Support Our Mission Read Our Latest Edition BYLINE TIMES IMPACT: Find out about the changes you made happen Who knows what lay behind Andy Burnham's surprise announcement last week that he would soon be setting out options for a new long-term relationship between Britain and the European Union. Was it part of some cunning plan to reverse Brexit, or was he winging it? It's hard to know with this prime minister. What is clear is that, whether he realises it or not, the logical endpoint of the debate he has started is a manifesto pledge to "go all the way" and rejoin. After all, having declared that the current Brexit settlement, negotiated by Boris Johnson, is "not good enough" and has done "more harm than good", he can hardly advocate for the status quo. In any case, the status quo is not an option because, as Brexiteers used to be fond of telling us, Brexit is a process, not an event – and it is a process that is going to become inexorably worse for Britain as time passes. Indeed, it may be this realisation that led the prime minister to surprise his own cabinet with his decision to reopen the European question. Not only had the limited reset initiated by Keir Starmer, designed to "make Brexit work" run out of road after securing only modest advances, stymied by Labour's current red lines. But the entire process was in danger of being derailed by a row over the EU's new "Made in Europe" provisions designed to protect the bloc's autonomy and boost its resilience in the face of Chinese mercantilism, Russian aggression and US coercion. EXCLUSIVE Ten years and six prime ministers on, Byline Times looks at the fate of Brexit's most prominent media cheerleaders Byline Times Team Suddenly, being outside the bloc is becoming an uncomfortable place for Britain to be, particularly if, like Burnham, your goal is to boost the country's own resilience through reindustrialisation. But the other options Burnham is considering don't work either. A customs union with the EU would ease some of the problems associated with the Made in Europe policy, but beyond this the economic benefits would be slight. They would also come at the expense of requiring Britain to follow EU trade policies without having a say over them: a lot of political pain for not much gain. Rejoining the single market would bring much bigger benefits, but would turn Britain into even more of a rule-taker – including over the country's large financial services sector. That is not something any responsible British government could agree to. So that leaves Rejoin. Could Burnham persuade the public to back it? Much, of course, would depend on the terms. But Brexiteer scare stories claiming that Britain would be forced to join the Schengen travel zone or adopt the euro are surely wide of the mark. New members are committed to both in principle, but in practice, as Sweden's three decades outside the euro and Ireland's Schengen opt-out show, neither need happen without Britain's consent. The real risks lie elsewhere. A backdrop of an EU in crisis, whether as a result of renewed market turmoil or the rise of the far right, would make rejoining a hard sell. Meanwhile, the biggest challenge could be persuading the EU that Britain was serious about rejoining and would not Brexit again. Nonetheless, Burnham would start with some clear advantages. A megapoll undertaken by YouGov for Best for Britain found that only two per cent of voters think Brexit has been a great success, and only 29% think Britain was right to leave. Almost half of voters would back rejoining, rising to 65% of likely voters. The rise of nationalism that followed Brexit has brought with it a concerted campaign to undermine our fundamental human rights, argues Daniel Sohege Daniel Sohege The poll also shows that Labour would be more likely to win a majority at the next election on a commitment to rejoin. Indeed, for all their bravado, neither Reform nor the Conservatives are likely to welcome the prospect of havi...
