Andy Burnham Says Britain Could ‘Go All the Way’ and Rejoin the European Union

Andy Burnham has reopened one of the most divisive political debates in modern British history after declaring that the United Kingdom could “go all the way” and rejoin the European Union, raising fresh questions about the future of Brexit and the direction of the Labour government.

The Prime Minister’s comments represent a significant shift in Labour’s approach to Europe. Rather than limiting discussions to improving trade and cooperation with Brussels, Burnham has indicated that full EU membership should be considered alongside other options, including a customs union and a return to the single market.

His intervention has attracted attention across the political spectrum, with supporters arguing that Britain must reconsider its relationship with its largest nearby trading partner, while Brexit supporters warn that reversing the decision to leave could reopen divisions that have shaped British politics for a decade.

Burnham has said that Brexit has caused “more harm than good” and that the country needs a clearer long-term strategy for its relationship with Europe. However, he has not announced an immediate plan to rejoin the EU, and he has acknowledged that the available options must be assessed carefully.

The debate now centres on whether closer European integration could improve Britain’s economic prospects, what conditions EU membership would involve, and whether voters would support such a major change.

A major shift in Labour’s Brexit position

Since Labour won the 2024 general election, the party’s official position had ruled out returning to the EU single market, the customs union and freedom of movement. The strategy was intended to reassure voters who supported Brexit that Labour would not attempt to reverse the referendum result.

Burnham’s latest remarks have challenged that approach.

Speaking after Labour’s annual conference, he said Britain should consider the full range of possibilities for its future relationship with Europe. These included maintaining the current arrangements, negotiating a customs union, returning to the single market or pursuing full membership.

“I want to look at the options, and I am serious,” Burnham said when asked about rejoining. He also acknowledged that he would like to see Britain return to the EU during his lifetime.

The distinction between considering an option and committing to implement it is important. Burnham has not set out a timetable for accession, nor has he announced that a referendum will take place in the immediate future.

Instead, he has argued that Britain needs a long-term direction rather than allowing the Brexit debate to remain unresolved indefinitely.

That position could have major implications for Labour’s relationship with voters. Some pro-European supporters may welcome the prospect of closer integration, while people who voted Leave may view the proposal as a challenge to a democratic decision made in 2016.

Why Burnham believes Brexit must be reconsidered

Britain voted to leave the European Union in June 2016, ending more than four decades of membership. The decision was followed by years of negotiations over trade, immigration, Northern Ireland and the future of the UK’s relationship with European institutions.

Supporters of Brexit argued that leaving would allow Britain to regain control over its laws, borders, trade policy and public spending. They also maintained that the country could negotiate its own agreements with countries outside Europe.

Critics warned that departure would increase barriers to trade, complicate supply chains and reduce Britain’s influence over decisions affecting the European continent.

Burnham’s assessment is that the benefits promised by Brexit have not materialised sufficiently to justify the economic and political consequences. He has argued that Britain needs to restore stronger economic growth and develop a more stable relationship with the EU.

Businesses have repeatedly raised concerns about additional paperwork, customs procedures and regulatory differences following Britain’s departure from the bloc. Exporters, manufacturers and smaller companies operating across European markets have faced different requirements depending on the products they sell and the services they provide.

However, Brexit is not the only factor influencing the British economy. Productivity, investment, taxation, housing costs, global competition and wider economic conditions also affect growth. Any assessment of the consequences of leaving the EU must therefore distinguish between Brexit-related costs and other pressures.

For Burnham, the argument is that Britain should no longer treat the current relationship as beyond question. Whether rejoining would deliver sufficient benefits to justify its conditions remains a separate question.

The economic case for returning to Europe

One of the strongest arguments for closer ties is the importance of the European market to British businesses.

The EU remains a major destination for UK exports and an important source of imported goods, investment and industrial components. A closer trading relationship could reduce some of the obstacles that companies face when selling products across borders.

A customs union could simplify trade in goods by aligning external tariffs, although it would not automatically eliminate every customs procedure or restore the benefits of single-market membership.

Rejoining the single market would involve a much deeper relationship. It could reduce certain barriers to trade by requiring closer alignment with EU rules, but it would also mean accepting obligations associated with that arrangement.

Full EU membership would represent the most extensive change. Britain would again participate in the Union’s institutions and common policy framework, subject to the terms negotiated for accession.

