Nigel Farage said “hold my jacket” as he vowed to fight and defeat Andy Burnham’s plan to reverse Brexit. The Reform UK leader said he was ready to win the Brexit war a second time, after the Prime Minister said he wanted to rejoin the EU.

Speaking exclusively to the Express, Mr Farage said: “Let me tell you, I dedicated 27 years of my life, I nearly became the patron saint of lost causes backing this in the 90s and the noughties and all the way up – because I have always believed we should be an independent country.

“We should be in control, not a bunch of old men in Brussels that we cannot vote for and can’t remove. I think you can probably see from my reaction, if this fight comes again, well, someone, please hold my jacket.”

Nigel Farage had a message for Express readers (Image: Getty)

He warned Mr Burnham: “Don’t sign up to anything unless you give us a general election on this, you cannot betray the biggest vote in British political history … without giving us a say.”

Asked this morning if the UK should rejoin the EU, Mr Burnham said: “I’ve said I’m going to be honest and say, in my lifetime I would like to see that happen, but I am not going to move ahead of the public.

“I am not going to dictate in terms of my own opinions here – you have to make sure that the British public are the bosses.”

The Prime Minister also suggested over the weekend that the UK could bring back freedom of movement with EU countries. However, he stressed that he remained bound by Labour’s 2024 election manifesto, which ruled this out, meaning that no significant change could be introduced without a fresh general election.

Speaking exclusively to the Daily Express, Mr Farage said Mr Burnham “seems to be very out of date with his thinking, and he is now claiming that as members of the EU, controlling immigration was easier. Well, number one, it meant free movement for 450million people to come to Britain, and number two, illegal immigration … that meant they sent us more than we sent them”.

“All of this ‘isn’t Europe wonderful?’,” he said, was “based on something which is fundamentally untrue and wrong”.

“But there is a bigger point, and the Express led this in many, many ways. We voted to leave the European Union. Everyone promised they’d honour it.”

His message to Express readers was: “Express newspapers coming out in support of me in 2013-14 in support of us leaving the EU was absolutely crucial in the whole history of this. When people look back in 100 years and see me working with the Express, suddenly it’s a very, very powerful combination, and it went all the way through.

“But in the end it was the Brexit Party that got rid of Theresa May, that made Boris PM, but unfortunately it has not been delivered anything like the way we thought it would be.

“Mass migration into Britain was a choice that Boris Johnson’s government made. It was not what Express readers wanted, and it is not what I wanted.”

Nigel Farage Says ‘Hold My Jacket’ as He Vows to Fight Andy Burnham’s Brexit Betrayal

Nigel Farage has declared that he is ready for another battle over Brexit after Prime Minister Andy Burnham reopened the debate about Britain’s future relationship with the European Union.

The Reform UK leader delivered his challenge with a blunt message: “Someone, please hold my jacket.”

The remark came as Farage promised to fight any attempt to take Britain back into the EU, arguing that voters had already made their decision in the 2016 referendum and should not see that result overturned without another public mandate.

The row erupted after Burnham said he wanted an honest discussion about the possibility of restoring freedom of movement between Britain and the EU. The Prime Minister has also said that he would like to see Britain rejoin the bloc during his lifetime, while insisting that he would not impose his personal preference on the public. <Cite refs={[“turn803573search0″,”turn803573search10”]}/>

For Farage, the comments represent a fundamental challenge to the political settlement created by Brexit.

For Burnham, the debate concerns whether closer ties with Europe could improve Britain’s economic prospects after years of difficult relations with Brussels.

The disagreement has brought one of Britain’s most divisive political questions back into the spotlight, with both sides arguing that the country’s long-term future is at stake.

Farage prepares for another Brexit battle

Farage has spent decades campaigning for Britain’s departure from the European Union.

Speaking to the Daily Express, he recalled dedicating 27 years of his political life to the cause, describing his commitment to an independent Britain as a defining part of his career.

He argued that important decisions should be made by elected representatives whom British voters can remove from office, rather than institutions based in Brussels.

Farage warned Burnham against agreeing to any major change in Britain’s relationship with the EU without first allowing voters to express their views in a general election.

