Farage has slammed a ‘brexit betrayal’ (Image: Getty)
Andy Burnham has refused to rule out a free movement deal with the EU in a move slammed as a Brexit betrayal. Now veteran Brexiteers have warned it would leave the UK powerless to stop immigration from Europe. It comes after Mr Burnham said a return to the Brussels scheme was not a red line in any talks, ahead of a crunch summit with eurocrats next month. That is despite Mr Burnham promising voters, when standing for Leave-backing Makerfield, that he was not proposing the UK rejoin the EU or reopen the Brexit debate. Reform UK Leader Nigel Farage branded the Prime Minister’s stance a complete betrayal of the 17.4 million Britons who voted to take back control of the border.
Speaking exclusively to the Daily Express, Mr Farage said: “The cat’s out of the bag. Andy Burnham wants to open the door to 450 million people and leave us powerless to stop them coming in. Freedom of movement would undercut working people’s wages with cheap foreign labour – a complete betrayal of what the British people want and voted for.” The arch-Brexiteer threw down the gauntlet to Mr Burnham, saying: “If he wants open-door immigration risking millions more arrivals, he should call a general election and ask the public.
“Reform will fight the next election on stopping freedom of movement.”
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said: “This is yet another example of Burnham’s foot-in-mouth syndrome. He hasn’t thought this through or the implications.
“Most people who voted for Brexit did so because they didn’t want free movement. Too many politicians have failed to understand the significance and impact of immigration on communities.
“We have had more than enough experience of what happens when politicians (including previous Conservative governments) promise control but fail to deliver it. The answer is to learn from those mistakes, not reopen free movement.”
Battle lines were drawn after Mr Burnham told The Sunday Times: “Freedom of movement had very significant challenges associated with it and I spoke about them in my previous time in parliament. But at the same time, it was a type of immigration that perhaps wasn’t as difficult [as now]. Revolving-door migration where people would come and then go back is different.”
He added: “The balance of migration has changed, hasn’t it, since then? I think we’ve just got to have an honest discussion about those things.”
On free movement, he would only call for “a rounded discussion about it”, pointing to his father, who worked in Germany in the 1990s helping to build the country’s mobile phone network.
But he did slam the door on other parts of the EU project, saying: “I can’t see myself ever recommending anything that would involve joining the euro or Schengen.” Mr Burnham voted Remain, campaigned for Remain, and later backed a second referendum. Last year, he told the Labour Party Conference he wanted to see the UK back in the EU “in my lifetime”.
In May, while fighting the Makerfield by-election in a seat that backed Leave by around 65%, he promised: “I am not proposing that the UK considers rejoining the EU.” When challenged by this paper over his position, he ran away.
Former Tory Chancellor Jeremy Hunt also hit out at the plans, saying he was “absolutely astonished” at the proposal. Citing figures showing more than one million young people are unemployed, he added: “Allowing people from all over Europe to come and take those jobs […] would be a hammer blow.”
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.
Reform UK’s Treasury spokesman Robert Jenrick branded the idea “completely mad”. He told BBC One’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg: “I think it’s completely mad the idea that this country needs more immigration.
“It’s a total mess at the moment. We’re trying to grapple with the Boriswave and all the challenges that we’ve had in recent times. And Andy Burnham is proposing to open our borders to another 450 million people over whom we’d have no control whatsoever.”
Mr Jenrick warned a return to free movement would “undercut the wages of British workers, put more pressure on housing, on the NHS, on doctors, on dentists”.
He added: “What all the data now shows is that mass migration, importing hundreds of thousands or even millions of people into this country, has been a disaster for living standards, for working people, for Brits in this country.”
The Daily Express is campaigning to Give Us A Proper Brexit, demanding Britain quit the European Convention on Human Rights, slash Brussels red tape and enforce a 12-mile fishing zone for British vessels only.
Nigel Farage Tears Into Andy Burnham’s EU Plans and Declares: ‘The Cat’s Out of the Bag!’
Nigel Farage has launched a fierce attack on Prime Minister Andy Burnham after the Labour leader opened the door to discussions about restoring freedom of movement between Britain and the European Union.
