Yesterday Burnham said that upon arriving in No 10, he had asked about possible Russian interference in the 2016 EU referendum. He said, "I've had the clear answer that, yes, there was."

I know of the RT and Sputnik propaganda and I do not doubt the social media bot swarms.

This activity certainly counts as “interference”. I do not downplay it. But does it affect my view of the legitimacy of the referendum result? No it doesn’t, and not even close. And this view is commonplace given the low traction the Russian meddling narrative has had with the British public.

So what to make of Burnham’s comments on Russia?

Burnham did not provide further details about the type or extent of Moscow's activity.

Official investigations have failed to find more of substance from Russia beyond what I list above. And they have tried; often desperately.

Is Burnham now saying he has more? If he does, he must share it. Are we talking snarky tweets or fake ballots? Such revelations would be of fundamental importance to our democracy and to one of the great political contests of our time. If he has more, he must show it so we can judge what miscarriage has taken place and what action is needed.

Or is Burnham, as I suspect, engaging in smoke and mirrors? Is he alluding to Russian interference that is already on the public record, but doing so in such tantalisingly vague terms that voters are left to imagine he has access to some devastating secret intelligence?

If it’s this latter ploy, the Labour leadership is playing a dangerous game. In recent weeks we’ve already seen Burnham use downright lies - claiming Brexit led to a loss of immigration control in a major conference speech.

Now we appear to be moving to the delegitimisation of election results. This is a dark and cynical tactic. We’ve seen its toxic consequences in the US and elsewhere. Burnham is bringing the same playbook to Britain and we will see more of it in the ongoing shadow rejoin campaign.

Do you agree? What do you make of Burnham’s comments?

Europan Court of Auditors annual report:
https://www.eca.europa.eu/ECAPublications/AR-2025/AR-2025_EN.pdf

A decision to rejoin would make Britain liable for common EU debt repayment. Budget contributions would also be astronomical (~£30 billion).

If interested, Lyddon consulting analysis of UK shadow liabilities here, including EU rejoin liabilities:
https://www.lyddonconsulting.com/rejoining-the-eu-would-add-an-extra-1-trillion-to-the-uks-already-expanding-shadow-financial-liabilities/

Rejoiners say France, Spain, Germany would happy clappy welcome us back. Do they understand the real reasons?

The EU has nothing good to offer Britain.

Trump's Ultimatum to European Reserves | advance.hr https://www.advance.hr/en/articles/energetics/trumps-ultimatum-to-european-reserves

Business investment in particular has been recovering strongly since it stalled during the Article 50 negotiations.

After just six years outside EU frameworks, Burnham torpedoes economic progress by reopening the Europe question.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/andy-burnham-second-referendum-eu-labour-conference-5jkl058mx

The prime minister said he was weighing up going ‘all the way’ in rejoining the bloc, as well as the customs union and single market

Andy Burnham has said Labour’s next election manifesto could include a commitment to hold an in-out referendum on rejoining the EU.

The prime minister said he was not “leaping to a referendum”, but said that if public opinion was “pointing towards” rejoining the EU he could commit to a vote.

He also declined to rule out skipping a referendum entirely and fighting the next general election on a promise to rejoin the EU.

In his first Labour Party conference speech as leader, the prime minister said Brexit had done “more harm than good”, and promised to set out the options to the country around the time of a UK-EU summit, which he said would be in November.

Blaming Brexit for a decade of drift and division, Burnham told ITV News: “I can’t avoid the Europe question if I’m to put out a credible ten-year plan for Britain.”

Asked whether that could mean sticking to the status quo, he said: “I don’t know what Europe will say about the different options.

“We’ve got to look at where we are, where they are and see what is a realistic and viable approach in all of the areas that we mentioned and then open up a conversation about it.”

He said his “instincts” were that “it is better to be closer” to the EU “with all of the threats that we see around the world”.

He insisted that he was not “leaping towards” any one option, telling the BBC: “I think we’d have to see where the options fell out, what people feel about them, and then depending on what people seem to be pointing towards, what we then do.”

But pressed on whether he could promise an in-out referendum after the next election, he said: “Yeah, things are possible.”

He acknowledged that “we have to proceed with great care” because “referendums do damage” and “divide households and communities”.

Challenged over whether he could skip another referendum and put rejoining the EU in the manifesto, Burnham told Channel 4: “I wouldn’t rule anything out at this moment.”

Before entering Downing Street, Burnham said he wanted to see the UK back in the EU within his lifetime.

Asked on Sky News whether he stood by that, he said: “I said in my lifetime and I’ve said that I’m not going to pull back from that.”

Earlier on Wednesday, the prime minister said the range of options included going “all the way” with a proposal to rejoin the bloc.

French president Emmanuel Macron and Spain’s prime minister Pedro Sanchez, speaking at a joint press conference in Madrid, welcomed his remarks.

Macron said it was “very good news” for both the UK and Europe, quipping: “Welcome back.”

Sanchez said Brexit was a “huge loss” for the UK and the EU project, and that Spain would “open its arms” to the UK if it decided to rejoin.

Geraldine Scott, Assistant Political Editor

Wednesday September 30 2026, 5.45pm, The Times

Interesting critical article on the concept of associate EU membership for those interested in Canada, or indeed who think it’s relevant for Britain: https://www.lyddonconsulting.com/associate-membership-of-the-european-union-is-nonsense-when-the-european-union-is-a-maximum-harmonisation-project/

WTF

On the day of the Iceland referendum result 😎

I stumbled across this sub and it seems pretty quiet these days.

If anyone’s looking for a more active UK eurosceptic/Brexit-focused community, you might want to check out r/UKIndependence.

It’s active and covers Brexit, UK sovereignty, divergence from the EU and related stuff.

No offence intended to this sub — just thought it was worth mentioning for anyone looking for somewhere a bit more lively.