His message was that a government should not reverse such a significant constitutional decision without securing a fresh mandate.

The Reform leader also disputed Burnham’s suggestion that immigration had been different when Britain was an EU member. Farage argued that freedom of movement had limited the country’s ability to control migration from EU states.

These are central arguments in Reform’s political case against closer European integration. However, the practical consequences of any future agreement would depend on its precise terms, including the arrangements governing immigration, trade and the movement of workers.

Farage has made clear that Reform would campaign against restoring freedom of movement and would seek to make the issue a major point of debate at the next general election. <Cite refs={[“turn803573search1″,”turn803573search13”]}/>

What exactly has Andy Burnham proposed?

Burnham’s remarks have prompted fierce reactions, but it is important to distinguish between discussing possible changes and announcing a policy that has already been agreed.

The Prime Minister said Britain should have an evidence-based debate about its future relationship with Europe. He indicated that options could include closer integration with the EU and, in the longer term, the possibility of rejoining the bloc.

He has also left open a discussion about freedom of movement, which would be a major change from the current arrangements.

However, Burnham has not announced that Britain will immediately restore freedom of movement. His government remains bound by the commitments in Labour’s 2024 election manifesto, which ruled out returning to freedom of movement, joining the single market or re-entering a customs union during the current parliamentary term.

Burnham has suggested that any fundamental change would require the public to have a say at a future election. He has also said he could not envisage recommending that Britain join the euro or the Schengen border-free travel area. <Cite refs={[“turn803573search10″,”turn803573search0”]}/>

Those distinctions matter because EU membership, single-market participation and a narrower agreement with Brussels would not necessarily produce identical obligations.

Freedom of movement is closely associated with EU membership and single-market participation, but the details of any alternative arrangement would depend on negotiations and the legal framework agreed by both sides.

Farage is nevertheless treating Burnham’s willingness to reopen the subject as a warning that the political settlement reached after the referendum could change.

Why Brexit remains such a sensitive issue

The 2016 referendum saw 17.4 million people vote to leave the European Union, against approximately 16.1 million who voted to remain.

For Leave supporters, the result represented a demand for greater national control over immigration, laws and economic policy.

Many believed that leaving the EU would allow Britain to establish its own rules and negotiate trade arrangements independently.

Others argued that membership had provided important economic advantages, including easier trade with neighbouring countries and the ability for British citizens to live and work across much of Europe.

The subsequent years have produced continuing arguments over whether Brexit delivered the benefits supporters expected and whether the economic consequences justified the disruption.

Businesses have raised concerns about additional trade barriers and administrative requirements, while supporters of Brexit argue that Britain should focus on using its independence rather than returning to the old system.

Public opinion has also evolved. A report by The Independent in October cited polling suggesting that support for rejoining the EU had reached 61 per cent in a particular survey. That finding reflects the views of the people surveyed at that time; it does not mean every voter supports the same terms of re-entry or that a referendum would necessarily produce the same result. <Cite refs={[“turn803573search14”]}/>

The debate is therefore not simply a repeat of 2016. It now involves questions about what Britain has learned from leaving, what kind of relationship it wants with Europe and whether voters would support a different settlement.

Farage sees an opportunity in Labour’s change of tone

Farage has suggested that Burnham’s comments have given Reform a renewed opportunity to challenge Labour.

In an earlier speech in Doncaster, he described the reopening of the Brexit debate as a major political boost, arguing that it would allow his party to return to an issue on which it has campaigned for years.

The dispute could be particularly important in northern English towns and other constituencies where Brexit attracted strong support.

Some voters who backed Leave may see any movement towards restoring freedom of movement as a reversal of their referendum decision. Others may be more concerned about jobs, wages, trade and the practical benefits or disadvantages of closer relations with Europe.

Burnham will need to explain how his approach would address those competing concerns.

For Reform, the challenge is to demonstrate that its opposition to closer EU ties is accompanied by a credible economic alternative.

Farage’s strategy is to frame the issue around democratic consent and national sovereignty. He argues that the public should not be asked to accept a major change in direction without a clear opportunity to decide.