Supporters argue that a closer relationship could encourage investment, improve supply-chain cooperation and make it easier for British businesses to compete in European markets.

Critics counter that regulatory alignment could restrict Britain’s freedom to set different rules, while membership contributions and other obligations would have to be considered alongside any economic gains.

The overall effect would depend on the agreement negotiated, the sectors involved and how businesses and consumers responded.

Brussels sends a message to Britain

Burnham’s remarks have also prompted responses from European leaders.

French Finance Minister Roland Lescure said Britain would be welcome to return, stressing that the decision ultimately belonged to the British public.

French President Emmanuel Macron has also indicated that a British return could be positive for Europe. However, he warned that membership would not allow the UK to select only the benefits it wanted while rejecting the obligations attached to the Union.

That point highlights a major challenge for any future accession process.

During its membership, Britain negotiated several distinctive arrangements, including not adopting the euro and remaining outside the Schengen passport-free travel area. A future application would take place under different political and economic circumstances, and Britain could not assume that its previous terms would automatically be restored.

The EU would need to agree on the conditions of any return, and all 27 member states would have a role in approving an accession process.

The process could therefore involve lengthy negotiations over budget contributions, regulatory alignment, migration, institutional representation and other questions.

European leaders may welcome improved relations with Britain, but that does not guarantee agreement on every British demand.

Nigel Farage and Reform UK prepare to challenge the proposal

The prospect of rejoining the EU is likely to become a major point of contention for Reform UK, led by Nigel Farage, who has long made opposition to European political integration a central part of his political identity.

Reform has criticised Burnham’s willingness to reconsider full membership, arguing that the government should concentrate on domestic economic problems rather than reopen the Brexit debate.

For Farage, the issue provides an opportunity to present Reform as the party most committed to maintaining Britain’s departure from the bloc.

His supporters argue that rejoining could weaken national control over legislation and immigration policy while requiring Britain to accept European rules over which it would have less influence than a member state.

They also question whether the potential economic benefits would outweigh the financial and political costs.

Those concerns are likely to resonate with voters who supported Brexit because they wanted greater national autonomy. A clear commitment to rejoin could create difficulties for Labour in constituencies where Leave voters remain influential.

However, the debate also offers Labour an opportunity to appeal to voters who believe Brexit has damaged economic prospects and who favour closer cooperation with European neighbours.

The political consequences will depend partly on the detail of Burnham’s eventual proposals and whether he can explain how they would affect everyday life.

Would Britain need another referendum?

No immediate referendum has been announced, and Burnham has indicated that the country must first examine the available options.

A future government seeking full EU membership would face substantial political and legal questions. It would need to establish a negotiating mandate, obtain agreement from the EU’s member states and determine how any accession treaty would be approved domestically.

A referendum could become part of the political debate, particularly if a party made rejoining a central election commitment. However, the precise route would depend on future government decisions and the legal arrangements adopted.

Public opinion is also not fixed. Polling has indicated support for rejoining among some sections of the electorate, but responses can change when voters are asked about specific conditions, including budget contributions, freedom of movement and the possibility of adopting the euro.

A general question about EU membership does not necessarily capture the trade-offs involved in an actual accession agreement.

Burnham therefore faces the challenge of explaining not only why Britain might benefit from a closer relationship, but also what obligations and compromises that relationship would require.

The road ahead remains uncertain

Burnham’s declaration has reopened a debate that many politicians had hoped to move beyond. By saying Britain could “go all the way”, he has placed full EU membership back among the options being discussed at the highest level of British government.

Yet the gap between considering rejoining and achieving it is considerable. Britain would need public support, a clear negotiating strategy and the agreement of all EU member states. It would also have to confront difficult questions about national sovereignty, immigration, financial contributions and the future of British law.

For businesses, the immediate priority may be practical improvements to trade and cooperation rather than a lengthy accession process. For voters, the central question is whether closer ties with Europe would improve living standards and public services enough to justify the obligations involved.

For Reform UK and other Brexit supporters, the proposal represents a challenge to the political settlement established by the 2016 referendum. For pro-European campaigners, it is an opportunity to reconsider a decision they believe has weakened Britain’s economic position.

The debate is now moving beyond whether relations with Brussels should improve. It concerns how far Britain should go, what conditions it would accept and whether the country is prepared to revisit one of the most consequential decisions of the past generation.

Burnham has opened the door to that discussion, but Britain has not yet decided to walk through it.