DAILY MAIL COMMENT: No one voted for a return to this toxic Brexit psychodrama

Andy Burnham called yesterday for ‘an honest discussion’ about the merits of a return to allowing free movement of people between Britain and countries of the European Union . Perhaps the PM should start by being honest about his own intentions. In June, he specifically told the mainly Eurosceptic voters of Makerfield that he would not re-run the old Brexit arguments. ‘I’m not proposing the UK considers rejoining the EU,’ he said. ‘I respect the decision that was made at the referendum, and it’s going to undermine everything I’ve said about strengthening democracy if we don’t respect that vote.’ It got him elected, but what a difference a few months makes in his morally flexible world. Shamelessly flouting that Makerfield pledge, he is already dragging this country back towards Brussels. He even says we may go ‘all the way’ and apply to rejoin. Not only has Mr Burnham deceived the people of Makerfield, he is also making a mockery of Labour ’s 2024 manifesto, which expressly rejected a return to free movement, the single market or customs union. Hardly the way to start an honest debate. But then Remainers are used to churning out falsehoods. They love to complain about the notorious Leave campaign bus slogan claiming Britain sent £350,000 a week to the EU. And they had a point. After the UK rebate and other benefits were taken off, it turned out to be merely £252,000 a week. But compared with the mendacity and outrageous scaremongering of the Remain campaign, this was a minor sin. In June, Andy Burnham told the mainly Eurosceptic voters of Makerfield that he was 'not proposing the UK considers rejoining the EU' Treasury forecasts before the 2016 vote predicted that Brexit would bring economic catastrophe – a GDP fall of up to 6 per cent, as many as 820,000 more unemployed, a drop in real wages of 3-4 per cent, and house prices plummeting by up to 18 per cent. It was all tosh. In the event, jobs and vacancies soared, wages and GDP continued to rise, while house prices, far from collapsing, remained buoyant in the years after the referendum. Spurred into life by Mr Burnham’s double-dealing remarks, Remainers are at it again, spewing out spurious figures purporting to show how disastrous Brexit has been. Yet more humbug. They don’t mention that going back would mean cancelling the many trade deals made with other countries since Brexit and relinquishing control of our trade policy. Or that it could mean state investment in steel and other domestic industries becoming illegal and that AI and other technical developments could be hampered by EU regulation. Nor the net £9.2billion a year we no longer pay in membership fees. As our rebate would not be renewed, that figure would be substantially higher if we went back in. Would we be allowed back anyway, and if so, would we have to join the single currency? Would there be a fresh entry fee, would we have to join the border-free Schengen zone? If Mr Burnham really wants to rake over dead coals, he must take account of the demonstrable cons of shackling ourselves once more to the ailing EU, as well as the imagined pros. Vanishingly few people want to go through the Brexit psychodrama again – including another toxic debate over free movement. It can only bring more rancour and division. Four months ago Mr Burnham claimed he respected the referendum result, while clearly plotting to overturn it all along. Is that his idea of honesty?