Andy Burnham has always wanted back in (Image: Daily Express)
Being a backbench MP may be one of the worst jobs in Parliament. Your party won the election, but from the back of the class you have next to no say in what goes on. There is, however, one useful service a backbencher can perform. He can roll the pitch for the Government.
That, I suspect, is exactly what Chris Ward was doing when he took to the pages of The Guardian on Monday. Mr Ward, as he is keen to point out, is not just your ordinary backbencher. No, no, he was Starmer’s man when Sir Keir was Shadow Brexit Secretary, don’t you know?
And it was he who co-wrote the Brexit red lines in Labour’s 2024 manifesto: no rejoining the EU, no single market, no customs union, no return to freedom of movement.
Now their author says they should be pensioned off (given a “dignified retirement”) by the next General Election.
More revealing is his explanation of why they existed at all. The red lines, he wrote, were “designed precisely to close down the debate and to narrow the target” Brexit had become for Labour.
It might be one of the more honest statements made by a politician in recent years, a clear admission that a pledge in a manifesto was not a matter of principle but rather a tool to get through an election.
He is of course not alone; Remainers travel in packs. Several MPs have now suggested the time is right for Andy Burnham to consider sacking off the Brexit vote and Rejoin.
The pitch is being prepared, one roller at a time, and the man at the crease is ready.
Mr Burnham, the regular ordinary bloke who became our Prime Minister in July, has said he wants Britain back in the EU in his lifetime, while insisting he is “not proposing any changes in this Parliament”.
He has called for an “honest discussion” about free movement and has said a single market option could go in a Labour manifesto.
Soon he will sign a deal, about which we know remarkably little, with his suitors in Brussels.
Mr Burnham has promised that every policy must pass his “Makerfield test”, aka: it must improve life in the Leave-voting seat he now represents.
Yet polling, which suggests his own constituents want laws made here, not in the EU, suggests his plans fail that test.
To be fair to Mr Ward, his case is not entirely frivolous. He argues that Britain can no longer rely on America, which is itself a serious point in a dangerous world.
But Britain can stand shoulder to shoulder with France and Poland without letting Brussels write its food standards or decide who settles here. Membership of NATO never required the single market.
The danger is not one MP’s article. It is what it tells us about the last manifesto – and the next one.
A red line with a retirement date was never a red line. It was a sales pitch. And the sale, it seems, is nearly closed.
Andy Burnham’s Man Just Revealed His Hand – Reversing Brexit Is Now on the Table
Britain’s relationship with the European Union has returned to the centre of political debate after Chris Ward, a Labour MP and one of the architects of the party’s Brexit strategy, called for Labour to abandon its long-standing restrictions on closer European integration. His intervention has fuelled speculation that Prime Minister Andy Burnham could eventually seek to reverse Brexit and bring Britain back into the European Union.
The development is particularly significant because Ward helped write the Brexit commitments included in Labour’s 2024 general election manifesto. Those commitments explicitly ruled out rejoining the European Union, returning to the single market or customs union, and restoring freedom of movement. However, Ward now believes that these restrictions have served their political purpose and should be reconsidered before the next general election.
His comments have raised important questions about Labour’s future direction, the economic consequences of Brexit and whether British voters could eventually be asked to reconsider the country’s decision to leave the European Union.
For Burnham, the issue presents both an opportunity and a political challenge. He has expressed increasingly positive views about Britain’s European future, but he must also consider voters who supported Brexit and remain concerned about transferring powers to Brussels.
The controversy therefore represents more than another disagreement about trade or immigration. It could mark the beginning of a fundamental reassessment of Britain’s place in Europe.
Chris Ward’s Intervention Reopens the Brexit Debate
Chris Ward’s comments are important because of his previous involvement in Labour’s Brexit strategy. During Keir Starmer’s leadership, Ward helped formulate the party’s Brexit red lines, which were designed to demonstrate that Labour would respect the result of the 2016 referendum.
These commitments became an important part of Labour’s 2024 election campaign. The party wanted to reassure voters that it would not attempt to reverse Brexit immediately or reopen the political divisions that had dominated British politics for years.
However, writing in The Guardian on 9 November 2026, Ward argued that the restrictions should be given a “dignified retirement” by the next general election.
