Professor of Politics at Queen Mary University of London. Dr. Tim Bale wrote about the future of Brexit for AA Analysis based on British Prime Minister Andy Burnham's message of rapprochement with the EU.
British Prime Minister Andy Burnham unexpectedly resurrected the UK's relationship with the European Union (EU) in his speech to the Labor Party's annual conference, surprising everyone, including his cabinet colleagues.
Stating that Brexit "brings more harm than good", Burnham stated that "a clear route for the rest of the century" is needed for "higher growth rates and the restoration of the level of prosperity". In this regard, he stated that he would evaluate the current options available to the country in a short time and then try to provide "a basis for compromise that will clarify our perspective on both the position of the country and the future of the continent we live on."
The taboo Burnham breaks
Burnham thus broke a taboo. Since 2016, most centre-left politicians in the UK, including his predecessor Keir Starmer, have been unable to go beyond simply promising to “make Brexit work”. The basis of this situation lies in the fact that supporters of leaving the EU do not want to portray an image of stepping back from the decision put forward in the 2016 referendum, which they insist on calling "the will of the people".
Burnham's remarks did not provoke a reaction from "the public" or, perhaps tellingly, an elaborate defense of the benefits of Brexit by Brexit advocates. The vast majority of Britons have been telling opinion pollsters since early 2021 that the decision the country made a decade ago was wrong. Around 57 per cent of current voters - including 23 per cent of pro-Brexit voters - agree, while around 55 per cent say they want to rejoin the EU. Moreover, Burnham's decision makes even more sense in terms of electoral strategy, given that around eight-tenths of voters support rejoining the EU, whose support Burnham needs on behalf of Labor (or whose strategic vote she wants to use in the next election to prevent the Conservatives and far-right Reform UK from coming to power).
Another issue, at least as important, is that this intervention also makes economic sense. As a matter of fact, there are studies showing that Brexit has caused serious damage to the UK's trade, growth and public finances. At the same time, this change in public opinion and concern that the United States is no longer the reliable ally it once was also supports Burnham's view. Arguably, all these factors lead Burnham, only ten weeks into his term, to conclude that more needs to be done to reverse the massive act of "self-harm" caused by Brexit, or at least to mitigate its effects.
The Labor Party government under Starmer had taken a series of gradual steps to reduce disputes in trade relations that arose as a result of Britain's departure from the EU. But no economist believes this strategy will add more than 1 per cent to the country's GDP - just like the various trade deals Britain signed with other countries under the Conservatives. In reality, the only step that would make more than a marginal difference would be to join not only the Customs Union but also the Single Market, as in the case of Türkiye. However, taking it all the way forward and doing so without re-registering would mean the UK would become a "rule-taker" country. For such a large economy deeply committed to its sovereignty, this would probably be unacceptable both in principle and in practice.
Possible difficulties in the negotiation process
Experts predict that Burnham will include in Labour's next election manifesto a commitment to open negotiations for a new, closer relationship with the EU and put a potential agreement to a referendum, rather than a direct commitment to rejoin the EU. However, it must be said that winning such a vote is not a guarantee, especially if it involves full membership. Because existing member states will very likely refuse to re-grant the UK many of the privileges, special exemptions and budget rebates it enjoyed before it formally left in 2020. Indeed, current opinion polls show that support for rejoining British voters falls significantly when presented with this scenario.
Moreover, this assumes that each EU member state will be receptive to welcoming the United Kingdom back into their midst. According to the rules, each member state must approve. However, there is no guarantee for this.
Above all, European governments will be concerned that a UK decision to rejoin could be overturned again by a Eurosceptic government in the future. Moreover, in the process, France and Germany, the EU's largest members, may be governed by two far-right parties (the French National Rally (RN) and the Alternative for Germany (AfD)), whose sympathy and closeness to Britain is questionable - to say the least. Any agreement may need to be negotiated at this level.
However, we should not forget that Britain is still a relatively wealthy mid-sized power whose diplomatic and defense weight far exceeds its size. Moreover, French President Emmanuel Macron's positive reaction to Burnham's first move reminds us that different obstacles may be encountered in the negotiation process. However, in an increasingly unstable economic and geopolitical environment, it would please many European politicians and the public if the UK finally accepts that remaining within the EU is the safest option.
