exclusive economic zone while allowing continued EU access to waters, with the UK's quota share increasing by 25% (approximately 59,000 tonnes annually) phased in by June 2026, followed by yearly negotiations. Energy cooperation promotes interconnectivity and carbon pricing alignment, while aviation and road haulage receive market access subject to safety standards. Security and judicial cooperation under the TCA includes extradition facilitation via a fast-track surrender system akin to the former , operational information sharing on serious crimes, and limited foreign policy dialogue, but excludes participation in or and imposes stricter data adequacy rules. relies on joint committees and independent panels, with the first ruling in 2025 upholding a sandeel fishing ban against EU claims of TCA violation. The treaty includes review clauses, notably a comprehensive joint evaluation after five years of operation starting in 2026, amid ongoing adjustments like the May 2025 UK-EU summit agreements on fisheries stability and defence pacts that build upon but do not amend the TCA core.

Third Country

In European Union terminology, a third country denotes any sovereign state or territory that is not a member of the EU, excluding it from the bloc's internal market, customs union, and regulatory harmonization frameworks. This status imposes standard international trade and border protocols, including customs duties, tariffs, and non-tariff barriers unless mitigated by specific bilateral agreements. The term originates from EU legal texts distinguishing member states (first parties), associated entities like EEA members (second parties), and all others as third countries. Following the UK's withdrawal from the EU on 31 January 2020, and the conclusion of the transition period on 31 December 2020, the United Kingdom transitioned to third-country status vis-à-vis the . This shift ended automatic participation in EU decision-making bodies and free movement of , services, capital, and persons, subjecting UK-EU interactions to rules by default, overlaid with provisions from the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement ratified on 29 April 2021. As a third country, the UK faces mandatory customs declarations for imports and exports, sanitary and phytosanitary checks on agri-food products, and verification, contributing to documented increases in trade costs estimated at 4-5% for in the initial post-transition year. The designation carries broader ramifications for regulatory alignment, data flows, and mobility. For instance, citizens are now treated as third-country nationals under Schengen visa policies, limited to 90 days in any 180-day period within the without a visa, reversing prior unrestricted access. On data protection, the granted the adequacy status on 28 June 2021, allowing continued transfers without additional safeguards until at least June 2025, though this is subject to periodic review and potential revocation if laws diverge from standards. In financial services, third-country rules preclude passporting, requiring firms to establish subsidiaries or rely on limited equivalence determinations, which the has granted selectively (e.g., for certain clearing activities in ). These dynamics underscore the causal link between membership and integrated economic access, with empirically correlating to a 13-15% drop in - goods trade volumes by 2023 relative to pre-referendum trends, adjusted for global factors.

U

Unicorn

In Brexit discourse, the term "unicorn" denotes a purportedly unattainable post- outcome, such as a trade deal offering full access to the EU single market without corresponding obligations like or regulatory alignment. The phrase evokes the mythical creature to symbolize impossibility, often applied by critics to dismiss optimistic projections of "frictionless trade" or superior economic arrangements outside the EU customs union. The term emerged prominently during the 2017–2019 withdrawal negotiations, when UK government statements on achieving seamless borders and market access—exemplified by International Trade Secretary Liam Fox's 2017 assertion that "the free trade agreement that we will have to do with the European Union should be one of the easiest in human history"—were labeled unrealistic by opponents. Pro-EU commentators and media outlets, including those in outlets like The Guardian, popularized "unicorn" alongside related jargon such as "max fac" (maximum facilitation) for technology-driven border checks deemed fanciful without mutual recognition of standards. Usage spiked amid debates over the Ireland-Northern Ireland backstop, where demands for no regulatory divergence while avoiding customs infrastructure were derided as unicorn pursuits. Predominantly employed by Remain advocates and left-leaning analysts, the label critiques what they view as overpromising by supporters, though proponents counter that tangible deals—like the 2020 UK-Japan or CPTPP accession—demonstrate viable alternatives without constraints. By 2019, linguistic studies noted "" as part of rapidly evolving "Brexitspeak," reflecting public confusion over feasibility claims amid stalled talks. Post-ratification of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement on December 24, 2020, the term persisted in critiques of non-tariff barriers and disruptions, underscoring ongoing tensions between aspirational and practical trade-offs.

