Ten seats – Barnsley South, Bassetlaw, Bolsover, Cannock Chase, Dover & Deal, Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes, Hartlepool, Normanton & Hemsworth, Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley, and Rawmarsh & Conisbrough – would likely be won by Nigel Farage’s Reform UK.
A further four seats – Kettering, Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, North Northumberland, and Pendle and Clitheroe – risk being won by the Conservatives, while Alloa and Grangemouhe are projected to be picked up by the Scottish National Party.
Health Secretary Ms Cooper, who said earlier this year “we can’t turn back the clock” on EU membership, is among the big beasts at risk.
Chancellor John Healey is also facing potential defeat if Labour adopts a more pro-EU position.
When asked about the UK rejoining the EU, Mr Healey said: “I don’t expect to see that.”
Meanwhile, the People’s Channel found almost 100 Labour MPs have expressed support for Britain rejoining the EU or voiced support for the Prime Minister reopening the debate.
However, the MPs towing the party line remain divided on how enthusiastically to support Mr Burnham’s European exploration.
Halesowen MP Alex Ballinger told Britain’s News Channel last month: “I think it’s also fair to say that what people voted for in 2016, what they were promised by the Vote Leave campaign, isn’t what has been delivered.”
Meanwhile, Blue Labour MP Preet Kaur Gill said: “I think there is a lot we can do without joining – we will have to wait and see what comes out from the summit.
“The Prime Minister wants an honest conversation and to build concerts on what is in the best interests of the country and for businesses.”
GB News conducted its investigation after the Prime Minister gagged frontbenchers on the issue of Europe.
Despite being bound by collective responsibility, reports suggest 13 Cabinet ministers oppose rejoining and 15 back the prospect.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, who the People’s Channel revealed last week remains at loggerheads with the Prime Minister over the UK’s migrant crisis, publicly backed an open conversation about Britain’s relationship with Europe.
However, Ms Mahmood stopped short of endorsing a return to freedom of movement, which is a cornerstone of single market access and EU membership.
Britain’s News Channel understands party divisions will deepen if Mr Burnham reiterates his ambitions for EU membership at his reset summit on November 20.
The Prime Minister is expected to strike closer working arrangements on food and agricultural standards, youth mobility and emissions trading.
However, Norway’s Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre warned Britain against pursuing an Oslo-style relationship with Brussels after pointing out that membership of the single market allows the EU to dictate laws and directives.
“If you left because there was too much Brussels, don’t take the Norwegian version,” he said.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch also accused Mr Burnham of putting British taxpayers at risk through his proposed reset.
She warned that the arrangements could leave working families facing a bill of £1,220 each.
Brexiteers have already warned rejoining the bloc could cost £41billion a year, with Brussels bureaucrat Michel Barnier and ex-Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar rejecting the suggestion the UK could retain its rebate.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage will be in Brussels on November 20 as part of his push against the Prime Minister’s reset.
A Survation poll commissioned by the pro-Brexit pressure group Britain Unbound also found overwhelming support for Britain retaining control over key domestic policy decisions in Mr Burnham’s Makerfield constituency.
Four in five said decisions on state aid for regional development should be made by UK alone, while 78 per cent wanted Britain to retain control over VAT rates.
Three in four also backed the UK, making decisions on food standards and for Britain to retain control over refusing criminals’ entry into the country.
Andy Burnham Faces Brexit Civil War as GB News Reveals Full List of Labour MPs Who Oppose Rejoining the EU – Is Your MP One of Them?
Britain’s political debate over Brexit has returned to the centre of national attention after Prime Minister Andy Burnham reopened discussions about the United Kingdom’s long-term relationship with the European Union. The latest controversy has exposed significant differences within the Labour Party, with some MPs supporting closer European integration while others remain firmly opposed to the idea of Britain rejoining the EU.
A report by GB News has brought these divisions into the spotlight by examining the positions of Labour MPs on whether the United Kingdom should return to the European Union. According to the report, the broadcaster approached all 404 Labour MPs and investigated their views on the country’s future relationship with Brussels. The findings suggest that the issue remains deeply controversial within the governing party.
