Dame Emily Thornberry has insisted the EU was not a “sacred cow”, and ugred Andy Burnham to rejoin the bloc without a second referendum. The Labour MP for Islington South and Finsbury, who currently serves as the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, demanded people “get over it” and dubbed the withdrawal in 2020 as a “disaster”. It comes after Andy Burnham, who previously said Brexit had “done more harm than good”, told Parliament on Monday (October 12) that failing to seek a better arrangement with the EU would be a “major dereliction of duty”.

The Prime Minister announced an upcoming EU-UK summit in Brussels next month. He said he will hold a “serious dialogue” about the UK’s future, adding that “sticking with the status quo is not good enough for Britain”. Mrs Thornberry has now proposed that Labour should include joining the EU as a commitment in its next General Election manifesto, rather than having a second public vote. She believes that rebuilding ties with the bloc is essential to grow the UK economy and secure its place in the global landscape.

The senior Labour MP told Sky News: “Why shouldn’t we talk about it when the majority of people agree with me that Brexit was a disaster, and we ought to get back into the European Union.”

She added: “Well, we need to have a democratic decision, so we ought to be putting it somehow.

“I don’t think we need to have another referendum, but what we can do is have it in the manifesto, and then people can have a choice. I would say let’s not bother with another referendum. Let’s just have it as a General Election (topic).”

However, Richard Tice criticised the comments on social media. Reform UK’s Business, Trade and Energy spokesman Richard Tice said: “If Labour think they can rejoin the EU without a referendum, they have no idea what they are unleashing. No idea at all.”

Mrs Thornberry has a long-standing, pro-Remain track record. She publicly criticised then-Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn in 2019 for maintaining a neutral stance on Brexit, warning it could harm the party’s election chances.

She also argued that Labour would be “off our bloody rockers” not to try and reverse Brexit during the Conservative government’s original Brexit negotiations. She claimed to have fought for a “people’s vote” to reverse the decision.

Meanwhile, Andy Burnham confirmed that re-entry into the UK is a long-term option he is considering. He stated that he cannot “leave Britain out” of discussions regarding its European future.

At the end of last month, the Prime Minister said an in-out referendum “wouldn’t be the right thing to do right now”. However, he added that it is “possible” that a future Labour general election manifesto could promise a new vote on Britain’s future in the bloc.

Fury as Emily Thornberry Says Brexit Is “Not a Sacred Cow” – “Get Over It!”

Britain’s long-running Brexit debate has returned to the centre of Westminster politics after senior Labour MP Dame Emily Thornberry urged politicians to reconsider the UK’s relationship with the European Union. Her blunt message to those who oppose reopening the argument — “get over it” — has added fresh fuel to an already divisive national conversation.

Thornberry, who chairs the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, argued that Brexit should not be treated as an untouchable decision that politicians are forbidden from discussing. She said Labour should consider including a commitment to rejoin the European Union in its next general election manifesto, rather than holding another referendum specifically on EU membership. <Cite refs={[“turn719488search1″,”turn719488search9”]}/>

The comments have drawn criticism from opponents who believe that reversing Brexit without a second referendum would disregard the 2016 result. Supporters of closer European integration, meanwhile, argue that the country must be allowed to reconsider a major constitutional decision in light of its consequences.

At the heart of the dispute is a fundamental question: should the Brexit referendum settle Britain’s European future indefinitely, or should voters and politicians be free to revisit the issue through the normal democratic process?

Thornberry challenges the idea that Brexit cannot be discussed

Speaking to Sky News, Thornberry rejected the suggestion that Brexit should be treated as a political subject that is permanently closed.

She argued that Britain needed an open discussion about its future relationship with the EU and said she believed Brexit had been a serious mistake. Her proposal was that Labour should put the question of rejoining the bloc before voters at a future general election.

Thornberry’s approach would make EU membership part of a wider political choice. Rather than holding a separate referendum, Labour could include its position in an election manifesto and allow voters to decide whether they supported that programme.

She presented this as a democratic route because the electorate would have an opportunity to assess the proposal alongside the party’s other policies. Critics, however, question whether a general election — where voters choose between parties on numerous issues — would provide a sufficiently clear mandate for such a significant constitutional change. <Cite refs={[“turn719488search1″,”turn719488search9”]}/>

The distinction matters. A manifesto commitment can give a government political authority to pursue a policy, but the precise mandate would depend on the wording of the commitment, the election result and the subsequent process. Rejoining the EU would also require negotiations with the bloc and agreement on the terms of membership.

Thornberry’s remarks therefore represent a proposal for a future political direction, not an announcement that Britain is about to rejoin the EU.

Why the comments have provoked criticism

The phrase “get over it” has become the most controversial part of the intervention because Brexit remains closely connected to questions of identity, sovereignty and trust in democratic institutions.

For many Leave voters, the 2016 referendum was more than a policy consultation. It was an explicit opportunity to decide whether the UK should remain in or leave the EU. The Leave campaign won with approximately 51.9 per cent of votes cast, compared with 48.1 per cent for Remain, on a turnout of around 72 per cent.

Those figures remain central to arguments about the legitimacy of reopening the issue. Opponents of Thornberry’s proposal say that the result should be respected unless voters are directly asked to reverse it in another referendum.

Richard Tice, Reform UK’s deputy leader, criticised the idea of rejoining the EU without another public vote. He warned that those advocating such a route were underestimating the political consequences. Other critics have similarly argued that reversing Brexit would risk deepening divisions rather than resolving them. <Cite refs={[“turn719488search8″,”turn719488search5”]}/>

Supporters of Thornberry’s position take a different view. They argue that a referendum result does not prevent future generations or future governments from reconsidering policy. Britain has changed its approach to many major issues over time, they point out, and EU membership should not be permanently excluded from democratic debate.

The disagreement is therefore not simply about whether Brexit was successful. It is also about how a country should balance respect for a previous vote with the ability to change direction through later elections.

Andy Burnham’s role in reopening the debate

Thornberry’s intervention came after Prime Minister Andy Burnham placed Britain’s long-term relationship with Europe back on the political agenda.

Burnham has argued that the existing relationship is not sufficient for Britain’s future and said that failing to seek a better arrangement would amount to a serious failure of responsibility. He has also said that the government respects the 2016 referendum result and is not simply reopening the original in-or-out vote. <Cite refs={[“turn719488search1″,”turn719488search15”]}/>

The government has been pursuing closer cooperation with the EU in areas such as trade, security and other practical matters. Such cooperation does not automatically mean rejoining the bloc. There is a considerable difference between negotiating agreements with European partners and seeking full EU membership.

That distinction is important because the debate can encompass several possible destinations: maintaining the current arrangements, improving cooperation in specific areas, pursuing closer economic alignment or eventually seeking membership again.

Thornberry’s proposal goes further than a limited reset. She wants Labour to consider making rejoining the EU an explicit election commitment. Burnham’s broader discussion of the UK’s long-term options does not, by itself, establish that the government has adopted her position.

The next stage of the debate will depend on what ministers formally propose, what Labour includes in its manifesto and how European leaders respond to any request for closer ties.