Rayner and Burnham accused of Brexit Betrayal (Image: Daily Express)
Nigel Farage has hit out at a Brexit betrayal after an arch-Remainer and ally of Andy Burnham hinted she would back rejoining freedom of movement. Reports emerged that Mr Burnham is open to heading back into the scheme, which allows for the free movement of people across and within the EU without migration controls.
That follows years of wrangling between Labour politicians and eurocrats seeking a “reset” of relations between London and Brussels.
The Prime Minister is due to attend the UK-EU summit next month as part of those talks, after the crunch meeting was delayed when Labour ousted their previous boss – Sir Keir Starmer.
Speaking on Sky News, Angela Rayner, an ardent Remainer and close ally of the Prime Minister, appeared to back plans to rejoin the scheme.
When repeatedly asked if she would support surrendering Britain’s immigration controls to Brussels, she initially attempted to sidestep the question.
Pressed on the matter, Ms Rayner said: “In terms of our future relationship with the EU, of course we should be having a conversation and understanding the facts of what could be possible.”
The Labour Party has come under fire for attempting to cosy back up to Brussels after Mr Burnham performed a U-turn on commitments not to reopen the Brexit argument.
Mr Burnham voted to Remain, campaigned to Remain, and demanded a second referendum when his side lost in the largest democratic vote in British history.
Speaking in 2025 at the Labour Party conference, he even said he wanted to see the country back in “in my lifetime”.
Yet he changed position during the Makerfield by-election, a seat which voted 65% to leave the EU, and chose to run away when challenged on his evolving stance by the Daily Express.
When speaking at the Labour Party conference this year, he changed position again, saying he would press ahead with his party’s long-touted desire to “reset” relations with eurocrats.
Over the weekend the Prime Minister appeared to go evern further. He told the Sunday Times that an “honest discussion” was needed.
Mr Burnham said: “Freedom of movement had very significant challenges associated with it and I spoke about them in my previous time in parliament.
“But, at the same time, it was a type of immigration that perhaps wasn’t as difficult [as now].
“Revolving door migration where people would come and then go back is different. The balance of migration has changed, hasn’t it, since then?
“I think we’ve just got to have an honest discussion about those things.”
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Commenting online Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the Conservative Party, wrote: “This is yet another example of Burnham’s foot in mouth syndrome. He hasn’t thought this through or the implications.”
She added: “Most people who voted for Brexit did so because they didn’t want free movement. Too many politicians have failed to understand the significance and impact of immigration on communities.”
Veteran Brexiteer and Reform UK Leader Nigel Farage fumed that the Labour Party was staging a “total betrayal of Brexit Britain”.
He added that Mr Burnham was also breaking his “Makerfield pitch”, a pledge he had made during the by-election where he said he would only work in the interests of his constituents.
Mr Farage told the Daily Express that Mr Burnham was “deluded to say immigration was different when we were members of the EU”, pledging to “fight this dishonesty”.
The Daily Express has launched its ‘Give Us A Proper Brexit’ crusade, which calls for leaving the ECHR, a 12-mile border to protect British fishing waters and the cutting of EU red tape.
Labour has maintained that it is seeking to improve relationships with the trading bloc, which it says were harmed by bad deals struck by the previous Conservative Government.
Nigel Farage Erupts at Burnham Brexit Betrayal as Angela Rayner Hints at EU Scheme
Nigel Farage has launched a fierce attack on Prime Minister Andy Burnham after renewed debate over Britain’s future relationship with the European Union erupted into a major political controversy. The Reform UK leader has accused Labour of betraying Brexit voters, while Housing Secretary Angela Rayner has indicated that the government should keep its options open when discussing closer ties with Brussels.
The dispute has reopened one of the most divisive questions in British politics: should the United Kingdom reconsider freedom of movement and explore a closer relationship with the EU, or should it preserve the immigration controls introduced after Brexit?
Burnham has insisted that he will not restore freedom of movement during the current Parliament and says any such fundamental change would require a referendum. However, his willingness to discuss the issue has alarmed Brexit supporters, who fear that Labour could eventually seek a mandate to reverse important elements of the UK’s departure from the European bloc.
Rayner’s intervention has added another dimension to the controversy. She has argued that no option should automatically be excluded from discussions about Britain’s long-term relationship with Europe, while stressing that the government is not simply proposing to return to the arrangements that existed before the 2016 referendum.
For Farage, the disagreement represents an opportunity to challenge Labour’s credibility on immigration, sovereignty and democratic accountability. For Burnham and Rayner, the challenge is to explain how Britain can improve relations with its largest nearby trading bloc without ignoring the concerns of voters who supported Brexit.