W

Windsor Framework

The is a bilateral agreement between the and the , jointly announced on 27 February 2023 by then-UK and President during a summit at . It amends the —originally part of the 2019 EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement—to address practical issues arising from post-Brexit trade arrangements, including internal UK market frictions between and , while maintaining the absence of a hard border on the island of and protecting the integrity of the EU . The framework was formalized through a Joint Committee decision on 24 March 2023, with UK legislation via the Windsor Framework (Constitutional Status of ) Regulations 2023 receiving parliamentary approval in early 2024. Central to the agreement are operational changes to goods movement, replacing the Protocol's previous requirement for customs checks on most intra-UK shipments to with a dual-lane system effective in phases through 2025. The "green lane" applies to goods destined to stay in , featuring trusted trader schemes, minimal paperwork, and reduced physical checks to minimize barriers to the internal market; eligibility requires data-sharing and compliance declarations, with non-compliance risking diversion to the "red lane." The "red lane" handles goods at risk of entering the (e.g., onward to the ), subjecting them to full customs, sanitary, and phytosanitary rules, including inspections at designated facilities. Specific provisions cover parcels (under 2kg exempt from routine checks if not for commercial sale), pets (simplified pet travel passports for intra- movement), and /aluminum (replacing tariffs with global arrangements). A key democratic safeguard is the "Stormont Brake," which empowers the to vote against the automatic application of new or amended EU laws under the Protocol if they would significantly impact everyday life in , provided the vote draws support from a cross-community majority and is not used frivolously; successful blocks pause implementation pending . For medicines, the framework disapplies certain EU rules from 1 January 2025, allowing UK-wide licensing and supply chains to without routine batch testing, addressing prior shortages. Implementation milestones include initial data systems rollout in October 2023, parcel exemptions from October 2024, and full green/red lane operations for freight from 1 May 2025, with the allocating £1.2 billion in funding to support businesses' adaptation. Despite these reforms, the framework retains 's alignment with select EU rules for goods, prompting ongoing debate over its long-term effects on and unionist concerns regarding semi-detachment from the rest of the .

WTO Rules

In the context of Brexit, WTO rules refer to the baseline international trade framework established by the World Trade Organization that would govern UK-EU economic relations in the absence of a preferential bilateral agreement, often described as the "no-deal" scenario. Under these rules, primarily the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) for goods and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) for services, both parties would apply Most Favoured Nation (MFN) treatment, extending the lowest available tariffs and conditions offered to any WTO member without discrimination. This would eliminate the tariff-free, frictionless access previously enjoyed within the EU Customs Union and , introducing customs declarations, border checks, and potential non-tariff barriers such as sanitary and phytosanitary measures and technical standards compliance for all cross-border flows. The , originally acceding to the WTO as part of the on 1 January 1995, maintained its membership independently after completion on 31 December 2020, succeeding to the EU's WTO commitments via Article XXVIII bis of GATT 1994, which permits of modified schedules during negotiations. The submitted its draft goods schedule (Schedule XIX – ) for certification on 24 July 2018 and its services schedule on 3 December 2018, replicating EU bindings with minor adjustments to reflect sovereignty over areas like fisheries quotas, enabling trade to proceed under these terms pending formal WTO approval, which remained restricted as of certification processes. In practice, MFN tariffs—averaging lower for industrial products but significantly higher for —would apply alongside prohibitions on quantitative restrictions except as WTO-permitted, disrupting supply chains reliant on just-in-time delivery and regulatory alignment. Although preparations for WTO terms dominated UK policy contingencies through 2020, the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement, provisionally applied from 1 January 2021, superseded pure WTO application by granting zero tariffs and quotas on substantially all subject to , while WTO disciplines continue to inform dispute settlement and underlying commitments where the agreement is silent. This fallback underscored Brexit's emphasis on regulatory autonomy, as WTO rules impose fewer obligations for domestic divergence than EU law, though they lack the comprehensive mutual recognition that characterized pre-Brexit integration.

