Burnham’s attempt to put Brexit in the dock for a decade of weak growth met a clearer refusal than a clean acquittal: No won, 334 votes to 246. The striking feature was the room’s insistence on competing explanations, with even some opponents accepting that Brexit belonged somewhere in the indictment.
The floor’s most-respected No case argued that “Brexit has never been implemented properly”, shifting blame from departure itself to the politicians who negotiated and administered it. Other highly rated voices pointed to “lack of infrastructure, lack of housing and high electricity prices”, alongside debt, weak investment and policies associated with net zero.
Yes made a narrower, more defensible case than Burnham’s critics often allowed. Its strongest argument began, “Yes, but only partially”, while another voter called Brexit “an extra, self-inflicted wound” that added trade barriers to the pandemic and energy shocks. The two sides talked past each other: Yes argued from the gap with a Remain counterfactual; No demanded a verdict on what it saw as an unfinished policy.
That distinction sat behind much of the hostility. No voters repeatedly blamed Covid, austerity, taxes, immigration, regulation and energy costs, but one of the better-rated concessions said plainly that “Brexit has contributed to weaker economic growth”. The chamber was not denying every economic cost; it was resisting the idea that one political cause could carry responsibility for the whole decade.
The result leaves Burnham’s claim politically underpowered here, but not untouched: Brexit was treated as a contributor, not the culprit.
37 Opinions
Brexit reduced predicted economic growth due to trade barriers and leaving the EEC. It massively damaged the perception of this country globally, we are now often perceived as a more isolationist nation/unwilling to trade. Brexit has also amplified subsequent crises e.g. COVID-era labour shortages.
Record tax burden, an anti business establishment - particularly anti SME - creaking infrastructure, brain drain are all factors in sluggish growth. Brexit has given us opportunities to have a high growth economy which our establishment hasn’t grasped. Brexit is not a reason - Burnham is a fool.
It appears to have started with Brexit, the UK didn't get the financial help from the EU that it had previously. It cost more to go abroad. The boats, they began with Brexit. After which we had Covid, money being wasted on things like on PPE that was useless. One problem after another, with mistakes made all the time. I'm also inclined to point out, austerity, with all the downsizing, done under a conservative government.
yes he was because he facts don't lie. It has been proven that the economy has grown less than it would have done if not for Brexit. That is not to say it's by far the only reason, and this is not what Burnham is suggesting but he is correct to raise it. I am surprised by the Brexit-denialism in these results.
Brexit is part of the reason for low growth but far from the only one. Mass immigration, high taxes, high regulation and high energy costs are bigger reasons.
Well he's not wrong... you can't slap red tape and barriers between yourself and your biggest customer without choking growth. Global shocks like Covid and energy prices hurt everyone, but Brexit was an extra, self-inflicted wound that held back business investment and slowed wage growth.
Purely down to governments inability to run the country properly and do trade deals. And build up businesses.
I’m voting on what Burnham said. It was a LOT more than just Brexit but Brexit was a contributor
No. The reluctance to implement the decision to leave created too much uncertainty for investors.
Low growth is due to the austerity lies and no investment in infrastructure, energy and essential services which have taken and not given back