Britain’s relationship with Europe remains stuck in a place that hurts businesses and workers alike. Shevaun Haviland, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, has put it plainly: repairing the economic damage from Brexit should be Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s top priority. Her comments follow reports that the government plans to revisit its self-imposed red lines on EU alignment — not in pursuit of full rejoining, but in search of practical fixes that could reduce trade friction and restore some of the competitiveness the UK has lost since leaving the single market.
The data backs up the urgency. Since Brexit took full effect, British exports to the EU have been held back by customs checks, regulatory divergence, and the end of free movement for workers. Smaller firms in particular report that the cost and complexity of trading across the Channel has eroded margins or pushed them to abandon cross-border sales altogether. Meanwhile, the EU has moved on — striking trade deals the UK is not part of, and deepening its own regulatory integration. The gap between the government’s early rhetoric about “global Britain” and the reality of lost market access has only widened.
This is not a question of reopening old political wounds for the sake of it. It is a quiet, technocratic reckoning with the fact that the current arrangement is not working as promised. The promise of Brexit was that leaving would free Britain to flourish — but flourishing requires access to customers, talent, and supply chains, and geography means Europe remains the nearest and largest source of all three. A government that cares about outcomes, not slogans, has a duty to acknowledge what has gone wrong and adjust course accordingly.
The Westminster instinct is often to frame any move toward the EU as a betrayal or a capitulation. But there is nothing dishonourable about recognising that a policy has caused harm and then working pragmatically to reduce that harm. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Do not harm and do not reciprocate harm.” That principle applies as much to economic governance as to personal conduct. Making life harder for British businesses and workers without any clear compensating benefit is a form of harm — and repairing it is not weakness, it is responsibility.
Burnham has a chance to show what good governance looks like: not grand gestures, but honest assessment of what is broken and patient work to fix it. The business community is not asking for a reversal of the referendum — it is asking for a government that stops pretending the current deal is sufficient and starts making it better. That is a test of competence, not ideology. And it is the right test for any leader who claims to serve the public interest.