References

  1. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7639/
  2. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eut/withdrawal-agreement/contents
  3. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7960/
  4. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eut/withdrawal-agreement
  5. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5bfa866840f0b637d4ff1c24/14_November_Explainer_for_the_agreement_on_the_withdrawal_of_the_United_Kingdom_of_Great_Britain_and_Northern_Ireland_from_the_European_Union.pdf
  6. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/treaty/teu_2012/art_50/oj/eng
  7. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7b8b0840f0b645ba3c5004/7310.pdf
  8. https://www.akingump.com/en/article-50-of-the-treaty-on-european-union
  9. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/article-50-to-be-triggered-on-march-29
  10. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7551/CBP-7551.pdf
  11. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/the-eu-uk-withdrawal-agreement/timeline-eu-uk-withdrawal-agreement/
  12. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/the-article-50-process/
  13. https://verfassungsblog.de/brexit-article-50-duff/
  14. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/acquis.html
  15. https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/language-technology-resources/jrc-acquis_en
  16. https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Glossary/UKPracticalLaw/I25019897e8db11e398db8b09b4f043e0
  17. https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/documents/college-artslaw/law/iel/leaving-eu-legal-impact-brexit-gee-rubini-trybus.pdf
  18. https://www.gide.com/en/news-insights/incorporating-the-acquis-communautaire-into-uk-domestic-law-how-will-it-work-in-practice/
  19. https://institute.global/insights/economic-prosperity/after-brexit-divergence-and-future-uk-regulatory-policy
  20. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/brexit-necessitates-an-agreement-plus-for-northern-ireland/
  21. https://www.qub.ac.uk/brexit/Brexitfilestore/Filetoupload%2C796726%2Cen.pdf
  22. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/the-backstop-explained/
  23. https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_memo-18-6423_en.htm
  24. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/irish-backstop
  25. https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/4eba4e5c-4fd4-4882-ac5d-6507be105d98_en
  26. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-44615404
  27. https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-18-3962_en.htm
  28. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/brexit-what-is-the-irish-backstop-and-why-is-it-so-controversial.html
  29. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/21/irish-backstop-what-new-brexit-deal-means-to-northern-ireland.html
  30. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/the-protocol-on-ireland-northern-ireland/
  31. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/iconic-blue-passports-return-next-month
  32. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42443253
  33. https://homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2023/08/29/a-history-of-the-uk-passport/
  34. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/22/blue-brexit-passports-issued-redesign-eu
  35. https://www.ukabroad.net/blue-british-passport/
  36. https://www.bbc.com/news/education-51737116
  37. https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/22/uk/brexit-blue-passports-gbr-scli-intl
  38. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/types-of-british-passports/types-of-british-passports-accessible
  39. https://www.ukabroad.net/new-british-passport-blog/
  40. https://www.oed.com/dictionary/brexiteer_n
  41. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-facts/what-is-a-brexiteer/
  42. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Brexiteer
  43. https://www.politico.eu/article/12-people-who-brought-about-brexit-leave-remain-referendum-campaign-euroskeptics-tension/
  44. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7840/
  45. https://apnews.com/general-news-c563032864514bc9932a390bfac49c4b
  46. https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1044888/Brexit-news-what-is-BRINO-what-does-BRINO-mean-Brexit-in-name-only
  47. https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/submission/20187/Brino
  48. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/7/7/theresa-may-secures-backing-from-cabinet-for-soft-brexit
  49. https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1039406/brexit-news-latest-deal-date-dividend-chequers-plan-andrew-bridgen-mp
  50. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/29/chequers-dinner-could-end-in-on-the-brexit-express
  51. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/back-to-brino/
  52. https://www.briefingsforbritain.co.uk/brexiteers-beware-yet-again-brino-is-back/
  53. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/shortcuts/2019/nov/07/the-brexicon-how-well-do-you-know-your-brexit-jargon
  54. https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2019/0128/1025991-brexit-glossary/
  55. https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/research-reports-and-data/our-reports-and-data-past-elections-and-referendums/report-23-june-2016-referendum-uks-membership-european-union