For Andy Burnham, the challenge is not simply about negotiating a better relationship with European leaders. It is also about managing competing political interests within his own parliamentary party, particularly among MPs representing constituencies that voted strongly to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum.
Brexit Returns to the Political Battlefield
The 2016 referendum remains one of the most significant political events in modern British history. The decision to leave the European Union divided families, communities, political parties and generations of voters. With approximately 52 per cent voting Leave and 48 per cent voting Remain, the result established a clear national mandate to begin the process of withdrawal.
The United Kingdom formally left the European Union in January 2020, bringing an end to decades of membership. However, the political and economic consequences of Brexit have continued to generate disagreements.
Supporters of leaving argued that Britain would regain control over its laws, borders, trade policies and national decisions. Those who supported remaining in the EU warned that withdrawal could create economic difficulties, weaken international cooperation and reduce Britain’s influence in Europe.
Nearly a decade after the referendum, these arguments have returned to Westminster with renewed intensity.
Burnham has indicated that Britain should examine all possible options for its future relationship with Europe, including the possibility of eventually rejoining the EU. His position represents a significant development in the political discussion, although he has also acknowledged that full membership would require public consent.
According to reporting by The Guardian and The Independent in October 2026, Burnham has supported a more open discussion about European integration while distinguishing between closer cooperation, returning to the single market and full EU membership.
Labour MPs Divided Over Europe’s Future
The most difficult challenge for Burnham could come from within his own party. Labour contains MPs representing constituencies with very different political histories and attitudes towards Europe.
Some Labour representatives believe that Britain should eventually return to the European Union. They argue that closer integration could improve trade, encourage investment, strengthen employment opportunities and give British businesses better access to European markets.
Others believe that reopening the question of EU membership would be politically dangerous. They argue that voters made their decision in 2016 and that politicians should concentrate on domestic priorities rather than restarting an argument that divided the country for years.
The GB News investigation has highlighted this disagreement. Its reporting indicates that almost 100 Labour MPs have expressed support for rejoining the EU or reopening discussions about Britain’s membership.
However, support for closer relations should not automatically be interpreted as support for full membership. Some MPs may favour a customs arrangement, improved trade agreements or greater cooperation without restoring freedom of movement.
This distinction is important because the future of Britain’s relationship with Europe involves several different political and economic choices.
Why Some Labour MPs Oppose Rejoining
For MPs representing traditional Brexit-supporting constituencies, the issue is particularly sensitive.
Many voters in former industrial towns, coastal communities and parts of northern England supported leaving the European Union because they believed that political and economic decisions should be made closer to home.
Some felt that previous governments had failed to represent their interests and that membership of the EU had not delivered sufficient economic opportunities for their communities.
These concerns have not disappeared.
An MP who openly supports reversing Brexit could face difficult questions from constituents who believe the referendum result should be respected. Even politicians who personally supported Remain in 2016 may be reluctant to endorse another membership campaign.
The debate is therefore not simply about whether the European Union offers economic advantages. It is also about democratic legitimacy, public trust and the relationship between elected representatives and their voters.
Several Labour MPs have expressed caution about restoring freedom of movement or reopening the membership question. Their position reflects concerns that another major political confrontation could distract from issues such as healthcare, housing, employment, public services and the cost of living.
The Economic Argument for Closer European Relations
Those supporting closer ties with the European Union argue that Britain’s economy remains closely connected to European markets.
The EU is an important trading partner for British companies, and changes to trade arrangements can affect businesses involved in manufacturing, agriculture, transport and financial services.
Supporters of rejoining believe that membership could reduce certain trade barriers and improve cooperation in areas such as scientific research, education, environmental protection and industrial development.
They also argue that British companies could benefit from more predictable regulations and easier access to European customers.
However, opponents point out that membership would involve obligations as well as advantages. Britain would need to accept the relevant EU rules, contribute financially to the organisation and negotiate the conditions of any future membership.
Furthermore, rejoining would not automatically solve every economic problem facing the country. Britain’s productivity, housing shortages, regional inequalities and public-service pressures would still require domestic political solutions.