The Reform UK leader accused Mr Burnham of betraying the promises associated with Brexit, arguing that a return to free movement could significantly change Britain’s approach to immigration. His intervention has intensified the political debate ahead of a planned UK-EU summit in Brussels on November 20.
Mr Burnham has insisted that Britain needs an honest discussion about its future relationship with Europe. However, his willingness to reconsider freedom of movement has triggered criticism from Brexit supporters, who believe the policy would undermine one of the central objectives of the 2016 referendum. <Cite refs={[“turn418455search0″,”turn418455search1″,”turn418455search2”]}/>
Farage declares ‘the cat’s out of the bag’
Mr Farage’s response was blunt. He accused the Prime Minister of revealing the direction in which he wants to take the country and argued that voters who supported Brexit had been given reason to question the government’s intentions.
In comments reported by the Daily Express, the Reform UK leader said: “The cat’s out of the bag.” He claimed that restoring freedom of movement would open Britain to a much larger pool of potential migrants and reduce the government’s ability to control immigration from EU countries. <Cite refs={[“turn418455search0”]}/>
For Mr Farage, the issue goes beyond the technical details of a future agreement with Brussels. He regards immigration control as one of the defining promises of Brexit and believes any attempt to restore freedom of movement would represent a fundamental change in the settlement established after the referendum.
He has also challenged Mr Burnham to seek a public mandate for such a change rather than pursuing an arrangement that could leave voters feeling that an important decision had been made without their consent.
The dispute gives Reform UK an opportunity to place immigration and Brexit back at the centre of the national political debate. It also puts pressure on Labour to explain precisely what closer relations with Europe would involve.
What has Andy Burnham actually proposed?
The Prime Minister’s comments have prompted considerable speculation, but his stated position is more nuanced than an immediate plan to restore unrestricted movement.
Mr Burnham has said he wants an evidence-based discussion about whether some form of freedom of movement could form part of a broader agreement with the EU. He has argued that the pattern of migration has changed since Brexit and that the country should examine the advantages and disadvantages of different arrangements.
He has also pointed to the experience of people who previously travelled between Britain and European countries to work, study or gain professional experience. In his view, the debate should consider the potential benefits as well as the difficulties associated with migration. <Cite refs={[“turn418455news5″,”turn418455search2”]}/>
However, Mr Burnham has not announced an immediate return to EU free movement. He has said he will not simply push ahead of public opinion, and he has ruled out recommending that Britain adopt the euro or join the Schengen area, the system under which participating European countries have largely removed routine internal border controls. <Cite refs={[“turn418455search1″,”turn418455search2”]}/>
The distinction matters. Opening a discussion about possible arrangements is not the same as reaching an agreement or implementing a new immigration system.
Nevertheless, Mr Burnham’s comments have created a political problem because Labour’s 2024 election manifesto ruled out returning to freedom of movement, joining the single market or entering a customs union. Any substantial departure from those commitments would require the government to explain why its position had changed and what the consequences would be.
Why freedom of movement remains so controversial
Freedom of movement was one of the most politically significant issues during the Brexit referendum campaign in 2016.
Supporters argued that leaving the EU would allow Britain to determine its own immigration policies and reduce the automatic rights of EU citizens to live and work in the country. Opponents of Brexit warned that withdrawal could make trade, recruitment and travel more complicated.
The question remains divisive because it involves several competing concerns.
Employers in some industries argue that access to European workers can help address recruitment difficulties and support economic activity. Businesses also point to the value of allowing British citizens to work and gain experience across Europe.
Critics, meanwhile, argue that high levels of migration can increase competition for housing and public services if infrastructure and investment fail to keep pace. Some are also concerned about the effect of labour supply on wages in particular sectors.
The impact varies depending on the industry, location, skills of workers and wider economic conditions. It would therefore be misleading to assume that every worker, employer or community would experience the same effects from a change in migration policy.
For Mr Farage, however, the political principle is central: he believes the public voted to end automatic free movement and that restoring it would reverse an important part of that decision.
The economic argument for closer European ties
Mr Burnham’s position is partly driven by concerns about Britain’s economic relationship with the EU.
