Farage brands EU freedom of movement debate a 'betrayal' despite Burnham's pledge to consult voters - Reform Watch

Nigel Farage has accused Andy Burnham of a "total betrayal" for suggesting Britain should reconsider freedom of movement with the European Union, despite Burnham explicitly promising that no such change would take place without public approval through a referendum. Burnham has called for an honest discussion about Britain's future relationship with Europe, acknowledging the economic damage caused by Brexit and the significant changes to immigration since the UK left the EU. Farage responded by describing the Prime Minister as "deluded" for suggesting immigration was different before Brexit. However, figures from the Office for National Statistics directly contradict his dismissal. In 2025, non-EU nationals accounted for 77% of long-term immigration to Britain, compared with just 9% from EU nationals. Net migration among EU nationals was negative, with 42,000 more leaving Britain than arriving. The figures demonstrate how fundamentally Britain's migration patterns have changed since freedom of movement ended. Meanwhile, the economic consequences of Brexit remain substantial. The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that Britain's post-Brexit trading arrangements will leave long-term productivity 4% lower than if the country had remained in the EU, reflecting the barriers now facing businesses trading with Britain's largest economic partner. Reform's Zia Yusuf also joined the attack, citing £11.9 billion in Universal Credit payments to households containing foreign nationals. However, this figure includes entire households where at least one claimant is a foreign national, potentially including British partners. It cannot be presented as money paid exclusively to migrants, nor does it establish the cost of restoring freedom of movement. Farage's opposition to reconsidering Brexit also overlooks a fundamental democratic principle. The 2016 referendum determined whether Britain should remain a member of the European Union. It did not permanently prohibit future governments from proposing a different relationship with Europe. Burnham has committed to honouring Labour's existing manifesto throughout this Parliament and has pledged that any return to freedom of movement would require a referendum. Farage has every right to campaign against that proposal. But presenting a commitment to consult the British public as a betrayal of democracy, while dismissing the evidence of how Britain has changed since Brexit, deserves considerably greater scrutiny.