Consequently, the economic debate needs to consider both the potential benefits and the practical costs of different arrangements.
Freedom of Movement: One of the Biggest Obstacles
One of the most controversial elements of the discussion is freedom of movement.
Before Brexit, British citizens could generally live and work in other EU member states under European free-movement rules. EU citizens also had corresponding rights in the United Kingdom.
Supporters argue that these arrangements created opportunities for workers, students and businesses. They believe that restoring some form of mobility could help address labour shortages and strengthen cultural and educational connections.
Opponents, however, argue that immigration policy should remain under national control. They believe that the public expects elected governments to determine who can enter, work and settle in Britain.
This disagreement makes negotiations particularly complicated.
Burnham has suggested that Britain should have an honest discussion about the advantages and disadvantages of closer European cooperation. Nevertheless, the question of freedom of movement remains politically sensitive, particularly among voters who supported Brexit partly because of concerns about immigration.
The Political Risks for Andy Burnham
Burnham must balance several competing priorities.
On one hand, he faces pressure from Labour MPs and supporters who believe that Brexit has damaged Britain’s economic prospects and that the country should consider returning to the European Union.
On the other hand, he must consider the views of MPs representing constituencies where support for Brexit remains politically important.
If the government moves too quickly towards rejoining, it could create tensions with MPs who fear losing the confidence of their constituents.
If it refuses to consider closer integration, it could disappoint those who believe that Britain needs a more ambitious European strategy.
This is why the issue represents a significant test of political leadership.
The debate also involves the opposition parties. The Conservatives and Reform UK have consistently criticised proposals that they believe could undermine the independence Britain gained through Brexit. They are likely to use any major change in Labour’s European policy to challenge the government’s political direction.
Meanwhile, pro-European politicians will argue that Britain should not allow the 2016 referendum to prevent future generations from reconsidering the country’s international relationships.
What Does This Mean for Ordinary British Voters?
For ordinary people, the debate is about much more than political disagreements in Westminster.
It could affect employment opportunities, the price and availability of goods, travel arrangements, immigration rules, educational exchanges and the future prospects of British businesses.
Younger generations may have different priorities from older voters who participated in the 2016 referendum. Some young people believe that closer European integration would create opportunities that they currently lack.
Others are more concerned about national independence, immigration controls and the ability of Britain to make its own decisions.
Ultimately, any future proposal to rejoin the EU would need to address these concerns openly and honestly.
The names of MPs appearing on a list of opponents should also be examined carefully. A politician who opposes immediate rejoining may still support closer economic cooperation. Similarly, an MP who supports reopening the debate may not necessarily endorse full EU membership.
Voters therefore need to examine what their representatives have actually said rather than relying exclusively on political headlines.
Conclusion: A Debate That Britain Cannot Ignore
Andy Burnham’s renewed discussion about Britain’s future relationship with the European Union has exposed an important division within the Labour Party. The GB News investigation has provided another indication that Brexit remains a difficult issue for politicians, even several years after the United Kingdom formally left the European Union.
The disagreement reflects competing views about national sovereignty, economic growth, immigration, democratic accountability and Britain’s international future.
For some Labour MPs, rejoining the EU represents an opportunity to rebuild economic and political relationships with Britain’s closest European neighbours. For others, it risks reopening divisions that the country has already spent years trying to overcome.
There is no guarantee that Britain will return to the European Union, and Burnham has not committed to immediate rejoining. What happens next will depend on political negotiations, public opinion, the position of Labour MPs and the willingness of European leaders to consider Britain’s future relationship with the bloc.
One thing is clear: Brexit has not disappeared from British politics. The argument over whether the country should remain outside the European Union, develop a closer partnership or eventually seek full membership is likely to remain an important national issue.
For voters, the most important question is not simply whether their MP supports or opposes rejoining. It is whether that representative can explain their position, demonstrate how it would affect local communities and answer the concerns of the people who elected them.
Britain’s European future is too important to be decided by political slogans alone. It requires honest debate, reliable evidence, democratic accountability and a clear understanding of the consequences of every available option.