  56. https://www.gov.uk/government/topical-events/eu-referendum
  57. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c8f805440f0b640d60882b1/The_Future_Relationship_between_the_United_Kingdom_and_the_European_Union_120319.pdf
  58. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/intellectual-property-and-the-transition-period
  59. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/relations-united-kingdom/eu-uk-trade-and-cooperation-agreement_en
  60. https://www.niassembly.gov.uk/assembly-business/brexit-and-beyond/the-windsor-framework/windsor-framework-timeline/
  61. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/620a791d8fa8f54915f4369e/benefits-of-brexit.pdf
  62. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results
  63. https://www.bpf.co.uk/article/what-is-a-canada-plus-trade-deal-1568.aspx
  64. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45633592
  65. https://theconversation.com/chequers-vs-canada-plus-brexit-trade-plans-seven-key-differences-explained-103969
  66. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/01/15/what-precisely-does-canada-mean/
  67. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42298971
  68. https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/canada-plus-plus-plus-brexit-trade-deal-david-davis-wants-121349467.html
  69. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7840/CBP-7840.pdf
  70. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/comment/eu-hints-what-it-means-canada-plus-post-brexit-trade
  71. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-boris-johnson-canada-trade-deal-eu-ceta-a9310951.html
  72. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/canada-and-brexit/
  73. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/15/brexit-canada-trade-deal-eu-model-next-steps
  74. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-words-following-chequers-6-july-2018
  75. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-future-relationship-between-the-united-kingdom-and-the-european-union
  76. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5b55d9eded915d0b85eea5e5/THE_FUTURE_UK-EU_RELATIONSHIP.pdf
  77. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44749993
  78. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8387/CBP-8387.pdf
  79. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/06/theresa-may-secures-approval-from-cabinet-to-negotiate-soft-brexit
  80. https://www.politico.eu/article/theresa-may-reacts-angrily-to-uk-brexit-plan-rejection-eu-summit-salzburg/
  81. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-facts/what-was-chequers/
  82. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20200611IPR81004/eu-uk-talks-meps-united-behind-eu-stance-rejecting-uk-cherry-picking
  83. https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/news-media/press-releases/there-no-cherry-picking-brexit
  84. https://archive-yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/britain-tries-cherry-picking-brexit
  85. https://www.euractiv.com/news/merkel-speaks-out-no-cherry-picking-for-britain-in-brexit-talks/
  86. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/06/theresa-may-conservative-politics-brexit-solutions-leaked-eu-report
  87. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1746-692X.12202
  88. https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-retires-no-cherry-picking-brexit-line-uk-policy-starmer-von-der-leyen-trade/
  89. https://cepr.org/voxeu/blogs-and-reviews/untangling-brexit
  90. https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/22/uk/uk-brexit-cherries-intl
  91. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-facts/what-is-a-cliff-edge-brexit/
  92. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/19/brexit-phrasebook-a-guide-to-the-talks-key-terms
  93. https://www.businesseurope.eu/publications/consequences-of-a-cliff-edge-brexit/
  94. https://media.ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/UKIN-No-Deal-Brexit-Issues-impacts-and-implications.pdf
  95. https://www.isda.org/2018/10/09/cliff-edge-effects-under-eu-law-in-a-no-deal-brexit-scenario/
  96. https://www.afme.eu/media/wofpu0we/afmebrxbrexitkeycliffedgerisks.pdf
  97. https://www.icmagroup.org/assets/documents/Regulatory/Quarterly_Reports/Articles/Q4-2018-article---Brexit---cliff-edge-risks-in-international-capital-markets-101018.pdf
  98. https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-6851_en.htm
  99. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/cliff-edge-or-bridging-a-gap/
  100. https://dcubrexitinstitute.eu/2020/12/why-the-eu-avoided-the-cliff-edge-brexit-that-many-had-feared/
  101. https://www.businesseurope.eu/publications/comprehensive-and-ambitious-eu-uk-agreement-must-be-reached-in-time/
  102. https://www.afme.eu/news-insights/views-from-afme/brexit-avoiding-a-cliff-edge-in-financial-services/
  103. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/european-customs-union.asp
  104. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/explainer-customs-unions/
  105. https://european-union.europa.eu/priorities-and-actions/actions-topic/customs_en
  106. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/relations-united-kingdom/new-normal_en
  107. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46891257
