Richard Branson has launched an attack on Brexit (Image: Getty)
Brexiteers hit back at Sir Richard Branson after he branded the UK’s departure from the EU an “unmitigated disaster”. The Virgin Group founder claimed the 2016 Brexit vote was an “unprecedented act of economic and political self-harm”.
The billionaire, who backed Remain in the referendum and has lived in the Caribbean for much of the last two decades, insisted voters should be given a “second chance” to decide whether to be in the club. His intervention comes after Sir Tony Blair’s think tank called for the UK to rejoin Brussels within a decade.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Sir Tony Blair’s think tank is pushing for Britain to rejoin Brussels (Image: Getty)
But Tory MP Dame Priti Patel warned against looking back at Brussels “with rose-tinted glasses”.
She told the Daily Express: “Britain needs leadership that is committed to making the most of our Brexit freedoms rather than this constant desire to fight the battles of 2016 and the bitterness of losing the arguments back then.
“Too many still view the EU with rose-tinted glasses, since we’ve left, the EU has suffered from slow growth.
“Its institutions have failed to meet the challenges the world faces today and it continues to suffer from a lack of democratic legitimacy with more powers being centralised in Brussels away from national governments and parliaments.
“If Britain had never left the EU, we’d be paying even more in, getting less out and feeling the weight of more red tape. “
Vote Leave co-founder and Tory peer Lord Matthew Elliott added: “The UK has grown faster than France, Germany and Italy since leaving the EU.
“This is partly because our tech sector is so much stronger, because it’s not embroiled in the EU’s AI Act.
“We shouldn’t be complacent – we could be growing a lot faster – but that’s down to taxation being at a 70-year high, not Brexit.”
In a post on LinkedIn, Sir Richard compared the Brexit vote to swapping an F1 car for a hatchback.
He added: “As a majority of UK voters now feel regret over the Brexit vote, they must be given a second chance to determine what is in their best interest.”
Andy Burnham has committed to Labour’s red lines on Brexit in its 2024 manifesto, including not returning to the single market, customs union or freedom of movement.
But the PM earlier this week left the door open to including a pledge to rejoin the EU in Labour’s next election manifesto.
Brexiteers hit back as Richard Branson demands UK rejoins EU in furious rant
Sir Richard Branson has reignited Britain’s long-running Brexit debate after calling for the country to be given another opportunity to decide whether it should return to the European Union.
The Virgin Group founder’s intervention came as a report from the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change called for Britain to set a public objective of rejoining a significantly reformed EU within the next decade.
Branson, who supported Remain during the 2016 referendum, described Brexit in exceptionally strong terms and argued that British voters should be given a “second chance” to decide the country’s future relationship with Europe.
His comments immediately prompted a response from prominent supporters of Brexit, who rejected the idea that Britain should reverse its decision to leave the bloc.
The clash illustrates how, ten years after the referendum, arguments about Britain’s relationship with the EU remain politically active.
Branson launches fresh attack on Brexit
Writing on LinkedIn, Branson said he agreed with the argument that Brexit had represented an “unprecedented act of economic and political self-harm”.
He described Brexit as an “unmitigated disaster” and cited claims that the decision had imposed significant costs on Britain’s economy through weaker trade, productivity and employment.
Branson also compared the UK’s departure from the EU to “swapping an F1 car for a hatchback”, a metaphor designed to illustrate his view that Britain had surrendered economic advantages by leaving the bloc.
He argued that voters should be given another opportunity to consider Britain’s relationship with Europe.
“As a majority of UK voters now feel regret over the Brexit vote, they must be given a second chance to determine what is in their best interest,” Branson said in his post.
The comments represent Branson’s political and economic assessment of Brexit rather than an established conclusion about the overall effect of leaving the EU.
Economic assessments of Brexit vary according to methodology, time period and the counterfactual used to estimate what would have happened if Britain had remained a member.
Tony Blair think tank calls for rejoining EU
Branson’s intervention came shortly after the Tony Blair Institute published a report arguing that Britain should ultimately seek to rejoin a substantially reformed European Union.
The report, titled Beyond Leave and Remain: A Path to Rejoining a Reformed Europe, proposes that the UK establish a clear public objective of returning to the EU within ten years, provided significant reforms take place within the bloc.
Former prime minister Tony Blair argued that the political circumstances of 2016 were different from those facing Britain in 2026.
The report does not simply advocate restoring Britain’s former relationship with the EU exactly as it existed before Brexit.
Instead, it proposes a future relationship shaped by changes both in Britain and within the European Union.
Among the issues discussed are European competitiveness, defence cooperation, artificial intelligence, energy and industrial policy.
The institute also points to the possibility of new forms of association between the EU and non-member states, citing discussions about a potential associate membership model.
Blair has argued that Britain should not approach the issue solely through the question of whether Brexit should be “reversed”, but should consider what type of European relationship would serve the UK’s interests in the future.
That distinction is significant because formally rejoining the EU would involve negotiations with the member states and would not simply restore Britain’s previous membership arrangements automatically.
Brexiteers push back
The response from Brexit supporters was immediate.
Conservative MP Dame Priti Patel criticised the idea of looking back towards Brussels, arguing that Britain should concentrate on using the freedoms created by leaving the EU.
Patel warned against viewing the EU through what she described as “rose-tinted glasses”.
She also pointed to economic and institutional problems within the EU and argued that Britain would have faced additional financial contributions and regulation had it remained a member.
Her comments were reported as a direct response to the renewed campaign for closer European integration.
Lord Matthew Elliott, a Vote Leave co-founder, also rejected Branson’s assessment.
