Britain does not need to reopen old wounds – endlessly relitigating Brexit is a bad idea
4 min read
Andy Burnham’s “Manchesterism” offered something genuinely exciting: a challenge to Westminster’s dominance based on the belief that communities should control their destinies.
It felt fresh, ambitious and rooted in places too often overlooked by national politics. For those of us representing former industrial towns, it offered the possibility of a different relationship between people and power.
That is why the PM’s decision to reopen the Brexit debate disappoints me. Having promised to decentralise power from Westminster, are we now going to transfer it back to Brussels?
I voted and campaigned to remain in the EU. I still believe in closer European co-operation, better trading arrangements and opportunities for British businesses internationally. But a decade on, I believe our priority must be rebuilding Britain, not reopening its deepest political wounds.
Blackburn’s referendum result reflected a country divided almost down the middle. Across former industrial communities, leave votes often expressed something beyond Europe: frustration with economic insecurity, declining opportunities and a political establishment perceived to be listening elsewhere. Not every leave voter shared the same motivation, but we ignore that sense of abandonment at our peril.
The referendum was not a cure for Britain’s economic problems, nor should it be written off as a failure. It was an opportunity for our leaders to confront our issues: to revive domestic industry, invest in skills, encourage enterprise and rediscover what this country could produce and sell to the world. Brexit arguments now usually focus on whether the decision itself was right, but the real question is whether successive governments delivered on its potential.
Rejoining the EU in itself would not restore trust, revive high streets or persuade people that politics works for them. Democracy cannot mean respecting a decision only until leaders decide they would prefer a different answer. We must learn from the referendum and hear what those who voted in protest were trying to communicate – not endlessly relitigate it.
Europe, too, has changed. Recent events, with cities across the continent set aflame, leave little space for doubt. Would rejoining really answer all our economic woes, or are we being dragged back in to help shoulder the burden of a bloc that looks to be on the decline?
I understand that this is hardly a moment for Britain to become inward-looking, but neither is it a moment to mistake institutional membership for national renewal. We can and should deepen co-operation with our European neighbours while remaining independent and building strong trading relationships across the world.
The referendum was not a cure for Britain’s economic problems, nor should it be written off as a failure
That means giving British workers a fair chance: investing in their skills, rather than leaving them vulnerable to being undercut by the global movement of labour, and ensuring businesses compete on a level playing field. An economy cannot thrive if domestic producers and small enterprises are left struggling against pressures they cannot reasonably overcome. International trade matters, but so does the resilience of our communities.
I have seen the potential of a different approach in neighbouring Preston, where efforts to retain more spending within the local economy have helped put local enterprise at the heart of regeneration. I want to explore what similar thinking could mean for Blackburn: revitalising our high street, celebrating our cultural heritage and creating opportunities that give people a genuine stake in their town’s future.
This is localism as a practical philosophy, not a political slogan. It means recognising that prosperity is built in communities, small businesses matter, and economic decisions should benefit the people whose work sustains local life.
It also means healing divisions. Blackburn has experienced deep political and racial tensions. Rebuilding trust requires more than telling people their grievances are misplaced. It requires showing, through action, that their futures matter and that politics can deliver tangible improvements. We cannot do this while telling them their vote was wrong and therefore will not be respected – that is a recipe for more resentment, creating further grievances left vulnerable to exploitation.
Manchesterism excited people because it suggested that power could move closer to those who had felt excluded from it. That promise deserves to be pursued – not diluted by another national argument about surrendering control.
Adnan Hussain is the Independent MP for Blackburn
