Andy Burnham has been warned against pushing the UK back into the EU (Image: POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

Britain faces “economic disaster” and the death of the family business if Labour continues to pursue “anti-growth” policies, the chairman of the Independent Business Network (IBN) has warned. John Longworth, writing in a Budget submission, urges a radical change of course and makes the case that rejoining the European Union – a long-term possibility floated by Andy Burnham – would be “insanity”.

In a damning assessment of Labour’s record in power, he said: “There appears to be a blind attachment in the corridors of power to tax and spend, and to ideological policies such as net zero, the direct attack on property ownership and inheritance, and welfare profligacy. A continuation of this approach risks economic disaster and the demise of family businesses. Rather than address the real issues of government policy and the economy, the Prime Minister has chosen instead to pursue rejoining the European Union, raising false hope that this would solve Britain’s problems. It would introduce years of uncertainty and conflict. Quite apart from the enormous cost of such a policy, tying the UK to a failing economic model would be most unlikely to boost our fortunes. It is such insanity that the only rational explanation is that it is a ‘weapon of distraction’, designed to divert attention from the absence of both leadership and economic growth that besets our government.”

John Longworth is a former director-general of the British Chambers of Commerce (Image: Jonathan Buckmaster)

Brendan Chilton, the organisation’s chief executive, said: “We believe that family-owned and family-run businesses must have a greater voice in public policy and can thrive outside the EU. One of the primary reasons for leaving the European Union was to ensure that we had the ability to create the most dynamic and competitive environment for businesses and start-ups. We also left the European Union so that we could embark on our own trade deals, securing advantages for British businesses, access to new markets and flexibility to help with the cost of living. We must not reverse that decision, and the Independent Business Network will fight for our sovereignty and for maintaining our independence outside the EU.”

Andy Burnham Warned UK Facing ‘Economic Disaster’ Over Huge EU Mistake

Andy Burnham has been warned that Britain could face serious economic consequences if his government pursues closer ties with the European Union without addressing the country’s underlying economic problems. As the Prime Minister prepares to reshape Britain’s relationship with Brussels, business leaders have raised concerns that renewed uncertainty over Brexit could undermine investment, put pressure on family businesses and distract ministers from the urgent task of improving economic growth.

The warning comes from John Longworth, chairman of the Independent Business Network and a former director-general of the British Chambers of Commerce. In a submission prepared ahead of the Budget, Longworth criticised the government’s economic direction and argued that a return to EU membership would not solve Britain’s problems. He warned that continuing what he described as anti-growth policies risked economic damage and the decline of family-owned businesses. <Cite refs={[“turn168779search0″,”turn168779search1”]}/>

His intervention comes as Burnham faces pressure to explain what he wants Britain’s future relationship with Europe to look like. The Prime Minister has said that the current Brexit arrangements are not good enough, but he has also insisted that he will not propose rejoining the EU during the current parliament.

The disagreement highlights a major question facing the government: can Britain improve trade with its largest nearby economic partner without reopening the political divisions that surrounded Brexit?

The Warning Behind the ‘Economic Disaster’ Claim

Longworth’s criticism centres on the belief that Britain’s economic difficulties cannot be solved simply by changing its relationship with the EU.

He argues that government policy should concentrate on encouraging businesses to invest, making it easier for companies to employ people and creating conditions in which family-owned firms can expand. In his view, higher employment costs, taxation and regulatory uncertainty are among the issues that need urgent attention.

The Independent Business Network has called for changes to policies affecting employers, including reversing the increase in employers’ National Insurance introduced under the previous Labour administration. It has also defended flexible working arrangements, including zero-hours contracts, arguing that they can provide an entry point into employment for people who might otherwise struggle to find work.

The organisation has called for changes to VAT arrangements and greater access to finance for young entrepreneurs.

These proposals reflect a particular economic perspective: that smaller businesses need flexibility, predictable costs and fewer barriers to expansion.

Other business groups and economists may place greater emphasis on different priorities, including skills, infrastructure, access to overseas markets and the benefits of regulatory cooperation. The central debate is whether the government’s current approach gives businesses the conditions they need to grow.

