What will European leaders make of Andy Burnham? He’s the seventh UK prime minister they’ve had to deal with in a decade of chronic political instability in London, triggered by the fateful 2016 referendum vote to leave the European Union.
The “king of the north” is largely unknown in continental Europe. He has focused on domestic issues—devolving power to regions and cities, and expanding state control over key industries—rather than foreign policy. He may initially spend less time on diplomacy than his predecessor, Keir Starmer, whom critics called “never here Keir” for his frequent foreign travel to support Ukraine, strengthen European and NATO defense ties, and try to curb Donald Trump’s disruptive instincts in transatlantic relations.
Starmer had started to rebuild some trust between Brussels and London after a long period of mutual suspicion and frustration over the UK’s failure to fully implement the withdrawal agreement hastily negotiated by Boris Johnson. But he was cautious about resetting ties with the EU, to avoid angering Labour voters who supported Brexit. And the Treasury, as always, was reluctant to pay for closer engagement with Europe.
Starmer was praised for co-leading, with French President Emmanuel Macron, both the “coalition of the willing” working on security guarantees for Ukraine and the group of European nations preparing to ensure safe passage in the Strait of Hormuz once the US and Iran stop fighting. Burnham is likely to keep that role, which helped restore the UK’s standing as an important player in European security—even if it’s no longer at the EU’s core—rather than retreating into nationalist isolation or embracing the MAGA movement, as Nigel Farage’s Reform party would do.
Like other domestically focused politicians, Burnham will soon realize that the UK’s economic stagnation, declining relative living standards, and underlying social discontent are at least partly due to Brexit’s damaging effects on trade and investment. Even without the strong security and geopolitical reasons for getting closer to the EU, deeper engagement with Britain’s main export market would be an obvious way to achieve healthier growth.
As a new face in Downing Street, Burnham has a chance to rethink Labour’s red lines on EU relations—no single market, no customs union, no freedom of movement—and pursue a more ambitious approach. He also has the charisma that Starmer lacked to sell it to the public. Burnham will find European governments open to cooperation on defense and security, and increasingly willing to welcome the UK into its “made in Europe” push for greater European control over key technologies and supply chains. But they remain wary of UK attempts to pick and choose the benefits of the EU market without taking on the responsibilities, like paying for market access and allowing free movement of people, as Norway and Switzerland do.
I agree with Joël Reland from the UK in a Changing Europe think tank, who noted last week that Burnham may sound less pro-European than Starmer, “but is shaping an economic and security agenda that could bring London closer in line with Brussels.”
Reland highlights the “striking” similarity between Burnham’s goal of building “sovereign capabilities” in industries from shipbuilding to AI, and EU plans for greater “strategic autonomy”—meaning reducing reliance on foreign suppliers in critical sectors.
Moreover, Burnham faces political and social challenges similar to those of his European counterparts. Many European countries are seeing a similar rise in national populism, backlash against immigration, and anger at the political establishment over the cost of living and poor public services—the same forces that fueled Brexit. With populists like Marine Le Pen in France and Alice Weidel in Germany knocking at the doors of power, encouraged by Trump’s White House, Elon Musk, and Vladimir Putin, the new Labour prime minister has a strong interest in joining forces with pro-European leaders.European liberal democratic forces across the continent.
Keir Starmer with the leaders of Poland, Italy, France, and Germany before talks in Berlin about the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz. Photograph: Michael Kappeler/AFP/Getty Images
The geopolitical reasons are strong. Putin is waging hybrid war against Europe, Trump is trying to pull the US away from European security and undermine European values like liberal democracy, the rule of law, and tolerance, and Xi Jinping is flexing China’s export power and control over critical raw materials.
Building closer ties with Europe, starting with security and defense, also makes sense for UK domestic politics. Burnham must realize that Labour won’t win the next general election as a middle-ground party still afraid of upsetting Brexit voters. Labour has been losing pro-European voters to the Liberal Democrats and the Greens, and working-class Brexit voters to Reform.
He can start to reverse those losses if he declares Labour to be the practical pro-European force that can deliver the economic and political benefits of closer ties with the EU without being held back by old taboos. Hardcore Eurosceptics won’t vote Labour anyway.
There are signs that Burnham understands this, even if it’s not his top priority. He needs to find a way to link boosting the economy with closer cooperation with Europe. The first step could be in defense industrial cooperation, joining a follow-up to the EU’s Safe joint procurement tool. Another option is accepting an ambitious youth experience program without quotas or high tuition fees. This would give young Britons reciprocal chances to study and work in Europe, which Brexit made much harder.
Temporary visas for European students and apprentices might increase immigration numbers, but they would benefit the UK economy and its scientific and technological achievements.
Burnham might feel that moving away from Labour’s red lines requires a national democratic mandate at the next general election, but he should be bold and start making the case now for why the UK would be better off in the single market, in preparation for the party’s next manifesto.
Paul Taylor is a senior visiting fellow at the European Policy Centre.
Frequently Asked Questions
Here is a list of FAQs about Andy Burnhams plans and how they might bring the UK closer to Europe written in a natural tone with clear answers
BeginnerLevel Questions
1 Who is Andy Burnham and why does his opinion matter on Europe
Andy Burnham is the Mayor of Greater Manchester Hes a prominent Labour politician who often speaks about giving more power to cities and regions His views matter because hes a vocal advocate for closer ties with Europe especially on trade and youth mobility
2 What exactly is Burnham proposing that would bring us closer to Europe
Hes mainly pushing for a UKwide youth mobility schemea deal that would let young people live work and study in the EU more easily and vice versa He also wants the UK to rejoin the single market and to sign a new security pact with Europe
3 Doesnt closer to Europe just mean rejoining the EU in disguise
Not exactly Burnham has said he doesnt think the UK will rejoin the EU anytime soon Instead hes talking about practical smaller stepslike a youth mobility deal or a veterinary agreementto rebuild trust and reduce trade friction without reversing Brexit
4 How would a youth mobility scheme actually work
It would likely be a reciprocal deal For example young Brits could move to Germany or France for up to 23 years to work or study and young Europeans could do the same in the UK It would be capped and timelimited not an opendoor policy
5 Would this affect my daily life if Im not young or dont travel
Indirectly yes If trade with Europe gets easier that could lower prices in shops and create more jobs Also closer security cooperation could mean better shared intelligence on crime or health threats
AdvancedLevel Questions
6 Burnham talks about dynamic alignment with EU rules What does that mean in practice
Dynamic alignment means the UK would automatically adopt certain EU regulations as they change rather than setting its own This would reduce trade barriers but critics say it hands control back to Brussels without a seat at the table
