Daily Mail, on UK Politics, 7 November 2026

7.3out of 10Serious

: with Brussels

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.3 findings

of Andy Burnham 's . Whitehall sources said Treasury officials will be asked to set out the potential economic benefits of a range of options for Britain's future relations with the European Union . One insider said the move was designed to 'inform the debate' over how far to go in unpicking Brexit. But that Labour is planning to revive the Project Fear tactics of the referendum campaign in a bid to bounce the country back into the EU.

Former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith said the initiative 'sounds like Project Fear all over again'. He told the Daily Mail: 'There is no limit to Burnham's ambitions when he talks of getting closer to the EU. 'All the nonsense about the UK's economic performance is without evidence. We have outgrown the EU.' Shadow Chancellor Andrew Griffith also warned the Treasury against 'giving us Project Fear in reverse'. In the run-up to the 2016 vote, the Treasury produced an 'analysis' claiming that Britain would suffer a 'profound shock' if it voted to leave the EU.

Andy Burnham is pushing for a fresh debate about Britain's relationship with the European Union, arguing closer ties could boost economic growth Burnham meets with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on the sidelines of the 81st United Nations General Assembly on September 22, 2026 It said the UK would be plunged into a deep recession, with house prices falling by up to 18 per cent and unemployment jumping by up to 820,000.

A review of the predictions by investment platform AJ Bell this year found the Treasury had been right to forecast a fall in the value of the pound, but added: 'Neither of the Treasury's short-term "shock" or "severe shock" scenarios proved totally accurate.' Mr Burnham is pushing to reopen the Brexit debate, despite saying in May that it was 'the last thing we should do right now'. He will use a UK-EU summit in Brussels this month to launch a 'conversation'.

The PM claimed this week that a new food and farming deal would boost the UK's GDP by 0.4 per cent over time – equal to £12billion a year. But the Treasury has refused to publish the analysis on which the figure is based. It came as the Bank of England governor also claimed the UK would benefit from closer ties with Europe, with Mr Burnham seizing on his comments to justify striking a new deal with Brussels. Andrew Bailey said more open trade with the EU would improve growth, telling the BBC: 'Would the UK being able to trade more openly with its nearest neighbours, to have that trade, to have that market openness, be beneficial for growth in the UK?

My view is yes, it would.' In response, Mr Burnham said in a separate BBC interview on Friday night: 'The governor of the Bank of England said yesterday that getting closer to Europe again would bring growth. And that is what I'm trying to do.' But Shanker Singham, a former government trade adviser and chairman of The Growth Commission, said: 'Quite simply, this EU reset is being sold to the British people on the back of flawed assumptions and bogus calculations.'

A Treasury source said the department had not yet been asked to draw up a new analysis of potential EU options. A spokesman said the analysis of the new food and farming deal would be published 'in due course'.

Read the original article on dailymail.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (3)

The Daily Mail states in its headline and opening line that the Treasury will produce a Project Fear analysis. Its own body attributes the plan only to unnamed Whitehall sources, gives the Project Fear label to Conservative critics, and admits near the end that a Treasury source said no analysis has been asked for. It also calls the Prime Minister's policy a 'betrayal' in its own voice.

  1. Headline goes beyond the article

    Serious

    “The return of Project Fear”

    Why this matters
    The headline adopts 'Project Fear' as the Daily Mail's own verdict, with no quotation marks and no speaker.
    The impression it gives
    That it is an established fact that the Government is reviving scaremongering tactics.
    The context
    In the body the Project Fear label comes from two Conservative politicians, Sir Iain Duncan Smith and Andrew Griffith. It is their charge, not a reported fact.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“sounds like Project Fear all over again”
    • Elsewhere in the article“giving us Project Fear in reverse”

    Show it in the article

    “Treasury to outline PM's Brexit reset plan”

    Why this matters
    The headline states as settled fact that the Treasury will produce this analysis. It drops the attribution to unnamed sources.
    The impression it gives
    That the Treasury has been commissioned and the analysis is going ahead.
    The context
    The body rests the claim on unnamed 'Whitehall sources'. A Treasury source says the department has not yet been asked to draw up any such analysis.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“Whitehall sources said Treasury officials will be asked”
    • Elsewhere in the article“the department had not yet been asked to draw up a new analysis of potential EU options”

    Show it in the article

    “in echo of Remain's scare tactics”

    Why this matters
    The headline calls the planned work 'scare tactics' in the outlet's own voice.
    The impression it gives
    That the Treasury is preparing a warning designed to frighten voters.
    The context
    The article's own sources describe an assessment of the potential economic benefits of options for EU relations, meant to 'inform the debate'. Calling that a scare tactic is the critics' view.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“set out the potential economic benefits of a range of options”
    • Elsewhere in the article“designed to 'inform the debate'”

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Treasury may assess options for closer EU ties, sources say; Tories call it 'Project Fear'. A Treasury source says no analysis has yet been requested.

  2. States one side's claim as fact

    Serious

    “The Treasury is to conduct a new 'Project Fear-style' analysis”

    Why this matters
    The opening line tells the reader, with no attribution, that the Treasury is to carry out the analysis. It puts 'Project Fear-style' in quotation marks without saying who said it.
    The impression it gives
    That the analysis is confirmed and that someone authoritative has described it as Project Fear-style.
    The context
    The only basis given is unnamed Whitehall sources. The Treasury's own source, quoted 22 sentences later, says the department has not been asked. No one in the article uses the phrase 'Project Fear-style'.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“A Treasury source said the department had not yet been asked”
    • Elsewhere in the article“Whitehall sources said Treasury officials”

    Show it in the article

    “the revelation triggered warnings”

    Why this matters
    The word 'revelation' presents an unconfirmed tip from unnamed sources as an uncovered fact. It then hangs the critics' warnings on it.
    The impression it gives
    That a hidden plan has been exposed and the warnings respond to something proven.
    The context
    The plan is unconfirmed. The Treasury source says no analysis has been requested.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“had not yet been asked to draw up a new analysis”

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Whitehall sources say Treasury officials may be asked to assess options for closer EU ties, though a Treasury source said no such analysis has yet been requested.

  3. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “planned Brexit betrayal”

    Why this matters
    The Daily Mail calls the Prime Minister's policy a 'betrayal' in its own voice, not as any critic's word.
    The impression it gives
    That seeking closer EU ties is by settled verdict a betrayal of the country.
    The context
    The article's facts describe a policy of seeking closer trade ties and a 'conversation' at a UK-EU summit. Whether that is a betrayal is a political judgement the article attributes to no one.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“launch a 'conversation'”

    Show it in the article

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Daily Mail

  1. 7 NovWhistleblower warns that Labour's conversion therapy ban would have been used to suppress scandal at NHS gender clinic for children6.0
  2. 6 NovKeir Starmer cashes in on lucrative speaking gigs after quitting No10 as he signs up with US-based agency which boasts Joe Biden, Jacinda Ardern and Kamala Harris among its clients3.0
  3. 6 NovParliament Square poised to be next London landmark pedestrianised - but politicians voice alarm that cyclists will run riot3.0
  4. 6 NovLondon Tube drivers to go on strike across three months as RMT union continues fight against four-day working week7.3
  5. 6 NovRussell Brand's matey time with Labour: Disgraced comic invited to give drug talk by MP later forced out by cocaine and rent boys sting - and backed hard-Left Corbyn3.0

Everything we scored from Daily Mail