When Andy Burnham took charge as the U.K.’s Prime Minister on July 20, he became the seventh occupant of 10 Downing Street since the country decided to exit the European Union (EU) by a narrow margin in the Brexit referendum held in June 2016.

The fact that the U.K. has never seen these many Prime Ministers in any 10-year period in at least the last five decades speaks to the political volatility the country is witnessing. Although one cannot attribute the unprecedented revolving door of Prime Ministers to Brexit alone, the instability provides the backdrop to test whether the U.K.’s exit from the EU — which legally came into force in January 2020 — made any difference in meeting the objectives it purportedly wanted to achieve.

The two key arguments made in favour of the exit were to control migration and enable the U.K. to chart its own path in trade by freeing the country from the “unfair” regulations imposed by the EU.

Taking back control of borders

The ‘Vote Leave’ campaign used the famous slogan “take back control”, meaning in part to increase control over the U.K.’s borders and break free from the EU’s free movement programme, which allows citizens of member countries to live and travel across other member countries without a visa.

Seven months after the referendum, the then Prime Minister Theresa May said, “Brexit must mean control of the number of people who come to Britain from Europe.” The Conservative Party manifesto for the 2019 election, which Boris Johnson won to become the Prime Minister, promised that there would be fewer lower-skilled immigrants and that overall immigration would come down. Instead, the data show that net migration (immigration minus emigration) moved in the opposite direction, although immigration from EU countries fell.

After free movement between the U.K. and the EU ended in January 2021, net migration reached 8,91,000 in 2022 and 8,48,000 in 2023, more than three times the 2016 level. In fact, the total net migration of 2.7 million in the five-year period from 2021 to 2025 was more than double the 1.27 million recorded in the five years before the Brexit vote (2012-2016).

Brexit campaigners had promised to cut overall numbers by replacing EU free movement with a common system covering migrants from everywhere. While a unified system was put in place, the trends for EU and non-EU migrants diverged sharply.

In the 2012-2016 period, net migration from EU countries to the U.K. marginally exceeded the country’s overall net migration figure. For instance, in 2016, net migration from EU and non-EU countries stood at 2,53,000 and 90,000 respectively, while 94,000 U.K. nationals left the country. This left the U.K.’s net migration in 2016 at 2,49,000. The trend has since reversed: from mid-2022, net migration from the EU to the U.K. has been negative. Thus, Brexit did not reduce migration but altered the composition of migrants.

Mixed outcomes in trade

Trade tells another complicated story. Brexit campaigners touted leaving the EU as a chance to reduce dependence on the bloc’s regulations and expand commerce with the rest of the world while continuing to have full access to the European market.
The COVID-19 pandemic coincided with the U.K.’s formal exit from the EU and the U.K.-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement. The agreement was a last-ditch free trade deal to continue zero tariffs and avoid reverting to the World Trade Organization’s rules, which Ms. May claimed would allow “for the freest possible trade in goods and services between Britain and the EU’s member states.”

Though the U.K.’s exports to countries in the EU, in current prices, have grown year-on-year since 2021, its trade deficit has also widened due to higher imports from these countries.

Across each year from 2012 to 2025, the U.K. ran a trade deficit with EU countries and a surplus with non-EU countries. Though the pattern held, the U.K.’s trade deficit with the EU as a percentage of its exports to the bloc increased from 13.5% in 2021 to 23.5% in 2025. At the same time, the country has not been able to significantly improve its trade surplus with other countries, indicating that Brexit perhaps did not help the U.K. in any considerable measure on the trade front.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the resulting spike in energy prices benefited the U.K., which re-exported gas to EU countries. The Office for National Statistics reported that European demand, combined with Britain’s regasification infrastructure, which converted imported LNG back into pipeline gas, nearly tripled gas exports to record levels in April 2022 — possibly explaining the peak of £202.9 billion worth of goods exported to EU countries in 2022. However, U.K.’s goods exports haven’t recovered to their 2019 pre-pandemic peak. Inflation-adjusted goods exports remained weaker in 2025 than before the pandemic and before the U.K.-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement took effect in 2021.