He explained that the original red lines were designed to close down the Brexit debate and narrow the political challenges facing Labour before the 2024 election. In his view, those commitments were appropriate at the time, but the international situation has changed considerably.
Ward believes that Britain must reconsider its relationship with Europe because of growing international instability, new security threats and uncertainty about the reliability of the United States as Britain’s principal security partner.
His argument is that the country can no longer base its long-term foreign policy entirely on assumptions that existed when Labour developed its Brexit strategy in 2020.
He therefore wants the party to consider a much closer relationship with the European Union, potentially including full membership or an alternative arrangement similar to associate membership.
This intervention is especially significant because it comes from someone who helped establish the very restrictions he now wants Labour to reconsider.
Andy Burnham Is Opening the Door to Rejoining the European Union
Andy Burnham has already demonstrated a willingness to discuss Britain’s return to the European Union.
In September 2026, he suggested that Britain could eventually go all the way towards rejoining the bloc, arguing that Brexit had produced economic and political consequences that deserved serious examination.
He has also said that he would personally like to see Britain back inside the EU during his lifetime, although he insists that the public must ultimately decide the country’s future.
Burnham’s position is more open than that of previous Labour leaders, who generally avoided discussing full membership because of concerns about reopening the divisions created by the 2016 referendum.
However, Burnham has repeatedly distinguished between his personal views and the immediate policies of his government.
He has stated that he is not proposing to rejoin the European Union during the current parliamentary term and has maintained that Labour’s existing manifesto commitments remain in place for now.
Nevertheless, he has indicated that a future Labour manifesto could offer voters a different approach to Britain’s relationship with Europe.
This distinction is politically important. Reopening the discussion does not automatically mean that the government has decided to reverse Brexit. It means that the possibility is no longer being excluded from the longer-term political debate.
Labour’s Original Brexit Promises Could Be Rewritten
The most important part of Ward’s intervention concerns the commitments Labour made before the 2024 general election.
The manifesto established three major restrictions: no return to the European Union’s single market, no rejoining the customs union and no restoration of freedom of movement.
These commitments were intended to reassure voters that a Labour government would respect the outcome of the referendum.
Ward now believes that these restrictions should no longer determine Labour’s long-term European policy.
Removing the red lines would give Burnham greater flexibility when negotiating with Brussels. It would also allow Labour to consider arrangements that might previously have been politically unacceptable.
However, such a change could create uncertainty among voters who believed the party had made a clear commitment to respecting Brexit.
There is also an important distinction between closer economic cooperation and full EU membership. Joining the single market, entering a customs union and rejoining the European Union would each involve different obligations and economic consequences.
Full membership would require Britain to accept the EU’s wider legal and institutional framework, including its rules concerning trade, competition and the movement of people.
Consequently, any decision to pursue membership would require a much more extensive political and democratic process than simply negotiating a new trade agreement.
Why Burnham Believes Britain Needs a Closer Relationship with Europe
Burnham’s arguments are largely based on economic growth, international security and Britain’s changing position in the global economy.
Since leaving the European Union, British businesses have faced additional administrative requirements when trading with European markets. Food exporters, manufacturers and smaller companies have had to navigate new customs procedures and regulatory arrangements.
Burnham believes that closer cooperation could reduce some of these barriers and improve Britain’s economic prospects.
He has also argued that Brexit weakened Britain’s ability to cooperate with European countries on certain security and migration matters.
Another important consideration is the changing international environment.
The war in Ukraine, tensions involving Russia and uncertainty surrounding the United States’ international commitments have increased the importance of European security cooperation.
Ward has made a similar argument, suggesting that Britain should no longer assume that Washington will always provide the same level of strategic support.
He believes that Britain should strengthen its relationships with France, Germany, Poland and other European countries to improve collective security.
However, critics argue that cooperation does not necessarily require EU membership. Britain remains a member of NATO and can negotiate bilateral agreements with European governments without transferring additional powers to Brussels.
The disagreement therefore concerns how much integration is necessary to achieve Britain’s economic and diplomatic objectives.
The Makerfield Test: A Potential Political Obstacle
One of the most interesting complications for Burnham concerns his constituency of Makerfield, where a significant proportion of voters supported leaving the European Union in 2016.