The political effectiveness of that argument will depend on the details of any proposals, the evidence presented by both sides and the priorities voters bring to the next election.

Immigration is at the centre of the dispute

Freedom of movement remains one of the most contentious elements of the debate.

Under the arrangements that applied while Britain was an EU member, eligible EU citizens could generally move to the UK to live and work without the immigration controls now applied to most EU nationals.

After Brexit, the UK introduced a points-based immigration system, although British businesses continued to recruit workers from overseas through different visa routes.

Farage argues that restoring freedom of movement would reduce Britain’s control over immigration and could place additional demands on housing, transport, healthcare and education.

Those concerns are frequently raised in debates about population growth, but the effect of any new arrangement would depend on the number of people moving to Britain, their employment, their tax contributions and the public services required.

Supporters of closer EU ties point to the benefits of allowing businesses to recruit from a wider labour market and making it easier for British companies to operate across Europe.

They argue that immigration policy should be considered alongside the economic relationship rather than in isolation.

Any proposal would therefore need to explain how it would affect workers, employers, public services and the wider economy.

The economic argument is far from settled

The debate over rejoining the EU also raises questions about trade and investment.

Supporters of closer integration argue that reducing barriers with Britain’s largest neighbouring economic bloc could help businesses export goods, provide services and attract investment.

They point to the administrative costs and regulatory differences that have emerged since Brexit, arguing that a closer relationship could improve economic cooperation.

Opponents counter that rejoining would involve significant obligations and could reduce the freedom Britain currently has to establish its own rules in certain areas.

They also question whether the benefits of membership would outweigh the costs and whether Britain would have the same influence over EU decisions as it had before leaving.

These arguments cannot be settled by slogans alone. Any serious proposal would need to identify the intended arrangement, explain its legal and financial implications and provide a credible assessment of the likely economic effects.

Farage has already used the prospect of rejoining to raise questions about possible costs and the obligations associated with EU membership. Burnham, meanwhile, has argued that Britain’s relationship with Europe should be discussed openly and on the basis of evidence.

The public will ultimately need more detail to assess the competing claims.

Could voters be asked to decide again?

Farage’s demand for a fresh public mandate highlights the constitutional significance of the issue.

The original referendum provided a direct vote on EU membership. Any future decision to reverse Brexit would raise questions about whether the Government should seek a new referendum, include a clear commitment in its election manifesto or use another democratic process.

Burnham has indicated that he would not dictate the outcome based on his personal views and that the public must be involved in any fundamental change.

Farage argues that a general election should provide that opportunity before the Government signs up to a new arrangement.

There is still considerable uncertainty about what form any future proposal would take. A commitment to closer cooperation would not automatically amount to a decision to rejoin the EU, and a future government would have to negotiate the terms of any major change.

The precise democratic process would depend on the policy proposed and the commitments made by the parties seeking public support.

A new chapter in Britain’s Brexit debate

Farage’s “hold my jacket” remark captures the intensity with which he has returned to the Brexit argument.

He sees Burnham’s comments as a challenge to the outcome of the referendum and has promised to campaign against restoring freedom of movement or taking Britain back into the EU.

Burnham has presented a different position: he wants an open debate about Britain’s future relationship with Europe while maintaining that the public must decide whether any major change should take place.

Both sides now face the task of explaining their positions in practical terms.

For Farage, that means setting out how Britain could protect national control while maintaining effective economic relationships with its European neighbours.

For Burnham, it means explaining what closer integration could deliver, what obligations it might involve and how any decision would receive democratic approval.

The disagreement is likely to remain a significant feature of British politics as discussions with European leaders continue.

Ultimately, the central question is not whether one politician can deliver the most forceful slogan. It is what kind of relationship Britain should have with the EU, what that relationship would mean for immigration and the economy, and how the public should be involved in deciding the country’s future.

Farage has made clear that he intends to contest the issue vigorously. Burnham’s next challenge will be to turn his call for an honest discussion into a clear explanation of the options, their consequences and the democratic process through which voters would make their choice.