On services, the U.K.’s exports to EU and non-EU countries follow largely parallel trends. Though services exports fell sharply during the pandemic, they have recovered since, suggesting that Brexit did not derail them — although sectors dependent on moving staff, particularly in EU countries, faced higher regulatory costs.

Source: Office for National Statistics, Government of the U.K.

Published – July 30, 2026 08:00 am IST

A London-based professional who chairs the Labour Party’s diaspora group, Labour Indians, was on Friday nominated by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer as one of his 30 picks for new political peerages in the House of Lords, to be approved by King Charles III.

Krish Raval, awarded an OBE in 2018 by Queen Elizabeth II for Services to Leadership Education and Inter-faith Cohesion, is the Founder-Director of Faith in Leadership – a University of Oxford-based organisation working towards fostering inter-faith relations.

He is now expected to join the Labour benches in the Upper House of the UK Parliament as a life peer, along with Starmer’s former chief of staff Sue Gray and former Labour shadow minister of Sri Lankan heritage Thangam Debbonnaire.

“The King has been graciously pleased to signify his intention of conferring peerages of the United Kingdom for Life,” reads the Downing Street statement announcing the nominations this week.

An independent House of Lords Appointments Commission (HOLAC) vets these nominations before the Prime Minister can formally recommend them to the King.

This is followed by legal documents, or the writ of summons, issued by Parliament and a Letters Patent issued by the monarch to create a life peerage for the new members to be able to take their seat in the House of Lords and vote.

The Labour Party has nominated 30 peers in what is seen as an attempt to balance the numbers in the Lords, where the Tories have the most number of peers.

Once the new nominations are approved, which include Opposition Conservative Party Leader Kemi Badenoch’s six picks and Liberal Democrats’ two, the governing Labour Party is expected to have 217 peers, Tories 279 and Lib Dems 80. Over 180 crossbench peers are also part of the Lords as unaffiliated to any party, which means no party has an outright majority in the Upper Chamber of Parliament.

While Badenoch has nominated former deputy prime minister Therese Coffey among her choices, the Lib Dems have British Pakistani councillor Shaffaq Mohammed on their list. According to reports, former prime minister Rishi Sunak’s nominations for the House of Lords are expected at a later date.
 

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

London:

An ‘urgent’ issue was tabled today in the House of Commons in UK’s parliament over the worrisome situation in Bangladesh. Members of Parliament raised concern over the recent attacks on the Hindu minority in the south Asian nation and also discussed the religious crackdown on Hindu monks by the interim government in the country.

Labour Party MP Barry Gardiner, had on Monday, asked for an urgent session in the British parliament to discuss the situation in Bangladesh which London has been monitoring closely.

Informing the House about initiatives taken by Britain so far, the foreign office in-charge for the Indo-Pacific region, Catherine West said she had visited Bangladesh last month and held meetings with the leadership of the interim government in the country. She said that UK was among the first countries to take up the issue with Dhaka and was given verbal assurances by Bangladesh’s chief adviser Mohamed Yunus.

Ms West also mentioned concerns raised by New Delhi over the happenings in Bangladesh. “We are aware of the statement of concern from the Indian government following the arrest of Chinmoy Krishna Das, a well-known Hindu leader, on sedition charges. The UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) desk is closely monitoring those developments,” said Ms West.

She went on to say that “The UK government will continue to monitor the situation, including making representations from this House, and will engage with the interim government in Bangladesh on the importance of freedom of religion or belief specifically as it affects the Hindu community.”

Conservative MP Priti Patel, who is the Shadow Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs called the situation in Bangladesh “deeply, deeply concerning”.

Referring to the surge in incidents of violence, vandalism, and desecration targeting Hindu minorities, Ms Patel said, “The degree of escalation in violence is deeply concerning. What we are witnessing now is uncontrolled violence in many quarters. We are watching with horror and shock as further violence spreads in Bangladesh. The thoughts of all of us in the House are with the diaspora community here and those affected in Bangladesh. These are deeply disturbing reports.”