Burnham has repeatedly emphasised that his policies must pass what he describes as the Makerfield test. In other words, decisions made by his government should improve the lives of ordinary people in communities such as the one he represents.
This principle could become particularly important if Labour considers a return to European integration.
Many Brexit supporters believe that leaving the EU was about restoring parliamentary sovereignty and ensuring that important decisions were made by British institutions.
They may therefore question whether closer European integration would undermine the democratic decision made in 2016.
However, support for Brexit does not necessarily mean that voters oppose every agreement with European countries. Some may support closer trade relationships while continuing to favour British control over immigration, taxation and domestic legislation.
Burnham must therefore explain precisely what any proposed arrangement would mean for ordinary households, workers and businesses.
The challenge is to demonstrate that closer cooperation could deliver practical benefits without ignoring concerns about national sovereignty.
Europe Is Watching Britain’s Changing Position
Burnham’s statements have also attracted attention from European leaders.
French President Emmanuel Macron has indicated that Britain would be welcome to return to the European Union. However, political support for closer relations does not mean that rejoining would be straightforward.
Britain would need to negotiate the terms of accession and obtain the agreement of existing EU member states.
Several important questions would have to be addressed, including financial contributions, regulatory obligations, freedom of movement and the role of European institutions in British law.
Britain might also be unable to retain all the special arrangements it enjoyed before Brexit.
European governments would want assurances that the UK’s return was permanent and that another British government would not attempt to leave again following a future election.
The negotiations could therefore take years and would require considerable political commitment from both sides.
For the European Union, Britain’s return could offer economic, diplomatic and security advantages. However, the EU would also need to protect the integrity of its existing institutions and rules.
Opposition Parties Prepare to Challenge Labour
The possibility of reversing Brexit is likely to create significant political opportunities for Reform UK and the Conservatives.
Nigel Farage has consistently argued that Britain’s departure from the EU should be respected and that the country should use its independence to establish its own economic and regulatory policies.
Reform UK could use Ward’s comments to argue that Labour is preparing to reverse the referendum result without having secured a fresh mandate from voters.
The Conservatives could make similar arguments, particularly among voters who believe Brexit represented an important decision about national sovereignty.
Labour supporters, however, may argue that democratic politics must allow governments to reconsider policies when economic circumstances change.
The 2016 referendum established the decision to leave the EU, but it did not necessarily settle every future question about Britain’s relationship with Europe.
This creates a difficult political debate about whether another referendum would eventually be necessary.
Burnham has indicated that he does not want to move ahead of public opinion. Any attempt to pursue full membership would therefore require a convincing explanation of its benefits, obligations and democratic legitimacy.
Conclusion: Is Britain Preparing for Another Brexit Battle?
Chris Ward’s intervention has brought Britain’s European future back into the centre of Labour politics.
His call to reconsider the Brexit red lines is particularly significant because he helped write the very commitments he now believes should be retired.
Andy Burnham has also demonstrated a greater willingness to discuss the possibility of reversing Brexit, including eventual EU membership.
However, there is an important difference between opening a political debate and making a government commitment.
For the moment, Burnham has maintained that Labour’s existing manifesto restrictions will remain in place during this Parliament. His government is concentrating on negotiating practical agreements with Brussels while considering Britain’s longer-term relationship with Europe.
The coming months will therefore be important in determining whether Labour’s approach develops into a more ambitious European strategy.
The central questions remain unresolved. Will Labour remove its Brexit red lines before the next general election? Could Britain eventually seek to rejoin the EU? Would voters support another major change in Britain’s relationship with Europe? And how would Burnham reconcile closer European integration with the promise that British communities must have a meaningful say in their future?
Ultimately, the controversy is about more than one Labour MP’s newspaper article. It concerns the direction of British economic policy, national sovereignty, international security and the democratic consequences of the 2016 referendum.
Britain may not be preparing to rejoin the European Union immediately, but the political discussion that once seemed closed is now firmly back on the table. The next Labour manifesto could become a defining moment in deciding whether the country continues to build a relationship with Europe outside the EU or considers a much more fundamental change.
Almost ten years after the Brexit referendum, Britain’s European future is once again an open political question.