Michel Barnier, the EU’s former Brexit negotiator, has said Britain would be welcomed back into the EU but pointed out that Burnham can’t do much about rejoining without public consent. He warned that the UK must be “clear-eyed” about the path ahead and said there would be “no single market à la carte.” I’m sure he’s right. I am not convinced the EU would even contemplate opening talks unless Britain can show a sustainable majority in favour of reversing Brexit. I would argue that Burnham has done what any politician in his position would do: he's kicked off a public debate. He should continue to raise the issue, keep it in the news, watch the polls and ‘roll the pitch’ ready for a moment when it will be right to talk about manifesto pledges and a future referendum.
To that end, I note the Times this morning is reporting that Burnham wants a more 'honest conversation' about freedom of movement:
Prime Minister Andy Burnham says he wants a more 'honest conversation' about freedom of movement, suggesting it could work better than post-Brexit immigration has. www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/...— Sunder Katwala (sundersays) (@sundersays.bsky.social) 24 October 2026 at 20:54
There is said to be a split in the cabinet, with some opposed to rejoining, including the Chancellor and the Home Secretary. Even some remainers like Yvette Cooper are said to be cautious about kicking off a debate at the moment. The Labour movement as a whole is overwhelmingly in favour of rejoining and, according to Peter Kellner, an 8.2 million majority in the country feels the same way.
When we joined the first time, it followed a long period when it was the generally accepted policy of both main parties. Edward Heath took us in without a referendum, and few people thought that one was needed. It was Harold Wilson who used a referendum as a political tool to unify his party (they also had several senior figures who were staunch Eurosceptics) and win the 1974 general election.
I think Burnham would be wise at the next election to commit to starting talks on rejoining as a full member, with a referendum held when the negotiations are concluded. If he wins the election, that would give him a mandate for exploratory talks and make it hard for opposition parties to argue against the will of the people. And they can hardly oppose a deal which hasn’t been negotiated.
In the next parliament, he would then have five years to agree with the EU27, a basis for Britain’s entry under Article 50. There are some who think it would take longer than a single parliament, but I believe it would be perfectly possible. Then, and only then, when all the details are known (as they were in 1975) the deal should be put to a referendum.
That would avoid all the ridiculous scaremongering about the euro and Schengen. The decision really would be 'clear-eyed' and informed. We would know the monetary contribution and the conditions, and it would be a simple task for the Treasury to produce a synthesis of all the forecasts showing the positive economic impact and all that would mean for tax revenues.
Caroline Voaden, the LibDem MP for South Devon and a former MEP, has a piece in Politics.co.uk where she says Brexit was sold on “fantasies of higher living standards, control over our borders and freedom from laws imposed by Brussels” none of which materialised. If we can't convince voters about that, we don't deserve to win a referendum.
London mayor Sadiq Khan has suggested that according to research he commissioned earlier this year, London’s economy alone was £30 billion a year smaller than it would have been without Brexit.
Trade commentator David Henig, in his Substack blog argues that now is not the time for tinkering about with what he calls more “deliverism” or waiting for some special EU offer that is never going to be made. Burnham’s should “go big or go home” and I agree with that. We are either in or out, and while there are pro’s and con’s for each, being in is really the only game in town.
Lord Frost, who bears significant responsibility for the post-Brexit problems we face, in a CapX podcast last week, admitted that the country was "in a mess" and claimed parties on the right aren't doing enough to explain what the solutions are. He said Kemi Badenoch has announced spending cuts of £70 billion a year but claimed that was only "a quarter "of what was needed to get back to Blair-era levels of spending. To be clear, £280 billion is roughly what Britain spends on health and education combined.
Frost claims we have allowed government spending to "drift up too high" and markets are all "gummed up" through over-regulation. And remember, this comes after fifteen years of spending cut and at least 20 Conservative "red-tape initiatives." According to metrics monitored by organisations like the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Britain has exceptionally low regulatory barriers to market competition while keeping its public spending close to the average of its international peers.
More cuts will never chime with the British electorate; what we need is growth and more income and reversing Brexit is one glaringly obvious solution. In any future referendum, Frost and Co will need to convince voters like those in Sunderland, for example, why Brexit was a good move. Good luck with that.
In 2016, the UK produced 30 cars for every 100 made in Germany. That number is now down to 17 thanks to Brexit. ukandeu.ac.uk/from-pace-se...— Sue Wilson MBE (@suewilson91.bsky.social) 24 October 2026 at 12:34
Of course you can find plenty of pessimists and naysayers who are pro-EU but seem to think it’s all going to be too difficult. Simon Usherwood, Professor of Politics and International Studies at The Open University and Senior Fellow, UK in a Changing Europe, is not hopeful. He says memories of the UK as an ‘awkward partner’ during its membership make EU politicians “ask whether the costs of a UK return outweigh the benefits.”
The chances of managing re-entry negotiations within one five-year parliament, Usherwood says, “are very small indeed.”
On Blue Sky Niall Ó Conghaile, an Irishman resident in France, is very active, constantly criticising the UK’s cherry-picking approach and the comments of some anti-Brexit campaigners about how the EU should bend or soften its stance to accommodate us, as if we are a special case. There is a grain of truth in what he says. Mr Ó Conghaile acts as if he's a spokesman for Ursula Von Der Leyen. He isn't. He's only giving his personal opinion.
I think both he and Professor Usherwood, seriously underprice the boost that the EU would get from a recalcitrant member rejoining the bloc. It would reinforce the whole idea of European unity to see one of the EU’s most awkward former members return to the fold after ten years or more outside in the cold.
What message would that send to others in the EU who might want to try going it alone?
So, without suggesting Brussels must roll out the red carpet for us, I am sure there will be some flexibility to get what is still the world’s fifth or sixth largest economy back inside the bloc. Our voice isn’t what it was, but it still carries some diplomatic weight, especially when international law is being eroded as it is under Trump, Putin and Xi.
Overall, the national conversation to reverse Brexit is well and truly underway and that should be welcomed.
BBC and the Trump defamation case
In the $10 billion defamation case brought by Donald Trump against the BBC, he was due to give a deposition under oath on 16 October but chickened out, saying he was too busy on matters of national importance. He was in fact just campaigning and holding fundraising events.
His legal team wanted to push it back into January, but a judge has now ordered him to make time for the deposition before 11 December
Trump doesn’t do anything under oath well, as we know, and I for one, would be amazed if he goes through with it. His lawyers know what a shocking liability he is when it comes to telling the truth. And pleading the 5th amendment would look terrible.
I think the whole case may soon be dismissed. It would be a stunning victory for Auntie.
Trump and the mid term elections
The midterms look like being a bloodbath for the Republicans. The House of Representatives is lost, and the Democrats are on track to flip the Senate. He is deeply unpopular among independents and Latinos, and even the MAGA faithful are turning away from him, especially the farmers in rural areas.
Let’s face it, you need to be semi-brain dead to think he’s doing even an adequate job, but around 30% of Americans still support him.
The big question is what will he do after November 3rd? He can’t accept losing, and we all know what happened in 2021. Watch out for fireworks in the US.
