Prime Minister Andy Burnham will hold a summit with EU leaders in October (Image: Getty)
The UK could join a new “European Confederation” under plans to unravel Brexit presented to Andy Burnham. It would mean rejoining the EU’s single market, while Britain would pledge to send armed forces – and use its nuclear deterrent – to defend Europe if needed.
Proposals to unravel Brexit have been presented to government officials as Mr Burnham prepares for an October summit with EU leaders, where the Prime Minister is expected to agree a new deal on energy, food exports and relaxing border controls for young people. The Confederation plan was drawn up by former Conservative MP Nick Boles, now a Labour adviser who helped with Sir Keir Starmer’s preparations for government.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Jonathan Powell, the national security adviser, was one of the officials presented with the proposals.
According to the Telegraph, the UK, Ukraine, Switzerland, Norway and the Western Balkan could join the confederation.
It would give the UK access to the EU’s Single Market for goods without having to accept freedom of movement or to scrap the pound and replace it with the euro.
Mr Boles told The Telegraph: “If we’re trying to do a bilateral negotiation in which we try to persuade the EU to have us have access to the single market for goods, we will fail.
“But if we make a proposal that solves other problems they have, like Ukraine… that’s the possibility where the selling might be easier. We can explain this isn’t just a selfish British deal, it’s a deal you can use to solve other problems yourselves.”
A government source said Ministers were working on proposals to deepen UK-EU cooperation.
Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband has reportedly attempted to take control of post-Brexit negotiations, and accepted an invitation to attend an informal meeting of foreign affairs ministers in Brussels.
But he has lost a Whitehall turf war, with the Cabinet Office, which oversaw preparations for Keir Starmer’s EU “reset” deal, maintaining control.
Andy Burnham Handed Blueprint to Reverse Brexit With UK Joining ‘European Confederation’
Andy Burnham has been presented with a proposal that could dramatically reshape Britain’s relationship with Europe, reopening the debate over Brexit and offering a possible route back towards the European single market without requiring the UK to immediately rejoin the European Union.
The blueprint, developed by former Conservative MP Nick Boles, proposes the creation of a “European Confederation” that would bring Britain and other countries outside the EU into a closer economic and security partnership with the bloc. The concept would offer a different route towards European cooperation, potentially allowing Britain to participate in the single market for goods while retaining the pound and avoiding the automatic restoration of free movement. <Cite refs={[“turn140917news2″,”turn140917search6”]} />
The proposal arrives at a politically sensitive moment. Brexit remains one of the most divisive questions in modern British politics, with supporters emphasising national sovereignty and independent decision-making, while critics point to trade barriers, additional bureaucracy and lost economic opportunities.
For Burnham, the blueprint presents both an opportunity and a challenge. It offers a potential alternative to the existing post-Brexit arrangement, but any attempt to pursue it would require negotiations with European leaders, difficult compromises and a convincing explanation to British voters.
Most importantly, the proposal is an idea put forward by Boles, not an agreed government policy. Whether it becomes the basis for negotiations remains uncertain.
What Is the European Confederation?
The central idea is to establish a broader European partnership outside the EU’s existing membership structure.
Rather than requiring every participating country to join the European Union under the same terms, the proposed confederation would create an additional framework for cooperation. Countries could work more closely with the EU on trade, security and strategic priorities while retaining some arrangements that distinguish them from full members.
According to Boles’s proposal, Britain could seek access to the single market for goods through an agreement linked to closer European defence cooperation. The blueprint also envisages commitments to European security, including increased defence spending and an expanded role for Britain’s military capabilities. <Cite refs={[“turn140917news2″,”turn140917search6”]} />
The idea is intended to address two problems simultaneously. Britain wants closer economic ties with its largest nearby trading bloc, while European countries face growing questions about defence, geopolitical instability and their ability to protect their shared interests.
Boles’s argument is that a proposal offering benefits to both sides may have a better chance of gaining support than a British request for economic advantages without a wider strategic contribution.
That is the political calculation behind the confederation concept: Britain would not simply ask Europe to make an exception for it. Instead, it would offer something in return.
However, the details would be decisive. The EU has established rules governing participation in its single market, and any arrangement that allowed a non-member to gain substantial access without accepting the normal obligations would require careful negotiation.
A new institutional framework might provide flexibility, but it would not automatically guarantee agreement from all the countries involved.
Could This Reverse Brexit Without Rejoining the EU?
For supporters of closer European integration, the proposal could represent a significant change in direction.
Leaving the EU removed Britain from the bloc’s single market and customs union, introducing new procedures and requirements for many businesses trading across European borders. Although the UK retained extensive economic relationships with European countries, its position changed substantially after Brexit.
A confederation could offer a way to reduce some of those barriers without immediately returning to full EU membership.
The proposed arrangement is particularly focused on goods, where customs procedures, product standards and border checks can create costs for exporters and importers. Businesses dealing in food, agricultural products, manufacturing components and other physical goods could benefit if a future agreement reduced unnecessary friction.
Yet the precise benefits would depend on the agreement negotiated. Access to the single market generally involves accepting common rules and enforcement arrangements. A new confederation would need to establish how Britain followed relevant standards, how disputes were resolved and what role the UK would have in shaping the rules it applied.
The distinction between participation and influence would therefore be important. Britain might obtain greater access to European markets while still having less formal influence over decisions than it enjoyed as an EU member.