  108. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/0/brexit-what-difference-customs-union-single-market/
  109. https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/customs/international-affairs/united-kingdom_en
  110. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014292123002623
  111. https://academic.oup.com/economicpolicy/article/38/116/707/7146499
  112. https://www.cer.eu/insights/weighed-down-gravity-uk-trade-policy-after-brexit
  113. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8822/
  114. https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Exiting-the-EU-The-financial-settlement.pdf
  115. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8039/
  116. https://www.bruegel.org/system/files/wp_attachments/WP_2017_03-.pdf
  117. https://obr.uk/box/the-financial-settlement-with-the-european-union-an-update/
  118. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/explainer/brexit-deal-financial-settlement
  119. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/12/uks-brexit-divorce-bill-stood-at-367bn-in-2021-eu-audit-reveals
  120. https://www.efta.int/eea
  121. https://www.efta.int/eea-relations-eu/qa-about-eea-agreement
  122. https://www.eeas.europa.eu/node/60110
  123. http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8483/CBP-8483.pdf
  124. https://www.slaughterandmay.com/media/rpsaxo04/brexit_essentials_alternatives_to_eu_membership_1412pdf.pdf
  125. https://encompass-europe.com/comment/why-the-uk-will-not-become-an-eea-member-after-brexit
  126. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/27/efta-countries-wary-of-commons-interest-in-norway-brexit-option
  127. https://www.efta.int/about-efta/european-free-trade-association/history
  128. https://www.efta.int/about-efta/faqs
  129. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2018-0031/CDP-2018-0031.pdf
  130. https://www.politico.eu/article/uks-brexit-options-explained/
  131. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47767627
  132. https://www.efta.int/trade-relations/free-trade-network/united-kingdom
  133. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pms-speech-on-new-brexit-deal-21-may-2019
  134. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/report/frictionless-trade-what-brexit-means-cross-border-trade-goods
  135. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/723460/CHEQUERS_STATEMENT_-_FINAL.PDF
  136. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/theresa-may-brexit-chequers-plan
  137. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-facts/what-is-frictionless-trade/
  138. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/beyond-brexit-a-global-britain
  139. https://academic.oup.com/ia/article/99/6/2387/7280009
  140. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/global-britain-delivering-on-our-international-ambition
  141. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/global-britain-in-a-competitive-age-the-integrated-review-of-security-defence-development-and-foreign-policy
  142. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2021-0002/
  143. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1056819023002166
  144. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/global-britain-has-failed-what-next/
  145. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/are-we-seeing-the-slow-death-of-global-britain/
  146. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/struggle-achieve-global-britain
  147. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-37500140
  148. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/brexit.asp
  149. https://www.dover.gov.uk/Corporate-Information/Brexit/PDFs/FINAL-Brexit-impact-report-June-2018-FOI.pdf
  150. https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/76800/html/
  151. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5da863ab40f0b659847e0184/Revised_Protocol_to_the_Withdrawal_Agreement.pdf
  152. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/windsor-framework-explained/
  153. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eut/withdrawal-agreement/attachment/1/adopted
  154. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-57133682
  155. https://www.secnewgate.co.uk/our-insights/northern-ireland-protocol-and-impact-irish-sea-trade-where-are-we-now
  156. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/windsor-framework-unveiled-to-fix-problems-of-the-northern-ireland-protocol
  157. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgj9ly7pdmo
  158. https://supplychaindigital.com/news/what-the-irish-sea-border-means
  159. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9190/CBP-9190.pdf
  160. https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2020/12/11/what-is-the-level-playing-field-and-why-is-it-such-a-problem-for-brexit
  161. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/what-does-a-level-playing-field-mean/
  162. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5fe9eaf58fa8f56af415b19e/EU-UK_Trade_and_Cooperation_Agreement_24.12.2020.pdf
  163. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/690576/EPRS_BRI%282021%29690576_EN.pdf
  164. https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/03/a-reminder-of-how-britain-voted-in-the-eu-referendum-and-why/
  165. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/05/04/leavers-have-a-better-understanding-of-remainers-motivations-than-vice-versa/
