Andy Burnham wants to deepen the UK’s ties with the EU. (Image: Getty)
Britain cannot rejoin the European Union without having freedom of movement between the UK and the EU, Brussels’ former chief Brexit negotiator has warned. Michel Barnier warned the UK there will be “no cherry picking” for the UK.
When asked on BBC’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg whether Britain could rejoin the single market without having unlimited immigration backwards and forwards, Michel Barnier said: “There is no cherry picking. There will be no possibility to have one freedom and not the other.
“The four freedoms (of goods, movement of people, services and capital) are clearly the four conditions to be inside the single market.”
He said there would be no fee simply to rejoin, but added: “There will be the usual contribution of any member state to the European budget.”
Mr Barnier said he thinks the £5 billion annual rebate Margaret Thatcher had negotiated on paying into the EU’s central budget would be “off the table” in any future agreement.
He said: “We are speaking of a new situation, and it cannot be exactly as the past situation before Brexit.
The Prime Minister is due to sign a series of deals with the EU on November 20 in Brussels.
They will be focused on bringing down post-Brexit trade barriers on food and farming, as well as working more closely on emissions trading, and making it easier for young people from the UK to work, live and study in Europe and vice versa.
But he has suggested he wants to deepen ties with Europe further in the aftermath of the summit.
Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has acknowledged there will be “trade-offs” for Britain as it seeks to get closer to the EU again.
She was asked by Ms Kuenssberg whether it was true there would be a 150,000 cap on the number of Europeans who could come to Britain under a youth mobility scheme, and whether this would be acceptable to her constituents.
Mrs Nandy, who represents the leave-voting Wigan constituency, said: “Well, we’ll have those conversations with our European counterparts, but we’ll also have those conversations too with the British people, because it is right to say that there are costs as well as benefits to a closer relationship with the European Union.
“There are trade-offs to be made, and we can’t cut people out of that conversation.”
Ms Nandy also suggested she is not in favour of rejoining the trade bloc, telling the BBC: “The only thing that I think the British people are absolutely united on right now is that we left the European Union a decade ago with the promise of a close Brexit deal and the promise of benefits from that deal, and most of those have not been realised.
“It’s not working for people across this country, and we’ve got to do better.”
Michel Barnier Reveals Four Conditions for UK Rejoining EU – Including £5bn Bombshell
Britain could face a very different relationship with the European Union if it ever decides to reverse Brexit, former EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier has warned. His latest intervention has reignited the political debate over Britain’s future in Europe, with four fundamental conditions emerging as potential obstacles to any attempt to rejoin the bloc.
Barnier’s comments contain an especially significant financial warning: Britain should not expect to recover the annual £5 billion budget rebate negotiated by Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. Losing that preferential arrangement could mean a substantially different financial relationship with Brussels if the United Kingdom returned as an EU member.
The warning comes as Prime Minister Andy Burnham signals a willingness to explore closer relations with Europe. Although the government has not committed to rejoining the European Union, discussions about the future relationship have reopened one of Britain’s most divisive political questions.
For Brexit supporters, Barnier’s conditions demonstrate that returning to the EU would involve substantial compromises. For those who believe Brexit has damaged Britain’s economic prospects, however, the possibility of rebuilding closer relations could represent an opportunity to address some of the problems created by leaving.
1. Freedom of Movement Would Have to Return
Barnier’s first major condition concerns freedom of movement.
Speaking to the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg on 8 November 2026, the former Brexit negotiator made clear that Britain could not expect to regain access to the European single market while refusing to accept its fundamental principles.
Freedom of movement allows EU citizens to live, work and move between member states without requiring the same immigration permissions imposed on people from outside the bloc.
This was one of the most controversial issues during the 2016 Brexit referendum. Immigration control was a central argument for many Leave voters, who wanted Britain to determine its own rules for people entering and working in the country.
Barnier’s message is that this arrangement cannot simply be excluded from a future single-market agreement.
He explained that the four freedoms are interconnected and cannot be separated according to individual national preferences.
This presents a major political challenge for Burnham. Any government considering a return to closer European integration would need to explain how it intended to address the immigration concerns that contributed to Brexit.
It would also need to acknowledge that accepting freedom of movement would represent a significant change from the immigration arrangements established after Britain’s departure.
2. Britain Would Have to Accept the Single Market’s Four Freedoms
Barnier’s second major condition is that Britain must accept the complete framework governing the European single market.
The four freedoms are:
- Free movement of goods: Products can move between participating countries with fewer internal trade barriers.
- Free movement of people: EU citizens can live and work across participating countries.
- Free movement of services: Businesses can provide services across national borders under the relevant rules.
- Free movement of capital: Money and investment can move between participating countries.
Barnier rejected the idea that Britain could select the economic benefits it wanted while avoiding the obligations it disliked.
He argued that there could be no single market à la carte, meaning Britain could not demand unrestricted access to selected sectors while rejecting the wider rules.