Longworth’s warning is therefore a criticism of both the government’s economic policies and its decision to make the future relationship with Europe a major political issue.

However, the phrase “economic disaster” is a warning from a business representative, not an established forecast that Britain will inevitably experience a crisis. The eventual economic consequences will depend on the policies adopted, how they are implemented and the response of businesses and investors.

Burnham Admits Brexit Has Not Delivered as Promised

Burnham has openly questioned whether Brexit has produced the results promised during the 2016 referendum campaign.

In an interview with Good Morning Britain on October 26, he said Britain had ended up with a harder Brexit than voters had originally been led to expect. He argued that the departure from the EU had weakened the economy and had not delivered the promised improvements in immigration control.

The Prime Minister said the existing agreement was not good enough for Britain and that he intended to pursue practical improvements. However, he also stressed that he would not move ahead of public opinion or attempt to impose his personal preferences on the country. <Cite refs={[“turn168779search2″,”turn168779search3”]}/>

Burnham acknowledged that he would like Britain to be part of the EU again within his lifetime. Yet he explicitly ruled out proposing rejoining during the current parliament, instead focusing on making the existing arrangements work better.

That distinction is politically significant.

Rejoining the EU would involve a much larger set of decisions than negotiating improvements to the current trade relationship. It would reopen questions about membership obligations, the movement of people, regulation and the political settlement established after the referendum.

Practical cooperation, by contrast, could involve agreements designed to reduce specific barriers affecting British businesses without requiring an immediate return to membership.

The government is therefore attempting to separate the question of whether Brexit has worked as promised from the question of whether Britain should rejoin the EU.

Burnham’s position is that the current arrangement needs improvement, but that major constitutional changes should not be imposed without public consent.

Why Businesses Want a Better Trading Relationship

The economic relationship between Britain and the EU remains extremely important to companies operating across Europe.

For manufacturers, food producers, exporters and smaller businesses, additional paperwork and regulatory requirements can increase costs. Companies selling goods across borders may have to deal with customs procedures, product standards and other requirements that did not apply in the same way when Britain was part of the EU’s single market and customs union.

Large businesses may be able to employ specialists to manage these requirements. Smaller firms often have fewer resources, making administrative costs more burdensome relative to their size.

Shevaun Haviland, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, has argued that repairing the economic damage associated with Brexit should be a priority for Burnham. The organisation has reported that many businesses believe the current trading arrangements are not working well enough.

The food industry is one area where closer cooperation could have practical consequences. Producers may face additional checks and paperwork when moving goods between Britain and the EU, while companies operating with perishable products can be particularly sensitive to delays.

Negotiating arrangements that reduce unnecessary barriers could therefore help some exporters and importers.

However, the details matter. Any new agreement would need to establish which rules apply, what obligations each side accepts and how compliance would be monitored.

Closer regulatory cooperation can reduce friction, but it may also require businesses to follow common standards or accept oversight arrangements. The economic benefits would depend on the sectors covered and the costs associated with meeting the new requirements.

The challenge for Burnham is to secure improvements that produce measurable benefits rather than merely generating another round of political arguments about Brexit.

Could Rejoining the EU Create More Uncertainty?

Longworth argues that pursuing EU membership again would introduce years of uncertainty and conflict. His concern is that businesses could postpone investment while waiting to discover what the future arrangements would mean for their costs, customers and legal obligations.

This is a legitimate question for policymakers to consider, although it does not establish that closer EU cooperation would necessarily harm the economy.

The effect of any change would depend on the terms negotiated, the length of the transition and the response of businesses. Some companies might benefit from easier access to European markets, while others could face adjustment costs.

Rejoining would also require negotiations with EU member states and agreement on the conditions of membership. Britain could not simply restore its previous arrangements by announcing a change of policy.

For that reason, Burnham’s decision not to propose rejoining during the current parliament provides a degree of clarity about the government’s immediate position.

Nevertheless, his comments have reopened a debate that many politicians had hoped to move beyond.

