Call it an admission, a pivot or a political reset, but whatever label you give it, the signs are clear: Brexit is back. After years of strategic silence, the government has started talking once again about the damage done by Britain’s departure from the European Union. The Chancellor has cited “barriers to trade” as one of the reasons taxes may have to rise in the next Budget. The Health Secretary has said he’s “glad we can now talk about Brexit damage.” These are not throwaway remarks – they are signals.
For years, ministers avoided naming Brexit as a factor in the country’s economic malaise. Now they’re leaning into it. By framing tax rises and inflationary pressures as consequences of “trade barriers,” the government is not just offering an explanation – it’s repositioning the story. The implicit message is that Britain is paying a long-term price for leaving the single market, and that it’s time to confront the consequences honestly.
That shift is politically useful. The UK now faces the highest inflation rate in the G7, with growth lagging behind other major economies. Blaming Brexit offers a convenient narrative: we would be doing better, if only our trade ties weren’t so restricted. For Labour, this is a safe space to occupy. It allows the party to acknowledge the pain without reopening the ideological divisions that tore the country apart after 2016.
The politics of this moment are subtle but significant. The government is preparing the ground for what could become the next great dividing line in British politics: not Leave versus Remain, but how to fix Brexit. The framing will be pragmatic, not nostalgic – less about reversing the decision, more about mending what’s broken. This distinction is crucial. It turns Brexit from a symbol of identity into a problem of management, something that can be improved, negotiated and ultimately redefined.
And that’s where things get interesting. If the public mood continues to shift – if “make Brexit work” quietly becomes “maybe Brexit doesn’t work” – then the case for a second referendum could emerge not as a demand from Brussels-loving idealists, but as a practical, patriotic proposal. The logic will be that Britain deserves a functioning economy, not a self-inflicted handicap.
Crucially, the next time this debate happens, the tone will be different. The case to rejoin will not be based on fear or doom, as it was in 2016, but on optimism and opportunity. Rejoining can be framed as a route to growth, stability and partnership – not submission. It can be presented as a positive step towards making Britain more secure, more prosperous and more influential in a rapidly changing world.
Politically, that’s powerful terrain for Labour. It allows the government to speak to business, young voters and disillusioned moderates in the same breath. It also lets them contrast an optimistic, outward-looking Britain with the inward, fractious nationalism of the Tory years. When framed that way, rejoining the single market – or even reapplying for full membership – becomes less about going backwards and more about moving forward again.
So yes, Brexit is back on the menu. But this time, it’s being served differently. The defensive nationalism that once fuelled it has soured. What’s emerging instead is a quieter, steadier appetite for repair – and eventually, for reunion.
The political class may not be ready to say it outright yet, but the direction of travel is obvious. When the dust settles and the numbers worsen, the question won’t be if Britain rethinks Brexit, but when. And when that moment comes, the side that paints the most optimistic picture – not of what we’ve lost, but of what we could regain – will have the best chance of winning the argument.