French single market demand would add 213,000 migrants a year, Reform claims

French authorities have reportedly made freedom of movement a condition of any British return to the European Union's single market, sharpening the migration argument around a possible rejoin. The claim was reported in a broadcast discussion that also examined a new Reform UK analysis, which said opening Britain's borders to the EU's half a billion people would increase migration by an average of more than 200,000 a year, with a specific estimate of 213,000.

The latest row follows comments by Andy Burnham, described in the broadcast as Prime Minister, who said he would be willing to take Britain back into the EU. He called for an honest and grown-up conversation about future options, including rejoining, and said the public should be presented with the broad choices and their consequences. Critics on the panel said that marked a rapid shift from respecting the referendum result to reopening the question of membership.

The panel focused on what rejoining would mean in practice. One contributor, historian and broadcaster Rafe Heydel-Mankoo, said a return to the single market would mean accepting Schengen-style freedom of movement, which he described as an absolute betrayal of the British public and the 17.4 million people who voted to take control of borders. He cited the Migration Observatory at Oxford University as saying immigration levels could return to pre-Brexit levels of around 200,000 to 300,000 a year. He also said Britain would be duty-bound to accept the EU's quota of asylum seekers on top of existing numbers.

He argued there is no electoral mandate for rejoining. He said polling showed 55% support for rejoining, but that support fell to 35% in favour and 43% against once voters were told Britain would not keep old opt-outs or the rebate and would have to join the euro and Schengen.

Nigel Nelson, a political commentator, said a full rejoin was unlikely. He noted that Britain would be a new entrant and might have to accept the euro, and that single market membership would require freedom of movement. He recalled that David Cameron failed to negotiate an exemption from freedom of movement before the 2016 referendum. He also said customs union membership would prevent Britain from having its own free trade deals.

Nelson argued for a reset and a better relationship with Europe rather than full membership. He said closer ties could reduce border controls, cut the price of the family shop and help the 16,000 firms that no longer trade with Europe. He said exports had risen every year, largely because of the services industry, and that supporters of Brexit had not done enough to sell its benefits. He argued it was hard to isolate the economic effects of Brexit because of COVID, the war in Ukraine and the Iranian war, and noted that the German, French and Italian economies had performed worse than Britain's.

On food costs, Nelson said about 25% of the recent increase would have happened anyway, with about 9% directly due to Brexit, translating to around £250 a year on the average family's food bill. He said voters who chose sovereignty had got what they wanted, but that those who expected economic gains were misled. He also said the public had been betrayed on immigration and that leaving the EU had not brought it under control.

Heydel-Mankoo said the British people were willing to accept a possible economic hit in order to retain control of sovereignty and borders, and that the tragedy was that they never got that control. Nelson agreed that there was a case for improving trade and reducing costs, but warned against returning to the post-referendum stalemate under Theresa May, when he said politics was frozen and the country was paralysed.

Also discussed was Shabana Mahmood, the Home Secretary, who told The Rest Is Politics podcast that Labour colleagues bombard her with requests for more migration every couple of weeks. The panel used that comment to argue that pressure for higher migration remains inside government.