The challenge is particularly sensitive in communities where the referendum result reflected concerns about sovereignty, immigration, economic opportunity and trust in political institutions. Any attempt to revisit Brexit could become a source of division if voters believe that their earlier decision is being ignored.

Burnham has attempted to address that concern by saying the public must ultimately decide the country’s direction.

The Budget Adds to the Pressure

The dispute over Europe is taking place against the backdrop of a difficult Budget.

The government must balance pressure to improve public services and support households against the need to maintain confidence in the public finances. Businesses are also watching closely for changes to taxes, employment costs and investment incentives.

Longworth’s organisation argues that the government should concentrate on reversing measures it believes are holding businesses back. That includes reviewing the cost of employing workers and making it easier for smaller firms to obtain finance.

Supporters of stronger employment protections and higher public spending may argue that the government must also consider workers’ incomes, job security and the quality of public services.

The disagreement illustrates the difficulty of designing economic policy that benefits different groups at the same time.

For example, reducing employers’ National Insurance could lower employment costs, but it would also reduce government revenue unless offset elsewhere. Expanding public spending could support demand and services, but it would require funding and would need to be assessed against the risks of higher borrowing.

Likewise, improving trade with the EU could help some industries while leaving other economic challenges untouched.

Britain’s productivity, housing supply, skills shortages, energy costs and investment levels will all influence its long-term economic performance.

The Budget therefore needs to address more than the argument over Brexit. The government must explain how it intends to create conditions in which businesses can expand and workers can enjoy higher living standards.

What Happens Next in Britain’s Relationship With Europe?

Burnham is expected to use the UK-EU summit scheduled for November 20 to pursue improvements to the current relationship. He has indicated that the government will consider practical options intended to make existing arrangements work better.

The discussions could cover areas where both sides have an interest in reducing friction, including trade and cooperation affecting food manufacturers.

The outcome will depend on the willingness of both Britain and the EU to negotiate agreements that provide benefits without creating unacceptable obligations for either side.

For businesses, the most important question will be whether any agreement reduces costs and uncertainty in practice. Political statements alone will not improve trading conditions if companies continue to face the same barriers.

Ministers will also need to explain the limits of any deal. A narrower agreement cannot be expected to reproduce every advantage associated with EU membership, while a more comprehensive arrangement could require more extensive commitments.

The government must weigh those considerations against public opinion and the political consequences of reopening the Brexit debate.

A Difficult Choice for Burnham

The warning from Longworth exposes a fundamental disagreement over the causes of Britain’s economic difficulties.

One view is that Brexit has created unnecessary barriers to trade and investment, making closer cooperation with Europe an important part of improving economic performance. Another is that domestic decisions on taxation, employment costs, regulation and public spending are more urgent, and that pursuing EU membership would create uncertainty without addressing those problems.

Both arguments raise questions that deserve scrutiny, but neither should be treated as a complete explanation for Britain’s economic performance.

The effects of Brexit vary between industries and businesses. The consequences of tax and employment policies also depend on how companies respond, while the benefits of international trade agreements may take time to emerge.

Burnham must therefore demonstrate that his European strategy is based on practical objectives rather than political symbolism.

If negotiations reduce barriers for exporters, simplify procedures and provide greater certainty for businesses, the government will have concrete results to point to. If negotiations generate uncertainty without delivering measurable improvements, critics will have further grounds to question the approach.

The same standard should apply to domestic economic policy. Tax changes, spending decisions and employment reforms should be judged by their effects on investment, jobs, productivity and household living standards.

Ultimately, Britain does not face a choice between solving its domestic problems and improving its relationship with Europe. It must consider both.

The warning of an “economic disaster” is a stark expression of concern, but Britain’s future will not be decided by rhetoric alone. It will depend on whether Burnham’s government can establish a credible economic strategy, negotiate useful agreements with the EU and create conditions in which businesses can invest with confidence.

The coming Budget and the November summit will provide important opportunities to test that approach. For the Prime Minister, the challenge is to turn a renewed debate about Brexit into practical improvements that can be measured in the real economy.