  166. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176268018301320
  167. https://www.jrf.org.uk/public-attitudes/brexit-vote-explained-poverty-low-skills-and-lack-of-opportunities
  168. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36616028
  169. https://theconversation.com/british-people-now-define-themselves-as-leavers-or-remainers-so-what-happens-after-brexit-130634
  170. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32810887
  171. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47559490
  172. https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/what-would-no-deal-brexit-look
  173. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/no-deal-the-wto-option/
  174. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/explainer/no-deal-brexit-uk-preparations
  175. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/explainer/operation-yellowhammer
  176. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47652280
  177. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48511379
  178. https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/eu-referendum/how-will-brexit-work/
  179. https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/82570/html/
  180. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9548/
  181. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/northern-ireland-protocol-the-uks-solution
  182. https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-53724381
  183. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/moving-past-troubles-future-northern-ireland-peace
  184. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/northern-ireland-protocol-bill-uk-government-legal-position/northern-ireland-protocol-bill-uk-government-legal-position
  185. https://www.revenue.ie/en/customs/businesses/info-movements-ni/info-businesses-trading-ni/trade-with-ni/windsor-framework.aspx
  186. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2ex7e1m13mo
  187. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-facts/what-is-the-peoples-vote-campaign/
  188. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43774200
  189. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8749/
  190. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-45925542
  191. https://fullfact.org/europe/peoples-vote-march-count/
  192. https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2019/mar/23/peoples-vote-brexit-rally-draws-1-million-marchers-video-report
  193. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/18/theres-no-chance-now-how-the-peoples-vote-movement-died
  194. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2025/01/17/project-fear-unpacked-how-fear-based-appeals-became-central-to-the-brexit-referendum/
  195. https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/13538642/indy-ref-no-campaign-project-fear-name/
  196. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/11/project-fear-started-as-a-silly-private-joke-now-it-wont-go-away
  197. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/five-remain-doomsday-predictions-that-aged-the-worst/
  198. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4419490/Only-two-Osborne-s-19-Brexit-forecasts-come-true.html
  199. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/03/09/project-fear-is-the-legacy-of-decades-of-euroscepticism-dare-cameron-make-a-positive-case-for-the-eu/
  200. https://metro.co.uk/2017/06/23/a-year-on-from-the-brexit-vote-did-project-fears-depressing-predictions-come-true-6728815/
  201. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/01/23/project-fear-was-groundless-the-uk-economy-has-been-remarkably-resilient/
  202. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3353017/just-one-in-ten-of-remain-campaigns-dire-project-fear-warnings-about-brexit-have-come-true-research-reveals/
  203. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-09/100-days-of-brexit-was-it-as-bad-as-project-fear-warned
  204. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/21/brexiteers-project-fear-expert-warnings
  205. https://conservativehome.mystagingwebsite.com/2022/01/03/ten-brexit-predictions-that-have-not-transpired/
  206. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-governments-negotiating-objectives-for-exiting-the-eu-pm-speech
  207. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7938/CBP-7938.pdf
  208. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51351914
  209. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/02/27/uks-red-lines-brexit-deal/
  210. https://www.ft.com/content/45e87b12-f0a1-424c-bf52-7785e33e3bb8
  211. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-draws-red-lines-for-brexit-talks/
  212. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/remainer
  213. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/remainer
  214. https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
  215. https://www.oed.com/dictionary/remoaner_n
  216. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7960/CBP-7960.pdf
  217. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/rejoiner
  218. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/where-rejoiners-are-going-wrong/
  219. https://www.the-independent.com/news/uk/politics/brexit-britain-rejoin-eu-gina-miller-b2362472.html
