Major petition for Britain to rejoin the EU passes massive milestone
Andy Burnham wants the UK to have a closer relationship with the EU (Image: Getty)
A renewed campaign for Britain to rejoin the European Union has brought the Brexit debate back into the political spotlight, as a parliamentary petition calling for closer European integration attracts attention alongside fresh signals from Prime Minister Andy Burnham.
The campaign comes as the Government considers how far Britain should go in rebuilding its relationship with Brussels. Supporters of rejoining argue that Brexit has increased trade barriers, weakened Britain’s influence and left the country facing unnecessary economic costs. Critics, however, warn that reopening the question risks reigniting divisions over sovereignty, immigration and democratic consent.
The debate has gained added significance after a separate petition calling for Britain to rejoin the EU as soon as possible passed the 100,000-signature threshold. Parliament’s Petitions Committee has agreed to schedule a debate on that petition for October 12, giving MPs an opportunity to discuss the issue in the House of Commons.
Meanwhile, another petition launched by Robert McMaster in June 2026 calls on the Government to begin negotiations for the UK’s return to the bloc. The official petition page currently records 6,378 signatures, meaning it has not yet reached the 10,000-signature threshold that triggers a Government response. The petition remains open until December 24, 2026.
Although the campaigns are separate, both reflect the renewed attention being paid to Britain’s long-term relationship with Europe.
Petition campaign puts Brexit back on the agenda
Brits voted to leave the EU in 2016 (Image: Getty)
McMaster’s petition argues that, a decade after the 2016 referendum and six years after Britain formally left the EU, the economic and political consequences of Brexit justify a fresh assessment.
It calls on the Government to apply to rejoin the bloc, while acknowledging that Britain might not be able to secure the same membership terms it enjoyed before departure.
The petition’s central argument is that the perceived benefits of leaving have been outweighed by additional costs, reduced influence and inefficiencies. Its supporters believe that restoring full membership would strengthen economic stability and Britain’s ability to influence decisions affecting the continent.
The campaign also argues that closer cooperation with European neighbours would be important in a world where Britain faces international challenges that cannot be addressed by relying on distant partners alone.
These are the organisers’ arguments rather than settled conclusions. The economic effects of Brexit remain the subject of political disagreement, and the benefits of rejoining would depend on the terms negotiated, the obligations accepted and the way businesses and public services responded to any changes.
Nevertheless, the petition illustrates how the question of EU membership continues to attract political interest, even after years of debate about the practical arrangements governing the UK’s departure.
Andy Burnham opens the door to rejoining
The campaign has gained attention as Burnham signals that Britain should consider a wider range of options for its future relationship with the EU.
At Labour’s annual conference in September, the Prime Minister said the country should examine whether its current arrangements remain appropriate. He included full EU membership among the possible options, alongside rejoining the single market or a customs union.
Burnham argued that Brexit had done more harm than good, particularly in economic terms, and said Britain should assess how closer relations with European partners might support growth. He has also indicated that any decision on a future referendum remains some way off and would depend on how the different options were assessed.
His comments represent a significant development in a debate that has been politically sensitive since the referendum. They do not, however, amount to a formal decision to begin accession negotiations.
The distinction matters because closer cooperation can take several forms. A bilateral agreement to reduce trade barriers would not be the same as membership of the single market, while joining the customs union would involve a different set of arrangements from full EU membership.
Rejoining the EU would be the most extensive option, bringing Britain back into the bloc’s institutions and the wider framework of membership rights and responsibilities.
Burnham has said the Government should set out the alternatives and explain their implications to the public. That leaves open the question of which arrangement ministers might ultimately favour.
What happened in the 2016 referendum?
The current debate inevitably returns to the referendum held on June 23, 2016.
Voters chose to leave the European Union by 51.9 per cent to 48.1 per cent. The result followed a campaign dominated by arguments about sovereignty, immigration, trade, economic security and Britain’s role in Europe.
For many Leave voters, the referendum represented an opportunity to restore national control over laws, borders and policy decisions. Others believed the UK could develop new trading relationships outside the EU and establish a different approach to international cooperation.
Remain supporters warned that leaving would create barriers to trade, reduce Britain’s influence in European decision-making and complicate cooperation on shared challenges.
Britain formally left the EU in January 2020, with the transition period ending in December that year. The Trade and Cooperation Agreement subsequently established the framework for relations between the UK and the bloc.
The referendum did not eliminate disagreements about Europe. Instead, the political argument shifted towards the consequences of withdrawal and whether the settlement delivered the outcomes promised by its supporters.
A campaign to rejoin now seeks to reopen the question from a different starting point: whether the arrangements established after Brexit continue to serve Britain’s interests.
Petition signatures do not automatically change Government policy
The parliamentary petition system gives members of the public a way to raise issues with the Government and Parliament, but it does not allow signatories to dictate policy directly.
