EXCLUSIVE: Julian Jessop also said the idea that Britain should have to provide overseas aid to poorer EU countries in return for the right to join the electricity market would be “another slap in the face to UK taxpayers”.
Prime Minister Andy Burnham (Image: Getty)
Andy Burnham has been accused of preparing to sell out Britain’s interests to Brussels in a controversial Brexit reset, with an expert warning that the proposed deal would leave the UK following EU rules without having any say over them. Julian Jessop, from the campaign group Britain Unbound, launched a scathing attack on the Prime Minister’s plans, claiming the concessions being considered would benefit the EU at Britain’s expense.
He warned that a proposed agri-food agreement could force businesses across the UK economy to comply with European regulations, even if they had no trade with the bloc.
Mr Jessop said: “Rarely has so much been given away in return for so little.
Almost every aspect of the so-called ‘reset’ stinks.
“The proposed agri-food deal will require the UK to apply EU rules to the entire economy whether businesses trade with the EU or not. And these are rules on which the UK will have no say. The proposed ‘youth mobility scheme’ is also biased in favour of the EU.
“The number of young EU people coming to work or study in the UK is likely to far exceed the number of young UK people heading in the other direction, as it did before Brexit, at a time when youth unemployment is already very high. UK universities will lose out too if EU fees are slashed.
“The idea that Britain should have to provide overseas aid to poorer EU countries in return for the right to buy and sell more energy is another slap in the face to UK taxpayers.
Can anyone imagine another sovereign nation like Canada paying tribute to the US in this way?”
His intervention comes after leaked documents revealed Brussels is demanding more money from Britain and wants Mr Burnham to abandon plans to deport foreign criminals to European countries.
A draft statement prepared ahead of a UK-EU summit in Brussels this month says the bloc expects an “appropriate level of financial contribution towards reducing economic and social disparities between the regions of the EU” in return for Britain gaining access to its single electricity market.
Brussels is also insisting that Mr Burnham “commits not to proceed with… removals and deportations” of European offenders to EU countries.
The demand follows changes introduced this year allowing the Home Office to deport foreign nationals once they have been sentenced.
However, a source told Sky News that the British Government would not agree to the demand.
The requirements have also not yet been approved by EU member states.
The leaked document further offers only a commitment to dialogue on economic security, rather than a firm agreement to limit the impact of the EU’s trade dispute with China on Britain.
Mr Burnham has defended the negotiations, arguing they could deliver a significant boost to the economy.
Asked about the prospect of Britain having its food trade rules made by the EU without any input, he told broadcasters: “What’s facing me two weeks on Friday is a UK-EU summit where I have the opportunity to add to UK growth.
“It’s estimated up to 0.4% extra on GDP.
“I think people in Britain would expect me to take that with both hands, given where we’ve been in recent times, and that’s what I’m doing.”
He added that closer cooperation could help farmers, remove red tape for British businesses and deliver economic growth.
Mr Burnham has previously described ignoring the opportunity for a new deal as a “dereliction of duty”, while insisting the “public will be the boss” when it comes to closer ties with Brussels.
“BREXIT BETRAYAL?” — ANDY BURNHAM CAUGHT IN A POLITICAL FIRESTORM AS EU RESET PLAN TRIGGERS FURIOUS BACKLASH!
Prime Minister Andy Burnham is facing growing political pressure after his government’s plans to reset relations with the European Union sparked fierce debate over Britain’s future outside the bloc.
The proposals have reignited one of the most divisive political arguments in modern British history: is the government simply trying to improve Britain’s relationship with its closest European neighbours, or is it gradually reversing the promises made during the Brexit referendum?
Critics have accused Burnham of moving Britain closer to Brussels without giving voters a proper opportunity to express their views. Supporters, however, argue that rebuilding economic cooperation with Europe is essential to Britain’s long-term prosperity.
The controversy has created another difficult political challenge for the Prime Minister, particularly as immigration, national sovereignty and the cost of living remain major concerns for British voters.
EU RESET PLAN SPARKS ANGER
The government’s proposed EU reset is intended to improve cooperation between Britain and European countries following years of strained relations after Brexit.