Farage Accuses Labour of Betraying Brexit Voters
Farage has responded angrily to Burnham’s renewed openness to discussing freedom of movement. The Reform UK leader has described the Prime Minister’s position as a betrayal of Brexit Britain and accused him of reopening an argument that Labour had previously promised not to revive.
The criticism centres on Burnham’s political commitments during the Makerfield by-election campaign, when he sought to return to Parliament. His opponents argue that voters were given assurances that the Brexit debate would not be reopened, making his subsequent comments about freedom of movement politically contentious.
Farage has also challenged Burnham’s suggestion that immigration under EU membership differed from the patterns Britain has experienced more recently. The Prime Minister has argued that migration before Brexit often involved younger European workers who came to Britain for a period and later returned home.
Farage disputes that interpretation and maintains that restoring freedom of movement would weaken Britain’s ability to control immigration.
Reform UK has made immigration control and national sovereignty central themes of its political programme. Consequently, the prospect of Labour considering a closer relationship with Brussels gives the party an opportunity to reinforce its existing message.
However, the question remains more complicated than the competing political slogans suggest. Freedom of movement is not the same as an unrestricted right for every person in the world to enter Britain. It is a specific arrangement governing eligible citizens of participating European countries.
Any future agreement would need to establish the rights involved, the obligations accepted by the UK and the extent of any safeguards. Those details would be essential to a meaningful assessment of the policy.
Angela Rayner Keeps the Door Open
Rayner has reinforced the government’s argument that Britain should examine the potential benefits and costs of closer European cooperation.
Speaking on BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg on October 25, she said that nothing should automatically be taken off the table when discussing the future relationship with the EU. She argued that Britain should have an honest conversation about the available choices and present any significant proposals to voters at a general election.
Rayner also criticised the current trading arrangements, arguing that additional paperwork and other barriers have made it more difficult for some British businesses to trade with European partners.
Her position does not amount to a formal announcement that Labour intends to restore freedom of movement. Instead, she has defended the principle of examining possible arrangements before deciding which options should be pursued.
That distinction has not prevented criticism from opponents who believe that keeping the possibility open creates uncertainty about Labour’s long-term intentions.
The government must also reconcile its current discussion with the commitments contained in Labour’s 2024 election manifesto, which ruled out returning to freedom of movement, joining the single market and re-entering the customs union during the current political programme.
Burnham has said he will maintain those commitments during this Parliament. Any fundamental change would therefore require a different political mandate.
Rayner’s comments suggest that Labour’s longer-term position could become a subject of debate before the next general election, although the precise terms of any future proposal remain uncertain.
Why Freedom of Movement Has Become So Controversial
Freedom of movement was one of the central issues in the 2016 Brexit referendum.
Supporters of leaving the EU argued that Britain should regain control over immigration policy and decide its own rules for people seeking to live and work in the country. For many Leave voters, the ability to determine who could enter Britain was inseparable from the broader question of national sovereignty.
Those arguments remain influential today.
Critics of a possible return to freedom of movement worry that Britain could lose some of the discretion it gained after Brexit. They also argue that immigration policy must take account of housing availability, public-service capacity, employment conditions and the concerns of local communities.
Supporters of closer European ties offer a different perspective. They argue that easier movement could help British citizens work and study in Europe, give businesses access to a wider pool of workers and reduce certain barriers to economic cooperation.
They also point out that migration can contribute to economic activity, fill vacancies and generate tax revenue. Its overall effects depend on the circumstances, including the skills of workers, employment rates, wages and the capacity of public services.
A serious debate must therefore examine the likely consequences rather than assuming that migration is either entirely beneficial or inherently damaging.
Burnham has acknowledged that freedom of movement created significant challenges. His argument is that the country should assess how migration patterns have changed and whether a more functional relationship with European countries could help Britain address current problems.
Farage, by contrast, sees the possibility of restoring freedom of movement as a direct challenge to the political commitments associated with Brexit.
Could Closer EU Ties Help the British Economy?
Economic concerns are an important part of Labour’s argument.
The EU remains a major trading partner for the UK, and businesses in sectors such as agriculture, food production and manufacturing have raised concerns about the administrative burdens associated with trading across borders.
Supporters of closer cooperation argue that reducing unnecessary barriers could make it easier for British companies to export goods, obtain supplies and plan investment. More predictable arrangements could also help businesses that depend on European customers or suppliers.
Rayner has argued that Labour should examine the trade-offs involved and seek the best possible agreement for Britain.