That could become a major point of contention in the political debate.
The Defence Bargain at the Heart of the Plan
One of the most distinctive features of Boles’s proposal is its emphasis on security.
Britain remains a major European military power and possesses an independent nuclear deterrent. The blueprint envisages using those capabilities as part of a wider European security arrangement, potentially involving increased defence spending and a broader commitment to protecting participating countries. <Cite refs={[“turn140917news2″,”turn140917search6”]} />
The strategic argument is that European security and economic prosperity are closely connected. A more stable and secure continent benefits trade, investment and cooperation, while stronger defence arrangements could reduce vulnerabilities at a time of international uncertainty.
Supporters may also argue that Britain and its European neighbours have overlapping interests that extend beyond the terms of their post-Brexit relationship. Cooperation on defence, energy, technology and industrial resilience could offer benefits to both sides.
However, military commitments are not simply bargaining chips. They involve long-term expenditure, operational responsibilities and difficult decisions about national security. Any proposal would need to explain precisely what Britain was promising, which countries would be covered and how those commitments would interact with existing NATO arrangements.
A pledge to spend more on defence could also compete with other public spending priorities. The government would need to demonstrate that the financial obligations were sustainable and that the arrangement strengthened, rather than complicated, existing security cooperation.
The defence dimension may help distinguish the confederation idea from a conventional trade negotiation, but it also makes the proposal considerably more complex.
Why Andy Burnham Faces a Political Test
Burnham’s position would be complicated by the competing expectations surrounding Brexit.
Some voters want a closer relationship with the EU because they believe the current arrangements have damaged trade and investment. Others remain committed to the principle that Britain should make its own decisions without being bound by European institutions.
A proposal that promises closer economic integration without full membership could appeal to people who want practical improvements but are reluctant to revisit the entire Brexit settlement.
Nevertheless, the same compromise could attract criticism from both directions. Some pro-European campaigners may argue that a confederation would leave Britain following rules without having a full seat at the decision-making table. Brexit supporters may object to any arrangement that requires regulatory alignment or additional financial and military commitments.
Burnham would therefore need to explain what the proposal would achieve that could not be secured through existing negotiations.
He would also have to make clear whether the confederation was intended as a permanent alternative to EU membership or as a possible intermediate step towards closer integration.
These are different ambitions, and voters deserve to know which one a government is pursuing.
The political challenge would be to present a practical case based on trade, jobs, security and economic performance rather than simply reopening the arguments of 2016.
Would Europe Agree?
Even if the British government supported the proposal, it could not implement it unilaterally.
The European Union would need to assess whether the arrangement was compatible with its legal framework, the integrity of the single market and the interests of its existing members.
European leaders would also have to consider whether the proposal offered sufficient benefits to justify creating a new institutional structure. Some may welcome a closer British contribution to European security, while others could question whether the proposed economic concessions would undermine existing membership rules.
The relationship between Britain and the EU has also been affected by years of difficult negotiations and changing political priorities. Rebuilding trust would require more than an attractive concept. It would require clear commitments, reliable implementation and evidence that Britain intended to maintain a stable relationship over the long term.
The idea of a confederation could provide a framework for discussing those issues, but it should not be mistaken for a ready-made agreement.
The EU’s response would depend on the details, the benefits offered to participating countries and whether the proposed arrangements could operate without weakening the rules that underpin the single market.
What Would It Mean for Ordinary Britons?
For the public, the value of any new European arrangement would ultimately be measured by its practical effects.
If it reduced unnecessary trade barriers, British exporters could find it easier to serve European customers. Businesses might face fewer administrative obstacles, while improved cooperation could support investment and supply chains.
But no agreement could guarantee an immediate economic transformation. The effects would vary between industries, and the benefits would depend on the terms negotiated, the costs of compliance and the ability of businesses to take advantage of improved market access.
There would also be questions about migration, public finances and democratic accountability. The proposal’s appeal partly rests on the possibility of closer economic cooperation without automatically restoring freedom of movement, but the precise arrangements would need to be negotiated rather than assumed.
The government would have to explain whether the deal involved new financial contributions, what obligations Britain would accept and how disagreements with European institutions would be resolved.
Without transparent answers, the proposal could create expectations that the eventual agreement would struggle to meet.
A New Chapter or Another Brexit Compromise?
Boles’s European Confederation blueprint offers a different way of thinking about Britain’s place in Europe. Rather than treating the choice as a simple decision between remaining outside the EU and returning as a full member, it proposes a broader partnership that combines economic cooperation with shared security responsibilities.
That makes it an idea worth examining, but not a guaranteed solution to Britain’s post-Brexit challenges.
Its success would depend on whether the EU considered the proposed arrangement workable, whether the British government was willing to accept the necessary obligations and whether the public believed the benefits justified the costs.
For Burnham, the immediate task would be to clarify his ambitions for Britain’s European relationship and establish which options he is genuinely prepared to pursue. Any major shift would require political scrutiny, detailed negotiations and an honest account of the trade-offs.
The wider debate is no longer simply about whether Brexit should be reversed. It is about what kind of relationship Britain wants with its European neighbours, how much cooperation it is prepared to accept and what it expects to gain in return.
A European Confederation could become part of that discussion. Whether it develops into a workable agreement, however, will depend on decisions that have yet to be made.