I am deeply concerned by the awful violence we have seen in Bangladesh, and my thoughts are with those affected.

In Parliament this afternoon, I called on the Government to set out how they are engaging with the Bangladeshi Government on this pressing and important issue.… pic.twitter.com/jRXciBQIKH

— Priti Patel MP (@pritipatel) December 2, 2024

She went on to ask the British government to delve into what is being done about the release of Hindu priest Chinmoy Krishna Das, who has been arrested in Bangladesh. “We have a religions
leader who has now been arrested. We need to know effectively what is being done to secure his release, due process in particular. But at the same time, can the Minister give details of the government’s engagement with Bangladesh on this particular matter. What discussions have taken place so far, and have we been robust in pursuing the right to protect life, the prevention of violence, and persecution, and importantly, tolerance for religious belief.”

Barry Gardiner, MP for Brent West in London, which has a large British Hindu population, described the situation as being “clearly on a knife edge”.

Another MP, Bob Blackman, who is the chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for British Hindus, said “Hindus are suffering with their houses being burned and their businesses ransacked. Priests have been arrested, and I understand that two more were arrested over the weekend, and 63 monks have been denied access to the country. The clear issue is an attempt at the ethnic cleansing of Hindus from Bangladesh. We want to hear not just words of piety, but absolute condemnation of what is going on. Religious minorities are being deliberately persecuted because of their religion.”

Since Sheikh Hasina was forced to step down as prime minister, the new military-backed interim administration, led by Nobel laureate Mohammed Yunus, has faced criticism for failing to control violence against minorities. This includes instances of vandalism and desecration at temples, damage of Hindu businesses and properties, and homes of Hindus being attacked.
 

Supporters of the “Not Dead Yet” campaign, which opposes the Assisted Dying Bill, react outside the Houses of Parliament as news breaks that the Bill has passed the first stage, on November 29, 2024 in London, England.
| Photo Credit: Getty Images

British lawmakers gave initial approval on Friday (November 29, 2024) to a bill to help terminally ill adults end their lives in England and Wales, following an impassioned debate that saw people sharing personal stories of loss and suffering.

Members of Parliament approved the assisted dying bill by a 330-275 vote, signalling their approval in principle for the bill, which will undergo further scrutiny before it goes to a final vote.

Friday’s vote came after hours of debate — emotional at times — that touched on issues of ethics, faith and law. There was no braying and shouting that often marks debates in the House of Commons and speeches were considered respectfully and heard in silence.

“Let’s be clear, we’re not talking about a choice between life or death, we are talking about giving dying people a choice about how to die,” the bill’s main sponsor, Kim Leadbeater, said as she presented the bill to a packed chamber.

Supporters said the law would provide dignity to the dying and prevent suffering, while protecting the vulnerable.

Opponents said the disabled and elderly were at risk of being coerced, directly or indirectly, to end their lives to save money or relieve the burden on family members. Others called for the improvement of palliative care to ease suffering as an alternative.

The proposed bill would allow adults over the age of 18 who are expected to have fewer than six months to live to request and be provided help to end their life, subject to several safeguards.

They would have to be capable of taking the fatal drugs themselves, and two independent doctors and a High Court judge will have to sign off on any decision. The bill will not apply to Scotland or Northern Ireland.

Arguments for and against

Backers of the bill told heart-wrenching stories about constituents and family members who suffered in the final months of their lives and dying people who committed suicide in secret because it is currently a crime for anyone to provide assistance.

Danny Kruger, who led the argument against the bill, cautioned lawmakers not to back a “state suicide service.” He argued that no amount of safeguards will stop many vulnerable people feeling the pressure to make a request to end their lives.

Mr. Kruger voiced his disappointment at the outcome but said there’s a chance lawmakers will reject the bill when it comes back for a vote in the next few months. Some of those voting in favor said they only did so to examine the details further and could potentially vote against it in the future.

