Andy Burnham said he wants an “honest discussion” about the possibility of a return to free movement between the UK and European Union as part of his plans for a new relationship with the bloc.

The Prime Minister wants to consider various options for a new relationship with Brussels, potentially including a return to full EU membership or joining the single market – which would require free movement. He told the Sunday Times: “I think you have to have a very factual, quite evidence-based debate about this.”

The Prime Minister has previously committed to the red lines in Labour’s 2024 election manifesto – which ruled out the return of free movement, single market membership or a customs union – suggesting any fundamental change in the relationship would have to wait until after a general election. The issue of migration was one of the dominant factors during the 2016 Brexit referendum campaign.

But he suggested the type of migration experienced during the years of EU membership was different from the challenges faced now. He said: “It was generally younger people, not always, but spending a few years, then going back. And obviously the ease of that worked for British people as well.”

Mr Burnham will meet the European Union’s chiefs at a summit on November 20 in Brussels. He has said he will take the opportunity around the summit to lay out to the British public different options for the future relationship with the bloc.

The Prime Minister acknowledged 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),” he added. “Revolving door migration where people would come and then go back is different. 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.”

But Mr Burnham said he could not imagine recommending the UK joins the Schengen borderless area or ditches the pound to adopt the euro, he added: “I can’t see myself ever recommending anything that would involve joining the euro or Schengen.”

Nigel Farage said the comments were a betrayal of voters who backed Brexit, including in Mr Burnham’s Makerfield constituency.

The Reform UK leader said: “This is a total betrayal of Brexit Britain and his Makerfield pitch. He is also deluded to say immigration was different when we were members of the EU. We will fight this dishonesty.”

Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: “Andy Burnham knows full well that a return to EU free movement would mean handing back control of our borders and allowing uncontrolled migration from across Europe. The British people voted to end free movement, and there can be no return to it.”

The Sunday Times conducted a series of interviews with Mr Burnham in the in the run-up to his 100th day in office on Tuesday.

“Three months in, I’ve got the measure of it now,” Mr Burnham said. “I know the tram lines. I’ve got to be radical, but disciplined. I’ve got to be connected on the ground, but sufficiently detached in a way. I’ve got to balance some opposites. I know a lot is riding on it. ”

Mr Burnham revealed he had “connected” with US president Donald Trump “more than I imagined”.

“Like me, he will happily divert onto sport for a good 20 minutes,” he said. “ Golf, in his case.” He said they had “many differences” but “there’s something about a more instinctive approach … The over-calculation of politics is what puts the public off”.

The Prime Minister also said he took strength from his Catholic faith. Asked if he prays or leant on the faith for guidance, he said “it’s looser” than that.

“I wouldn’t want to overemphasise it but it’s all still there inside, if I could put it that way. It can never not be there. I do take strength from it. My dad’s funeral was at the same church where I was an altar boy. You go back and you feel the pull of it all.”

Andy Burnham Wants ‘Honest Discussion’ on EU Freedom of Movement Return

Andy Burnham has reopened one of Britain’s most divisive political debates by calling for an “honest discussion” about the possibility of restoring freedom of movement between the United Kingdom and the European Union.

The Prime Minister’s remarks have reignited questions about Brexit, immigration control and Britain’s long-term relationship with Brussels. Almost a decade after the 2016 referendum, the debate over whether leaving the EU delivered the changes voters expected is once again moving towards the centre of British politics.

Burnham has argued that the pattern of immigration has changed since Brexit and that Britain needs to examine the consequences of its current arrangements. However, he has also made clear that he will not restore freedom of movement without a referendum and will not abandon Labour’s existing Brexit commitments during the current Parliament. <Cite refs={[“turn535662search0″,”turn535662search8”]}/>

His position creates a difficult political balancing act. He wants to explore closer cooperation with European countries while avoiding the impression that his Government intends to reverse Brexit without public consent.

For supporters of a closer relationship with Europe, the discussion represents an opportunity to reconsider policies that may be limiting economic cooperation. For critics, it risks reopening an argument that the country settled through a democratic vote.

Why Burnham Wants to Reopen the Debate

In an interview with The Sunday Times, Burnham acknowledged that freedom of movement had created significant challenges before Brexit. Nevertheless, he suggested that migration from EU countries had often followed a different pattern, with some people arriving to work for a limited period before returning home.

He contrasted this with what he described as a greater tendency for some migrants to settle permanently under the arrangements that developed after Brexit.

“The balance of migration has changed,” he argued, calling for a factual and evidence-based discussion about the consequences. <Cite refs={[“turn535662news17″,”turn535662search1”]}/>

The comments reflect Burnham’s broader criticism of Brexit. He has previously argued that leaving the EU did more harm than good and has encouraged Britain to consider the options available for its long-term relationship with European partners.

However, he has not announced a policy to restore freedom of movement immediately. His argument is that Britain should examine the evidence and consider the available choices rather than treating the issue as permanently closed.

That distinction will be central to the debate. Discussing a policy does not mean adopting it, and examining the effects of Brexit does not automatically mean that the Government intends to reverse the referendum result.

Immigration Remains at the Heart of Brexit

Immigration was one of the defining issues of the 2016 referendum campaign. Supporters of leaving the EU argued that ending freedom of movement would allow Britain to exercise greater control over who could enter the country to work and settle.

Following Brexit, the UK introduced a points-based immigration system that changed the way many European nationals could move to Britain for employment. EU citizens generally became subject to immigration requirements that had not applied in the same way when Britain was a member of the bloc.

