Title: Sir John Curtice: Why Labour's Brexit focus has shifted from Leavers to Remainers

In her recent Mais lecture on Tuesday, Chancellor Rachel Reeves declared that "Brexit did deep damage," a statement that underscores a significant evolution in the Labour Party’s stance on the issue—a trajectory government ministers have been hinting at for some time. Reeves addressed European partners directly, asserting that the new administration views a deeper partnership as beneficial for all of Europe, while simultaneously clarifying that the government has no intention of "turning back the clock" on Brexit.

This overt discussion of Brexit’s perceived negative impacts appears driven by a strategic calculation: as the government strives to reverse the UK’s stubbornly weak economic performance, it feels compelled to be more aggressive in its efforts to "reset" the United Kingdom’s post-Brexit ties with the European Union.

Labour’s 2024 election manifesto had previously outlined a modest approach to renegotiating the Trade and Co-operation Agreement, originally negotiated by Boris Johnson. The plan focused on eliminating EU customs checks on British food and agricultural exports by harmonizing UK regulations with those of the EU. However, the manifesto established firm boundaries: it ruled out rejoining the single market, the customs union, or allowing freedom of movement, and offered no indication of any desire to re-enter the EU itself. This cautious position was largely a reaction to the party’s crushing defeat in the 2019 general election, after which Labour accepted the outcome of Brexit and voted in favor of the Johnson-era deal.

Nevertheless, the party’s rhetoric has been softening. Shortly after last autumn’s Budget, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer stated that Brexit had "significantly hurt our economy" and argued that Britain must continue to move toward a closer relationship with the EU. While the manifesto’s red lines appeared technically intact, Starmer’s comments suggested a growing consensus within Labour that achieving economic recovery requires a more ambitious reset strategy.

Some cabinet members have gone even further in their criticism. During a literary festival in October, Health Secretary Wes Streeting remarked that he was glad the UK now "dares speak" the name of the Brexit problem, implying that being outside the EU hinders the delivery of the economic growth promised by the government. Similarly, Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy, speaking on a podcast, described the economic harm caused by Brexit as "self-evident" and pointed to the economic advantages Turkey has gained through its customs agreement with the EU.

Pressure to rethink Brexit policy is also evident within Labour’s broader ranks. On Wednesday, London Mayor Sadiq Khan urged the UK to rejoin the EU single market and customs union prior to the next general election, with the aim of campaigning for full EU membership at that ballot.

In contrast to Khan’s proposals, Reeves reaffirmed on Tuesday that the manifesto’s red lines remain unchanged. However, her Mais lecture clearly signaled a shift in approach. She indicated that the government intends to align the UK’s regulatory framework with the EU’s in additional areas wherever it serves Britain’s interests. Reeves suggested that such regulatory alignment is crucial to achieving the economic growth Labour promised during the 2024 campaign but has thus far failed to deliver.

To date, economic performance has fallen short of expectations. The economy expanded by 1.3% in 2025, an improvement over the 1.1% growth recorded in 2024, yet this still underperformed the official forecast of 1.5%.

These policy adjustments carry weight beyond economics; they pose significant political questions. Will seeking a closer EU relationship risk alienating pro-Brexit voters and lead to electoral disaster? Or has the political landscape shifted sufficiently to make it politically advantageous for Labour to alter its Brexit strategy?

Source: BBC News Generated at: 2026-03-20 00:01:51 UTC