Rachel Reeves has backed Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s approach to deepening the UK’s relationship with the European Union, saying Britain’s long-term future lies inside the bloc while warning that supporters of re-entry must first demonstrate the practical benefits.
The former chancellor set out her position in The Sunday Times after recent comments from Mr Burnham prompted renewed speculation about the direction of Britain’s post-Brexit policy. The debate has included questions over whether the UK could eventually return to the EU or accept arrangements involving freedom of movement.
Ms Reeves said she welcomed Mr Burnham’s leadership on the issue, despite having been removed from the Treasury after he became Prime Minister. She argued that Brexit had damaged the country’s economic and security position. In her article, she wrote:
“Brexit has made us poorer, weaker and less secure.”
She also said she was proud of steps already taken to improve relations with Brussels. Her intervention places a senior Labour figure behind the Prime Minister’s decision to examine what further changes may be possible, although it does not amount to a commitment to immediate EU membership.
A long-term question
Ms Reeves said she believed Britain’s future was in the European Union. However, she added that those who support rejoining must make their argument openly, show voters what the benefits would be and ensure that any subsequent stages were handled correctly.
That qualification is significant. Mr Burnham has told ministers that the Government’s immediate objective is to secure further practical arrangements with the bloc. The areas identified for discussion include food and drink, an emissions trading system and a possible youth mobility scheme. A summit with the EU is expected next month.
According to the Prime Minister, the period after that meeting would be used to consider the wider possibilities for the UK’s relationship with Brussels. The process therefore separates near-term negotiations from the more fundamental question of whether the country should change its overall post-Brexit settlement.
| Issue | Position outlined in the source |
|---|---|
| Immediate discussions | Food and drink, emissions trading and youth mobility |
| Longer-term policy | Options for the relationship with the EU to be explored |
| Major constitutional change | To be decided by the public and left to the next Parliament |
Cabinet caution
Mr Burnham has warned ministers against advocating a particular outcome while the process is under way. Earlier this week, he said individual ministers should not campaign for specific options or offer predictions about where the discussions would lead.
In a letter to his Cabinet, he said any fundamental alteration to the arrangements established after Brexit would be a matter for the public. He also indicated that such a decision would be left to the next Parliament. The position allows the Government to pursue closer practical cooperation while reserving the most significant constitutional choices for a later stage.
Ms Reeves’s comments are therefore supportive of the direction of travel but stop short of calling for an immediate return to the EU. She said advocates of that outcome had a responsibility to establish a persuasive case. Her remarks also acknowledge that any future change would involve more than a statement of political preference.
The intervention comes as Labour attempts to define the limits of its European policy under a Prime Minister who has opened the door to a broader discussion. The Government’s immediate test will be whether it can reach agreements in the sectors identified for the forthcoming summit without allowing those negotiations to be presented as a settled decision on Britain’s ultimate destination.
- Rachel Reeves has endorsed closer relations with the EU and said she believes Britain’s future lies within the bloc.
- Andy Burnham is seeking practical agreements on trade-related sectors and youth mobility before wider options are considered.
- Any fundamental change to post-Brexit arrangements would, under the Prime Minister’s stated position, be put to the public and left to the next Parliament.