Areas of potential cooperation include trade, food standards, energy, security, research and closer economic partnerships.
Supporters believe that reducing unnecessary barriers to trade could benefit British businesses, improve economic opportunities and strengthen relations with neighbouring countries.
However, opponents fear that closer alignment with EU regulations could gradually reduce Britain’s freedom to establish independent policies.
For Brexit supporters, the central concern is sovereignty.
They argue that Britain voted to leave the European Union in 2016 because millions of people wanted greater control over national laws, borders and economic decisions.
Any agreement that increases Brussels’ influence over British regulations is therefore likely to attract political resistance.
NIGEL FARAGE AND REFORM UK LEAD THE BACKLASH
Nigel Farage and Reform UK are likely to see the controversy as an opportunity to challenge Burnham’s leadership.
Farage has repeatedly presented Brexit as a democratic decision that must be respected.
He argues that closer integration with the European Union risks undermining the independence Britain gained by leaving the bloc.
Reform UK could use the issue to attract voters who believe the political establishment is attempting to reverse Brexit without another referendum.
For Farage, the argument is politically valuable because it allows him to position Reform as the defender of national sovereignty against what he describes as attempts to restore Britain’s previous relationship with Brussels.
However, supporters of closer European cooperation argue that improving trade relations does not automatically mean rejoining the EU or abandoning Brexit.
WHY ARE BRITISH VOTERS DIVIDED?
The debate reflects a continuing disagreement about the consequences of Brexit.
Some voters believe leaving the European Union gave Britain greater freedom to control immigration, negotiate international trade agreements and establish independent regulations.
Others argue that Brexit created unnecessary barriers for businesses, damaged economic relationships and reduced Britain’s influence in Europe.
For businesses exporting goods to European markets, additional paperwork and regulatory requirements have created practical difficulties.
A closer relationship with the EU could potentially reduce some of these problems.
However, critics question whether the economic benefits would justify accepting additional European rules.
The disagreement is therefore not simply about whether Britain should cooperate with Europe. It concerns how much cooperation is acceptable without undermining the independence voters were promised.
BURNHAM FACES A DIFFICULT POLITICAL TEST
For Andy Burnham, the challenge is to explain exactly what the EU reset means for ordinary British people.
The government must convince voters that closer cooperation will improve economic conditions without reversing the fundamental decision made in the 2016 referendum.
This will not be easy.
Many households remain concerned about rising living costs, housing affordability, employment opportunities and pressure on public services.
If the government cannot demonstrate practical benefits from its European strategy, political opponents will have an opportunity to portray the policy as an unnecessary distraction.
Burnham must also avoid creating the impression that important constitutional and economic decisions are being made without sufficient public discussion.
Clear communication will be essential if the government wants to prevent the debate from becoming another major political crisis.
IS BRITAIN REALLY HEADING BACK TOWARDS THE EU?
Despite the criticism, closer cooperation should not automatically be interpreted as an attempt to rejoin the European Union.
Britain can negotiate agreements with European countries while remaining outside the single market, customs union and EU political institutions.
The important distinction is between cooperation and membership.
However, some Brexit supporters remain concerned that gradual regulatory alignment could create a situation in which Britain accepts more European rules without having a direct role in making them.
That concern is likely to remain central to the political debate.
The government will therefore need to explain the limits of its proposals and demonstrate how British interests will be protected.
CONCLUSION: ANOTHER BREXIT BATTLE LOOMS
Andy Burnham’s EU reset plans have reopened a political argument that Britain has never completely resolved.
For supporters, closer cooperation with Europe represents a sensible attempt to improve trade, strengthen security and repair relationships after years of uncertainty.
For opponents, it risks undermining the democratic decision made during the Brexit referendum and gradually returning powers to Brussels.
Nigel Farage and Reform UK are likely to exploit the controversy, while the Conservatives may also seek to challenge the government’s approach.
Ultimately, Burnham faces a difficult balancing act: improving Britain’s relationship with Europe without convincing Brexit supporters that their referendum victory is being quietly undone.
One thing is certain: Brexit may have happened in 2020, but the political battle over what it means for Britain’s future is far from over.