However, the economic consequences would depend on the specific arrangement negotiated. Restoring freedom of movement would not automatically eliminate customs procedures or return Britain to the single market. Those outcomes would involve separate questions about regulations, market access and the obligations Britain might accept.
Closer integration could also involve compromises over the UK’s freedom to establish its own rules in certain policy areas.
The government would need to explain these issues clearly if it wanted voters to judge the merits of a new relationship with Europe. It would also need credible evidence showing how proposed changes might affect economic growth, wages, public finances and employment.
For Farage, the answer is to defend the principle of Brexit and pursue economic improvements without restoring the freedom-of-movement system. For Labour, the argument is that Britain should remain open to practical arrangements that could improve trade and cooperation.
The public will ultimately need to decide which approach offers the most convincing balance of advantages and disadvantages.
The Small Boats Crisis Adds to the Debate
Immigration is not limited to the movement of European workers. The continuing controversy surrounding small boats crossing the English Channel has made border management a central political issue.
Burnham has argued that Britain needs stronger cooperation with European partners, including arrangements that could help address migration and facilitate the return of people where the relevant legal conditions are met.
He has linked some of the difficulties facing Britain to the loss of previous cooperation mechanisms following Brexit.
However, freedom of movement and the management of irregular migration are separate policy issues. Restoring rights for eligible EU citizens would not automatically resolve the small boats crisis or determine how asylum claims should be handled.
Those matters require specific agreements on information-sharing, returns, asylum procedures and cooperation against people-smuggling networks.
The government would therefore need to explain how any proposed agreement would work in practice. It should also distinguish between people exercising legal rights to move between countries, people applying for asylum and those entering the country through unauthorised routes.
Farage is likely to continue arguing that immigration control should remain a central measure of the UK’s independence. Labour, meanwhile, will need to demonstrate that cooperation with Europe can improve border management without requiring concessions that voters would reject.
A Political Test for Labour
The controversy places Labour in a difficult position because its supporters do not all share the same views on Brexit.
Some want a closer relationship with Europe and believe the current arrangements have created unnecessary economic barriers. Others supported leaving the EU and remain concerned that closer integration could undermine the referendum result.
The party must also consider the views of voters in constituencies where Brexit remains politically important. If Labour appears to be moving towards a return to freedom of movement without explaining its plans, it could face questions about whether it understands the concerns of those communities.
Farage and Reform UK will seek to use the disagreement to challenge Labour’s credibility. The Conservatives may also criticise Burnham’s approach, arguing that the government is reopening an issue that should have been settled.
Yet Labour has an argument of its own: reviewing policy options is not the same as implementing them, and governments should be able to examine whether existing arrangements are delivering the intended results.
The key test will be whether Labour can explain the distinction clearly and show that any future proposals are based on evidence rather than political convenience.
The November Summit Could Shape the Next Stage
Burnham is due to meet European Union leaders in Brussels on November 20. The summit is expected to focus on improving the relationship between Britain and the EU, including practical cooperation that could benefit businesses and address shared challenges.
The meeting could provide an opportunity to discuss trade, food production and migration cooperation. However, it will not automatically settle the question of whether Britain should restore freedom of movement or pursue full EU membership.
Any substantial change would involve further negotiations and political decisions. The government would also need to consider its existing commitments and the democratic process through which future policy would be authorised.
For now, Burnham says there will be no changes to Labour’s current red lines during this Parliament. Rayner has argued that the country should not rule out every possible option before examining the facts.
Farage has made clear that Reform UK would oppose a return to freedom of movement and intends to make the issue a central part of its political argument.
Conclusion: Brexit Remains an Unresolved Political Fault Line
The confrontation between Farage, Burnham and Rayner demonstrates that Brexit continues to influence British politics a decade after the referendum.
Farage sees the renewed discussion about freedom of movement as a threat to the promises made to Leave voters. Rayner believes Britain should examine the available options for improving its relationship with Europe, while Burnham has called for a more evidence-based discussion and ruled out immediate changes without public approval.
The disagreement reflects two different priorities: preserving the control associated with Brexit and exploring whether closer European cooperation could bring economic and practical benefits.
Neither side can settle the issue through rhetoric alone. Voters will need clear information about the terms of any proposed arrangement, its implications for immigration and trade, and the compromises Britain might be expected to accept.
The November summit may provide an early indication of the government’s practical ambitions. The broader question, however, will remain open: how should Britain balance national control with the benefits of cooperation with its closest European neighbours?
As Labour considers its long-term direction and Reform UK prepares to challenge its approach, the debate over Brexit is once again becoming a defining issue in the country’s political conversation.