Simon Jenkins says reopening the EU debate is risky but necessary
Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins argues that Andy Burnham is right to open a debate on rejoining the EU, despite the political risks, because Brexit continues to damage the British economy.
Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins argues that Prime Minister Andy Burnham is right to reopen the debate on whether Britain should rejoin the European Union, even though the question is divisive, painful and politically risky. In his column, Jenkins writes that the move should be welcomed because the issue is urgent and is not going away, and because Brexit is still weighing on the national economy. He frames the subject as one the prime minister has a duty to confront rather than avoid.
Jenkins acknowledges that opening the question so soon after taking office might seem reckless and could put Burnham's popularity at risk. He nonetheless contends that the prime minister's job is to challenge the consequences of Brexit, if not to reform the arrangement itself. Jenkins describes the Brexit decade as one that has produced a bizarre sense of guilt among Britons, many of whom now feel uneasy about a decision they once backed.
The column cites opinion polls showing that nearly 60 per cent of Britons regard Brexit as a mistake, while only a third remain in favour. Almost a quarter of those who voted for Brexit now say they regret it. Jenkins notes that early forecasts of economic disaster were proved wrong, yet he argues that the accumulated cost of cutting links with Britain's biggest trading partner is estimated at 6 to 8 per cent of GDP. That figure, in his account, is the central reason the issue cannot be left alone.
Jenkins also presents the debate as a matter of political courage as much as economics. He argues that a leader who wants to address the damage cannot sidestep the subject simply because it is unpopular, and he treats Burnham's willingness to open it as evidence of seriousness rather than recklessness. The column makes clear that the case for reopening the debate rests on the continuing cost of Brexit and on the gap between public regret and the political system's reluctance to discuss it.
The source material does not set out a formal government proposal, a timetable or a specific policy that Burnham has put forward, so the column should be read as an argument for a debate rather than an announcement of a change in policy. Jenkins' piece is an opinion column, and the figures it cites are presented as his reading of polling and economic estimates rather than as a government assessment.
4