He argued that the UK had grown faster than France, Germany and Italy since Brexit and attributed part of Britain’s performance to the strength of its technology sector.
However, Elliott also acknowledged that Britain could be growing faster and attributed that shortfall to domestic taxation rather than Brexit.
These claims illustrate one of the central difficulties in the Brexit debate: economic performance is affected by numerous factors, making it difficult to isolate the effect of EU membership or withdrawal from other developments.
Burnham’s position comes under scrutiny
The controversy also puts Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s position under greater scrutiny.
Burnham’s government remains formally committed to the Brexit-related red lines contained in Labour’s 2024 manifesto.
Those commitments included not returning to the EU single market or customs union and not restoring freedom of movement.
However, Burnham recently declined to rule out the possibility that a future Labour manifesto could contain a commitment to rejoin the EU.
When questioned about the issue earlier this week, he described the question of rejoining as being “for another day”, while emphasising that his immediate priority was strengthening Britain’s relationship with the EU.
That position leaves an important distinction between closer cooperation with Brussels and full EU membership.
The government can pursue agreements covering trade, energy, security, youth mobility and other areas without committing itself to rejoining the bloc.
Indeed, negotiations between Britain and the EU are already addressing several areas of practical cooperation.
Brexit remains a dividing line
The renewed argument comes a decade after the 2016 referendum.
Britain voted to leave the EU by 51.9 per cent to 48.1 per cent, beginning a process that ultimately resulted in the UK’s formal withdrawal in January 2020.
The subsequent Trade and Cooperation Agreement established the framework for the post-Brexit relationship.
Since then, governments in London and Brussels have negotiated additional arrangements covering areas including security, trade and cooperation.
The European Council’s timeline for post-Brexit relations shows that discussions in 2026 continue to cover issues such as sanitary and phytosanitary arrangements, emissions trading, youth experience schemes, security and defence, electricity and other areas.
The current debate therefore involves more than a simple choice between the relationship that existed before 2016 and the relationship that exists today.
There are numerous possible intermediate arrangements.
The economic argument remains contested
Branson’s claim that Brexit has caused major economic losses has become a central part of the argument made by supporters of closer EU integration.
But Brexit’s economic consequences are difficult to measure because economists must compare actual UK performance with an estimated alternative scenario in which Britain remained inside the EU.
That counterfactual cannot be observed directly.
Supporters of Brexit point to Britain’s ability to establish its own trade policy, regulate certain industries independently and pursue policies outside EU-wide rules.
Critics argue that those freedoms have come with additional barriers to trade with Britain’s largest nearby market.
Both sides therefore tend to emphasise different measures when assessing the consequences of Brexit.
The disagreement is unlikely to disappear simply because a particular economic statistic moves in one direction.
What would rejoining actually involve?
A decision to rejoin the EU would also involve considerably more than a change in political rhetoric.
Britain would need to negotiate with the European Union and its member states.
Questions would arise over trade, financial contributions, regulatory alignment, migration arrangements, institutional participation and Britain’s representation within EU institutions.
The terms of any future membership would depend on negotiations rather than being determined solely by the British government.
The Blair Institute itself conditions its proposed timetable on significant reforms taking place within the EU.
That means the proposal is not simply for Britain to recreate its pre-2020 status immediately.
Instead, it envisages a different European political and economic environment.
The political debate moves into Labour
For Burnham, the issue presents a complicated political calculation.
Labour’s existing manifesto commitments remain opposed to restoring the single market, customs union and freedom of movement.
At the same time, the prime minister’s refusal to completely rule out future EU membership has allowed speculation about how far Labour’s policy could eventually move.
The issue is particularly sensitive because Britain’s major political parties continue to approach Brexit differently.
Conservatives and Reform UK figures have generally defended the principle of Brexit and emphasised the potential benefits of regulatory and political independence.
Labour has focused on improving practical relations with the EU while maintaining its existing red lines.
The Liberal Democrats have long advocated closer European integration.
The Greens also support a significantly closer relationship with the EU.
The precise policy positions of each party can therefore differ substantially even when they agree that the current relationship should be reconsidered.
Branson’s intervention adds another voice
Branson’s intervention is significant because he is a prominent business figure whose company has operated internationally for decades.
His support for Remain during the referendum is well established, meaning his latest comments represent a continuation of his longstanding position rather than a sudden change.
Nevertheless, his intervention does not itself change government policy.
Nor does a report from a political think tank establish that Britain will rejoin the EU.
The current government remains committed to its existing Brexit red lines while keeping longer-term options under discussion.
For now, the practical focus is on the UK’s relationship with Brussels rather than an immediate application to return to the bloc.
A debate far from settled
The confrontation between Branson and Brexit supporters demonstrates that the political arguments surrounding Britain’s departure from the EU remain unresolved.
Branson argues that Brexit damaged Britain’s economic and political position and that voters deserve another opportunity to reconsider the decision.
Patel and other Brexit supporters argue that Britain should instead use the freedoms created by leaving the EU and avoid reopening the divisions of 2016.
The Blair Institute has proposed a third element to the discussion: a long-term objective of rejoining a reformed EU, conditional on changes within Europe.
Burnham has not adopted that proposal as government policy.
His current position is to pursue closer practical relations with the EU while leaving the longer-term question open.
That leaves Britain’s European future uncertain.
What is clear is that the Brexit debate has entered another phase. The argument is no longer only about whether leaving the EU was right or wrong in 2016. It is increasingly about what relationship Britain should have with Europe in the 2030s — and whether future governments should consider membership again.
For now, Branson’s intervention has reopened that question, while the response from Brexit supporters shows that any move towards EU membership would remain highly contested.