However, leaving the EU did not immediately produce a sustained fall in overall net migration. The composition of migration changed, with arrivals from outside the EU playing a larger role in the figures.

According to the Office for National Statistics, long-term net migration fell to approximately 171,000 in 2025, compared with 331,000 in 2024. The decline followed changes to visa rules and other Government measures intended to reduce arrivals. <Cite refs={[“turn535662news2″,”turn535662search0”]}/>

These figures complicate the political argument. Brexit changed the rules governing European migration, but the overall level of migration has also been influenced by decisions about work visas, international students, health and care recruitment and other immigration routes.

Consequently, the question facing policymakers is not simply whether freedom of movement should return. It is also whether the existing system is achieving the economic and immigration outcomes the Government wants.

Burnham has argued that migration arrangements should be considered alongside other aspects of the relationship with the EU, including cooperation over immigration data and the ability to return people where appropriate.

He believes Britain lost some useful mechanisms for working with European partners after leaving the bloc. Critics, however, maintain that restoring freedom of movement would weaken the control over immigration that Brexit was intended to secure.

What Would a Return to Freedom of Movement Mean?

Under freedom of movement, eligible EU citizens could move to Britain to live, work and study under rules different from the UK’s current visa system. British citizens would also regain corresponding opportunities in participating European countries if the UK and EU agreed to restore the arrangement.

Such a change could make it easier for businesses to recruit workers from Europe and for younger people to seek employment or educational opportunities abroad.

Some employers, particularly in sectors that rely on seasonal or mobile labour, may welcome arrangements that reduce administrative barriers. British citizens could also benefit from easier access to work and study opportunities across Europe.

However, a return would raise difficult questions about immigration management, public services, employment conditions and the rules governing long-term residence.

Freedom of movement does not mean that every person can automatically receive every public benefit, nor does it eliminate all conditions associated with residence. The precise consequences would depend on the agreement reached between Britain and the EU.

A full return to freedom of movement would also require negotiations with Brussels and significant changes to the UK’s current relationship with the bloc. It is not something the British Government could simply introduce unilaterally while leaving the wider arrangements untouched. <Cite refs={[“turn535662search6″,”turn535662search10”]}/>

Burnham has separately ruled out recommending that Britain join the Schengen area or replace the pound with the euro. His comments indicate that he wants to explore closer European ties without automatically accepting every aspect of EU integration.

Conservatives and Reform UK Prepare to Fight Back

Burnham’s remarks have prompted criticism from political opponents who argue that revisiting freedom of movement would undermine the purpose of Brexit.

Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK, described the proposal as a “total betrayal” of voters who supported leaving the EU. He has argued that a return to freedom of movement would reverse an important outcome of the referendum.

Conservative politicians have also warned that restoring the arrangement could reduce Britain’s ability to control immigration. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp argued that the public had voted to end freedom of movement and that the Government should not seek to bring it back. <Cite refs={[“turn535662search0″,”turn535662news17”]}/>

These objections are likely to remain prominent as the Government develops its European policy. Immigration is a politically sensitive issue, and the prospect of changing the rules could create difficulties for Labour MPs representing constituencies where Brexit remains an important concern.

Burnham’s response has been to emphasise public consultation and the need for an evidence-based debate. His latest clarification that he would not proceed without a referendum is intended to establish a clear boundary between examining the options and making a fundamental change.

Whether that reassurance satisfies voters who oppose freedom of movement remains uncertain.

The November EU Summit Could Be Crucial

Burnham is due to meet senior EU officials in Brussels on 20 November 2026. The meeting is expected to provide an opportunity to discuss practical improvements to relations between Britain and the bloc, including cooperation on trade, food production, youth mobility and migration. <Cite refs={[“turn535662search1″,”turn535662news17”]}/>

The summit could help establish which areas offer the greatest scope for agreement without requiring an immediate decision about full EU membership.

For British businesses, reducing unnecessary trade barriers could be particularly important. For the Government, closer cooperation on migration data and the return of people who have no right to remain could also form part of a broader approach to managing the consequences of Brexit.

Yet the summit is unlikely to resolve every major disagreement. Freedom of movement involves legal, economic and political questions that would require extensive negotiations and public scrutiny.

Burnham will therefore need to explain which changes he wants to pursue now, which are longer-term possibilities and what role voters would have in deciding Britain’s future relationship with Europe.

No Immediate Return, but the Debate Is Back

For the moment, the Government has not announced a plan to restore freedom of movement. Burnham has said that he will maintain Labour’s existing commitments during the current Parliament and will not introduce such a fundamental change without a referendum. <Cite refs={[“turn535662search8″,”turn535662search0”]}/>

That means the immediate debate is about Britain’s future options rather than an imminent change to immigration rules.

The issue nevertheless carries considerable political significance. Brexit remains closely connected to questions of national sovereignty, economic growth, immigration and public trust. Any attempt to change the relationship with the EU will require ministers to explain both the potential benefits and the costs.

Burnham’s call for an honest discussion has reopened an argument that many politicians hoped had been settled. His supporters may see an opportunity to reassess the consequences of Brexit, while opponents fear that the Government could weaken commitments made to voters.

Ultimately, the direction Britain takes will depend on the proposals put forward, the outcome of negotiations with European partners and the public’s response to any future plans.

For now, Burnham is asking the country to consider the evidence. Whether that discussion eventually leads to a referendum or a substantial change in Britain’s relationship with the EU remains an open question.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.