This is particularly important because Burnham has discussed exploring closer economic ties with Europe without necessarily committing to full EU membership.
Barnier’s intervention makes clear that even a return to the single market without full EU membership would require significant commitments.
The British government would therefore face difficult choices about regulatory independence, immigration and economic cooperation.
3. Britain Should Not Expect to Keep Its Existing EU Budget Rebate
Perhaps the most politically explosive aspect of Barnier’s intervention concerns money.
The United Kingdom previously benefited from a special budget rebate negotiated by Margaret Thatcher in 1984.
The arrangement reduced Britain’s net contribution to the European budget by returning approximately two-thirds of the difference between its contribution and the EU expenditure allocated to the country.
The rebate was worth approximately £5.2 billion in 2020.
Barnier indicated that Britain should not expect to receive the same preferential arrangement if it rejoined.
He argued that Brexit had created a new political and financial situation, meaning the previous agreement could not simply be restored.
The UK would instead be expected to make the usual budget contribution required of an EU member state.
This could become a major political issue because British taxpayers would want to know exactly how much membership would cost and what economic benefits the country would receive in return.
The financial implications would depend on the eventual membership agreement, the UK’s economic position and the budget arrangements negotiated at the time.
Nevertheless, Barnier’s warning is clear: Britain should not assume that returning to the EU would mean recovering all the privileges it enjoyed before Brexit.
4. Britain Would Have to Accept the EU’s Common Rules and Obligations
The fourth condition concerns the wider legal and regulatory responsibilities associated with EU membership.
Rejoining would mean accepting the obligations that apply to other member states, rather than negotiating a special arrangement allowing Britain to disregard rules it found politically inconvenient.
These obligations would include compliance with European legislation, participation in the single market’s regulatory framework and acceptance of the institutional arrangements governing membership.
Britain would also have to negotiate its position on other important European policies.
Although Barnier has indicated that adopting the euro would not necessarily have to be an immediate condition of beginning membership negotiations, Britain could not expect to secure unlimited exemptions from the wider EU framework.
The distinction is important. Barnier has suggested that there could be room for discussion over the currency, but he has been considerably less flexible about the single market’s four freedoms.
For British politicians, this means that any serious attempt to rejoin would involve far more than simply signing another trade agreement.
Could Britain Rejoin the EU Within Four Years?
Barnier has also suggested that Britain could potentially move towards EU membership more quickly than some other countries seeking accession.
He argued that the original Brexit negotiations were exceptionally complicated because Britain had to withdraw from the EU and disentangle itself from hundreds of international agreements.
A future return could be quicker if Britain maintained sufficient regulatory alignment with European standards.
However, the timetable would depend heavily on political decisions in London and the willingness of European governments to approve the necessary arrangements.
The suggestion that Britain could rejoin within four years should therefore be understood as a possibility discussed by Barnier, not an agreed timetable or a guarantee.
Any return would require negotiations, political agreement and the necessary democratic approval in Britain.
Andy Burnham Faces a Difficult Political Choice
Barnier’s intervention places additional pressure on Burnham to clarify what he actually wants from Britain’s relationship with Europe.
The Prime Minister has argued that the country should have an honest debate about the economic consequences of Brexit and the opportunities available through closer cooperation.
However, there is a considerable difference between reducing trade barriers and rejoining the European Union.
A closer trading relationship might be possible without restoring full freedom of movement or accepting every aspect of EU membership.
Full membership, by contrast, would involve much more substantial commitments.
Burnham must therefore explain whether his objective is to improve the existing Brexit settlement, return to the single market or eventually seek full membership.
Each option carries different economic, political and constitutional consequences.
The government also faces pressure from Conservative and Reform politicians, who argue that reopening the question of EU membership risks ignoring the democratic decision made in 2016.
Conclusion: Brexit Debate Returns With a £5bn Warning
Michel Barnier’s latest comments have made one thing clear: Britain cannot expect to return to the European Union on precisely the terms it enjoyed before Brexit.
Freedom of movement, acceptance of the single market’s four freedoms, a standard EU budget contribution and compliance with the bloc’s common rules would all form part of the discussion.
The £5 billion rebate warning is particularly significant because it demonstrates that Britain could face a different financial settlement if it sought membership again.
For Brexit supporters, these conditions reinforce the argument that leaving the EU restored important powers to the United Kingdom.
For those who favour closer European integration, the challenge will be to demonstrate that the economic and diplomatic benefits of membership would outweigh the costs and compromises.
Ultimately, the decision about Britain’s future relationship with Europe belongs to the British people and their elected representatives.
But before politicians begin promising another European future, voters deserve an honest explanation of what returning would actually involve.
The central question is no longer simply whether Britain should rejoin the EU. It is whether the country would be prepared to accept the financial, economic and political conditions that Brussels would demand in exchange.