Under the official system, petitions that reach 10,000 signatures receive a Government response. Those that reach 100,000 signatures are considered by the Petitions Committee for a possible parliamentary debate. Reaching the higher threshold does not guarantee that a debate will take place, although the committee has agreed to debate the separate EU rejoining petition on October 12.
Even when MPs debate a petition, Parliament is not required to approve the proposal it contains.
The significance of the 100,000-signature milestone is therefore political rather than legally binding. It brings the issue into a formal parliamentary setting and gives MPs an opportunity to question ministers, explain their positions and represent the views expressed by constituents.
For campaigners, the debate provides a platform to argue that public opinion and the Government’s approach to Europe should be reconsidered.
For opponents, it provides an opportunity to explain why they believe the existing arrangements should remain in place or why any changes should stop short of full membership.
The eventual impact will depend on the arguments made, the Government’s response and whether the debate leads to further policy proposals.
Supporters say Brexit has damaged Britain’s influence
Those campaigning for rejoining argue that EU membership would restore Britain’s voice in decisions that affect its economy and its neighbours.
As a former member of one of the bloc’s largest economies, the UK had a role in negotiations over European legislation, trade policy and the direction of the single market. Outside the EU, Britain can negotiate with the bloc and influence discussions through diplomatic channels, but it no longer participates in EU decision-making in the same way as a member state.
Campaigners also argue that reducing regulatory and customs barriers could help British businesses trading with European customers.
For companies operating across borders, differences in paperwork and regulatory requirements can add costs and complexity. A closer relationship could potentially ease some of those burdens, depending on the terms agreed.
However, rejoining would not automatically remove every commercial difficulty, nor would it guarantee stronger economic growth. The final effects would depend on the conditions of membership, the wider economic environment and the ability of British businesses to benefit from improved market access.
Any serious proposal would need to explain not only the possible gains but also the financial contributions, regulatory commitments and political compromises that membership would entail.
Critics warn against reopening old divisions
Opponents of rejoining argue that the 2016 referendum established a democratic mandate for leaving and that successive governments should not reverse that decision without a clear public mandate.
They also question whether another prolonged argument over Europe would divert political attention from domestic priorities such as public services, housing, living costs and economic growth.
Reform UK, led by veteran Brexit campaigner Nigel Farage, has criticised Burnham’s approach. The party has argued that the Government risks moving towards Brussels without a sufficiently clear mandate from voters.
There are also practical questions about what Britain could negotiate if it applied to return.
EU membership involves common rules and obligations, and France’s President Emmanuel Macron has warned that the UK could not simply choose the advantages it wanted while rejecting the responsibilities associated with membership.
That warning highlights a central issue for the debate. The UK would need to negotiate a new accession arrangement rather than assume that its previous terms could be restored unchanged.
The Government would also have to consider whether a proposal for rejoining should be put to voters in a future general election, a referendum or another democratic process.
Could a second referendum enter Labour’s manifesto?
The possibility of a future referendum has become part of the wider political discussion, although no immediate vote has been announced.
Burnham has not ruled out the possibility that a referendum could feature in Labour’s manifesto at the next general election. He has also said that the country needs to examine the available options before deciding which path to pursue.
Including such a proposal in a manifesto would allow voters to consider the party’s position during an election. It would not, by itself, settle the terms of a future relationship with the EU or guarantee that membership negotiations would succeed.
A referendum would raise further questions about the wording of the ballot, the alternatives offered and the information made available to voters.
Supporters of rejoining may argue that the public should have the opportunity to reconsider Brexit in light of subsequent developments. Opponents may respond that the 2016 result should stand unless there is a clear and specific mandate to change course.
Both arguments reflect the continuing democratic sensitivity of the issue.
The next step is a debate, not a return to membership
The separate petition debate scheduled for October 12 gives MPs an opportunity to discuss the campaign for rejoining the EU, but it does not mean Britain is about to begin accession negotiations.
The Government would need to make a policy decision, assess the economic and legal implications and engage with the EU before a formal application could progress. European member states would also have a decisive role in any eventual accession process.
For now, the petition campaigns are adding momentum to a debate that Burnham has brought back into mainstream politics.
Their supporters want the Government to recognise what they see as the shortcomings of Brexit and take steps towards restoring full membership. Critics want ministers to respect the referendum result and explain why any change would be justified.
The challenge for the Prime Minister will be to turn broad statements about growth and cooperation into a clear policy that can withstand scrutiny from voters, businesses and Parliament.
The latest petition activity demonstrates that the argument over Britain’s European future is far from over. But signatures, parliamentary debates and political statements are only the beginning of that process.
Whether the UK ultimately seeks closer cooperation, a more extensive trading arrangement or full membership will depend on decisions that have yet to be made — and on whether the Government can secure sufficient political and public support for the path it chooses.