“I still think we can stop it,” he said.

Across the political divide

Although the bill was proposed by Ms. Leadbeater, a member of the ruling center-left Labour Party, it was an open vote with alliances formed across the political divide.

The government is widely expected to come up in the next few months with assessments on how assisted dying will be funded and how it would impact the U.K.’s state-funded National Health Service, hospice care and the legal system.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer did not show his hand ahead of the vote, but backed the change. Others in his Cabinet, including Health Secretary Wes Streeting and the Justice Minister Shabana Mahmood, voted against. There were similar divisions across other political parties.

Long-time British campaigner Esther Rantzen, who is terminally ill with lung cancer and played a leading role in advocating the need for a vote on assisted dying, voiced her joy at the “wonderful” outcome and said it will give people an “equal choice.”

When diagnosed with her terminal illness, Ms. Rantzen said she would travel to Switzerland to bring an end to her life, where the law allows assisted dying for non-residents.

Hundreds of people on both sides of the issue gathered outside Parliament on a cold but bright day as the debate continued for nearly five hours.

Opponents held signs saying, “Kill the bill, not the ill,” and, referring to the National Health Service, “NHS It’s cradle to grave. Not ’til old, inconvenient or expensive!”

The group Dignity in Dying, many wearing pink winter hats, led supporters as they clutched signs saying “Giving me choice over my death,” and “You can’t cure death. Please make it fear free.”

Backers of the measure erupted in cheers when the result was announced and hugged each other.

“It’s a relief, it’s history, finally we are getting towards having a society that shows love and compassion above the need to just keep people alive,” said Joshua Cook, 33, who has Huntington’s disease, an incurable neurodegenerative disease.

Other countries that have legalised assisted suicide include Australia, Belgium, Canada and parts of the United States, with regulations on who is eligible varying by jurisdiction.

Assisted suicide is different from euthanasia, allowed in the Netherlands and Canada, which involves health care practitioners administering a lethal injection at the patient’s request in specific circumstances.

London:

A large crowd gathered outside the Houses of Parliament in London on Saturday to protest the alleged violence against minority Hindus and other groups in Bangladesh following the resignation and departure of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina earlier this week.

Protesters carried Bangladeshi flags and held posters with messages such as “Protect our temples in Bangladesh,” “Hindu lives matter,” and “We want justice.”

They chanted slogans demanding peace and equality amidst the recent surge in violence.

The demonstration included activists from various human rights organizations, members of the Bangladeshi diaspora, and Indian-American Hindu allies standing in solidarity with Bangladesh’s Hindu community.

Unadi, a protester from Bangladesh, expressed concern over the helplessness of Bangladeshi Hindus, saying that the majority population prevents them from speaking out against injustices.

“Our country became independent in 1971 so that all communities could live peacefully. But now, we are suffering from atrocities committed by the majority community,” Unadi said.

He compared the situation in Bangladesh to other countries, noting that while governments around the world protect their minorities, the opposite is true in Bangladesh, forcing many to flee the country.

“The mentality of the people has to change so that we can live peacefully. In modern times like these, all communities must learn to coexist peacefully. We are all equals,” he added.

A protester from the Bengali Christian Association in the UK highlighted the need for equal treatment of all communities.

“I demand the interim government to amend the constitution, as it currently states that Bangladesh is a Muslim country. However, all communities fought for Bangladesh’s independence, so the country belongs to everyone,” she said.

Another protester pointed out that Bangladeshi minorities are being forced to flee due to ongoing atrocities by the majority community.

“We are gathered here because, for the past five to six days, people in Bangladesh have been torturing and burning our houses. They cannot take our country from us, and they cannot deport us. We want to live safely and peacefully in our country. The violence against minorities must stop,” he said.

Another protester shared that his home in Bangladesh had been looted and set on fire just days ago.

“My house was burned. A few days ago, many people looted our house,” he said.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)