The bloc remains an important trading partner, and businesses have faced additional administrative requirements since Brexit. Supporters of closer cooperation argue that agreements on trade, professional qualifications, research and mobility could reduce certain barriers and help British companies operate more easily in European markets.
Some businesses also want greater certainty about the rules governing cross-border trade. If the government can negotiate arrangements that reduce unnecessary friction while preserving the ability to set domestic policy, supporters argue, the economy could benefit.
However, closer integration involves choices and trade-offs. Access to parts of the single market can require accepting common rules, while freedom of movement would affect how immigration from EU countries is managed.
The central question is therefore not simply whether relations with Brussels should improve. It is which arrangements would offer the greatest practical benefits, what obligations Britain would accept and how the public would be consulted.
Mr Farage argues that the government is underestimating the consequences of reopening these questions. Mr Burnham maintains that the current relationship should not be treated as beyond discussion simply because Britain has already left the EU.
Political pressure builds ahead of the Brussels summit
The forthcoming summit provides a deadline for the government to set out its priorities for the next phase of relations with Europe.
Mr Burnham is expected to discuss options for closer cooperation, with areas such as food and drink trade, youth mobility and emissions trading among the subjects attracting attention. The precise outcome will depend on negotiations and the positions taken by both sides. <Cite refs={[“turn418455search2″,”turn418455search3”]}/>
The freedom-of-movement debate could prove particularly sensitive because it touches on the referendum result and Labour’s previous commitments.
Some senior Labour figures have supported reopening the discussion, while others have urged caution about the political and practical consequences. Opposition parties have seized on the disagreement, arguing that the government needs to explain where it intends to draw the line.
For Reform UK, the issue offers a clear way to challenge Labour among voters who remain concerned about immigration and the implementation of Brexit. Mr Farage is seeking to frame the debate as a question of democratic accountability, national control and whether politicians are respecting the expectations created during the referendum.
Labour faces a different challenge: explaining how it can improve economic cooperation with Europe without appearing to abandon commitments made to voters.
Could Britain return to free movement?
At this stage, a return to EU freedom of movement remains a subject for political discussion rather than an implemented policy.
Any change would depend on the details of negotiations, the legal structure of a potential agreement and the government’s approach to obtaining public and parliamentary support. Rejoining the EU itself would be a separate and more extensive step, and Mr Burnham has said he is not currently proposing that Britain rejoin. <Cite refs={[“turn418455search1″,”turn418455search2”]}/>
There is also an important distinction between full freedom of movement and narrower arrangements, such as youth mobility schemes or sector-specific agreements. These options can have different eligibility rules and consequences, so they should not be treated as interchangeable.
The government will need to clarify which possibilities it is considering and how each would affect immigration, employment, trade and public services.
Until those details are available, claims that Britain is already committed to reopening its borders to all EU citizens go beyond what has been announced.
A debate that could shape British politics
The confrontation between Mr Farage and Mr Burnham illustrates how Brexit continues to influence British politics a decade after the referendum.
For Brexit supporters, the prospect of restoring freedom of movement raises concerns about whether the political settlement they backed is being weakened. For those favouring closer European cooperation, the debate presents an opportunity to reconsider whether the current relationship delivers sufficient economic benefits.
Both questions deserve to be examined against the actual proposals rather than assumptions about what negotiations will produce.
Mr Farage has made clear that Reform UK intends to oppose a return to freedom of movement and campaign on immigration control. Mr Burnham, meanwhile, says Britain needs to assess its options honestly and seek the most beneficial arrangements available.
The coming weeks should provide a clearer indication of the government’s intentions as the Brussels summit approaches.
For now, the political battle is centred on a basic question: how can Britain improve its relationship with Europe without reopening divisions over sovereignty and immigration that have shaped the country for years?
The answer will depend on the details of any proposed agreement, the economic evidence supporting it and the extent to which the government can explain its choices to the public. What is already clear is that Mr Burnham’s willingness to discuss freedom of movement has given Mr Farage a fresh opportunity to challenge Labour over the meaning of Brexit—and ensured that the argument over Britain’s future relationship with Europe is far from over.