Nigel Farage warned of a sell-out to Brussels (Image: Getty)

Brexiteers have vowed to fight Andy Burnham every step of the way after the Prime Minister signalled his Brussels summit is only the start of a sell-out. Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, tore into the PM, warning he was plotting to throw open Britain’s borders and hand over billions to rejoin the bloc.

The furious backlash erupted after Mr Burnham hinted his love-in with Eurocrats later this month would be just the first step. Tories warned Britain’s farmers would be shackled to Brussels rules under Labour’s so-called EU reset, while Reform declared it was ready for war. Speaking exclusively to the Daily Express, Mr Farage said: “It’s now clear that Andy Burnham wants to open the borders to 500million people in the EU and pay over £40billion a year just for the privilege of rejoining.

“It’s time Brussels Burnham put the interests of the British people first, but if the Prime Minister wants this fight all over again, I say bring it on.”

Tory shadow Cabinet Office minister Mike Wood warned the reset would hand control of Britain’s food laws straight back to Brussels. He told this paper: “Labour’s EU reset will hand control of Britain’s food laws to Brussels, tying every farmer into costly EU rules – even those who never sell to the EU.

“Labour are reopening the Brexit debates of 10 years ago to adopt EU rules wholesale. That means more compliance costs for businesses already hammered by the jobs tax, outdated regulations that hold our farmers back and higher costs of trading with the rest of the world.”

He added: “When Labour negotiates, Britain loses. Only the Conservatives will stand up for British farmers – starting by reversing Labour’s family farm tax.”

The row exploded after Mr Burnham used an article in the Sunday Mirror to hail this month’s summit, saying it would “show what we can achieve when we work together”. But he sparked alarm by adding ominously: “But it doesn’t need to be the end of our ambition.”

The PM jets to Brussels later this month for crunch talks with Eurocrats, including European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen. He has refused to rule out free movement or rejoining the single market in the long term, insisting only that he would not return to free movement without a referendum and would not rejoin the bloc in this Parliament.

Labour insists none of its so-called “red lines” will be crossed. But fears are growing that the Remainer Prime Minister is quietly paving the way for a full-blown betrayal of the 17.4million who voted Leave.

Mr Burnham campaigned to stay in the EU and has repeatedly said he wants Britain back in the bloc “in my lifetime”. For this newspaper, the fight is nothing new. Back in 2010, the Daily Express became the first national newspaper to demand Britain quit the EU.

We declared that “from this day forth our energies will be directed to furthering the cause of those who believe Britain is Better Off Out”.

The crusade was laughed off by the Westminster establishment. But hundreds of thousands of readers flooded in to back it, and five years later David Cameron finally caved and granted the in-out referendum that changed history.

In 2016, this paper threw everything behind the Leave campaign, and 17.4million Britons voted to take back control.

Today, the 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.

And Mr Farage himself has credited the Express’s role in the battle, telling this paper last week: “The Express led this in many, many ways.” Brexiteers warn that if Mr Burnham tries to undo the will of the people, he will find the same coalition that won in 2016 ready and waiting.

Nigel Farage Warns ‘Brussels Burnham’ Is Plotting a Brexit Sell-Out – It’ll Cost Billions

Nigel Farage has launched a furious attack on Andy Burnham, accusing the Prime Minister of preparing to betray millions of British voters by moving the country closer to the European Union. The Reform UK leader has branded Burnham “Brussels Burnham”, warning that his ambitions could expose Britain to enormous financial costs, weaken control over immigration and undermine the independence secured through Brexit. His intervention has reignited one of the most divisive political arguments in the country, with Brexit supporters demanding to know whether Labour is quietly preparing to reverse the historic 2016 referendum result. As Burnham prepares for crucial discussions with European leaders, the political temperature is rising and Farage has made it clear that Reform intends to fight any attempt to take Britain back into the EU.

The controversy follows Burnham’s increasingly outspoken comments about Britain’s future relationship with Brussels. The Prime Minister has argued that Brexit has damaged economic growth and created unnecessary barriers for British businesses. He believes closer cooperation with European countries could improve trade, strengthen security and create new opportunities for workers and companies. However, his willingness to discuss the possibility of eventually rejoining the European Union has alarmed supporters of Brexit, who believe the government is opening the door to a fundamental reversal of the country’s democratic decision.

Farage’s criticism has been particularly direct. He has accused Burnham of wanting to reopen Britain’s borders to hundreds of millions of European citizens and warned that rejoining the EU could involve annual financial contributions exceeding £40 billion. These figures represent Farage’s political warning rather than an agreed estimate of the cost of any future membership arrangement. Nevertheless, his intervention has placed the financial consequences of closer European integration firmly at the centre of the debate.

For millions of people who voted Leave in 2016, the issue goes far beyond political personalities. Brexit represented a promise that Britain would regain control over its laws, borders and national decision-making. Voters were told that leaving the European Union would allow Parliament to establish policies that reflected Britain’s own priorities rather than accepting decisions made through European institutions.

The referendum produced a clear result, with 51.9 per cent voting to leave and 48.1 per cent voting to remain. Approximately 17.4 million people supported Brexit, making it one of the most significant democratic decisions in modern British history.

Those voters now want to know why the government appears increasingly interested in discussing closer integration with the very organisation Britain voted to leave.

One of the biggest concerns is immigration. Ending automatic freedom of movement was a central argument made by Brexit campaigners. Supporters believed that Britain should have the ability to determine who could enter the country to live and work, rather than operating under EU-wide rules.

Burnham has suggested that closer cooperation with European countries could improve immigration enforcement and help Britain tackle illegal migration. However, critics fear that any future agreement involving freedom of movement could reverse one of the most important changes introduced by Brexit.

Farage argues that British voters should not be expected to accept a return to arrangements they specifically rejected in the referendum. He believes the government must focus on strengthening border security and controlling immigration rather than creating new opportunities for European integration.

The financial implications are equally controversial. Rejoining the EU would involve negotiations over Britain’s budget contributions, participation in European programmes and wider financial obligations. The precise amount would depend on the terms of any future membership agreement, but taxpayers would reasonably expect a detailed explanation before the government considered such a commitment.

At a time when families are struggling with mortgages, energy bills, food prices and taxation, the prospect of additional financial obligations to Brussels is likely to generate considerable opposition.

Labour must also explain how closer European integration would affect British businesses. Supporters argue that reducing trade barriers could help exporters, improve supply chains and encourage investment. Since Brexit, some businesses have experienced additional paperwork and customs requirements when selling products to European customers.

However, critics question whether these economic benefits would justify accepting European regulations across important sectors of the British economy. They argue that the government should pursue practical trade agreements without sacrificing the independence that Brexit was intended to deliver.