  220. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jul/13/most-people-in-france-germany-italy-and-spain-would-support-uk-rejoining-eu-poll-finds
  221. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/five-reasons-why-rejoining-the-eu-is-a-difficult-path-to-follow/
  222. https://www.euractiv.com/news/what-brexit-betrayal-brit-rejoiners-unimpressed-by-starmers-reset/
  223. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0067/
  224. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-facts/what-is-soft-brexit/
  225. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47773982
  226. https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2018/06/25/how-a-soft-brexit-differs-from-a-hard-one
  227. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-brexit-options-explained/
  228. https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-publishes-brexit-white-paper/
  229. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47781009
  230. https://www.columbiathreadneedleus.com/binaries/content/assets/cti-blog/04.08.19-hard-or-soft-brexit-the-impact.pdf?cid=ctwp
  231. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5bfe7d6c40f0b65b14fc6631/28_November_EU_Exit_-_Taking_back_control_of_our_borders__money_and_laws_while_protecting_our_economy__security_and_Union__1_.pdf
  232. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-government-to-set-its-own-laws-for-its-own-people-as-brexit-freedoms-bill-introduced
  233. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/40-reasons-to-back-the-brexit-deal
  234. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/uk-eu-trade-and-cooperation-agreement
  235. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10040/
  236. https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/committees/current-and-previous-committees/session-6-constitution-europe-external-affairs-and-culture-committee/business-items/review-of-the-eu-uk-trade-and-cooperation-agreement
  237. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/602cf3dbd3bf7f031ce1360e/TCA_SUMMARY_PDF_V1-.pdf
  238. https://www.uktpo.org/reports/taking-stock-of-the-uk-eu-trade-and-cooperation-agreement-trade-in-goods/
  239. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/explainer-fisheries/
  240. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/trade-and-cooperation-agreement-implementation-report-2023-2024/trade-and-cooperation-agreement-implementation-report-2023-2024-html
  241. https://legalblogs.wolterskluwer.com/arbitration-blog/sandeels-and-sovereignty-the-first-ruling-under-the-uk-eu-trade-agreement/
  242. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czdy3r6q9mgo
  243. https://www.bbc.com/news/54152583
  244. https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/2021-03/notice-to-stakeholders-brexit-company-law_en.pdf
  245. https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/glossary/third-country
  246. https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/councileu/redirection/item/663312
  247. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9157/
  248. https://www.the-independent.com/travel/news-and-advice/what-is-third-country-brexit-eu-b1783943.html
  249. https://www.njordlaw.com/brexit-united-kingdom-recognised-safe-third-country
  250. https://www.europeanpapers.eu/en/europeanforum/uk-as-third-country-current-model-cooperation-with-european-union
  251. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08853908.2025.2463375
  252. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/28/frictionless-unicorns-max-fac-brexit-lingo
  253. https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/people-are-struggling-to-understand-all-the-brexit-terms-research-finds-347324
  254. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-eu-s-brexit-unicorns/
  255. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/05/brexitspeak-brexit-vocabulary-growing-too-fast-public-keep-up
  256. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-windsor-framework
  257. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/relations-united-kingdom/eu-uk-withdrawal-agreement/windsor-framework_en
  258. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/the-windsor-framework-further-detail-and-publications
  259. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/windsor-framework
  260. https://www.nicustomstradeacademy.co.uk/overview-of-windsor-framework/
  261. https://www.niassembly.gov.uk/assembly-business/brexit-and-beyond/the-windsor-framework/
  262. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/windsor-framework-explainer/windsor-framework-agreement-on-the-supply-of-medicines-in-northern-ireland-explained
  263. https://www.grantthorntonni.com/insights/factsheets/key-dates-for-the-implementation-of-the-windsor-framework/
  264. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/trading-under-wto-rules
  265. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/no-deal-brexit-and-wto-article-24-explained/
  266. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-goods-and-services-schedules-at-the-wto
  267. https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/united_kingdom_e.htm
  268. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldeucom/72/7209.htm
  269. https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationships-country-and-region/countries-and-regions/united-kingdom_en
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.