The prime minister has confirmed that rejoining the European customs union is under active consideration, citing a landmark interview with former chancellor George Osborne as a catalyst for re-evaluating Britain’s post-Brexit trajectory. In a round of broadcast interviews on Tuesday, Andy Burnham declared that “Brexit has done more harm than good” and outlined a spectrum of options ranging from a bespoke customs arrangement to full EU membership. The remarks, made on the margins of the Labour conference in Liverpool, represent the most explicit acknowledgement yet from Downing Street that the 2020 settlement is failing to deliver on its promises.
The Osborne factor
The shift in tone can be traced, at least in part, to a conversation published by The Independent earlier this month. In an extended interview with the paper’s editor-in-chief, Geordie Greig, Osborne argued that the UK’s economic isolation could only be reversed by rejoining the customs union — a position that carries particular weight given his role as architect of the austerity era and a leading figure in the Remain campaign. Burnham quoted the exchange directly during an appearance on BBC Breakfast, telling viewers: “We could look at what George Osborne has said about a customs union, we could look at what the Liberal Democrats said at their conference about the single market – or we could go all the way.”
It was a striking moment. For years, the mere mention of a customs union was treated as political kryptonite by both major parties, a proxy for betraying the 2016 referendum. That a Labour prime minister now feels comfortable citing a Conservative former chancellor on the subject speaks to a quiet transformation in the Overton window. Osborne’s intervention, delivered from the centre-right, has provided Burnham with a permission structure to test the water without owning the risk alone.
Cabinet unity and the Farage shadow
Privately, the mood music is even louder. Sources close to the cabinet suggest a clear majority of senior ministers now favour a formal pivot toward Brussels, with several arguing that the economic case has become impossible to ignore. Growth has flatlined for the better part of a decade, investment has stalled, and the much-vaunted “Brexit dividend” has yet to materialise in any measurable form. Yet the political calculus remains delicate. The resurgence of Nigel Farage’s Reform UK — now polling consistently in the high teens — has concentrated minds in Downing Street. One minister, granted anonymity to speak freely, put it bluntly: “It is not if but how the pledge on Brexit is phrased.”
That tension was on full display at the Labour conference. In his keynote address, Burnham delivered a sweeping indictment of the post-2010 consensus: deindustrialisation, deregulation, privatisation, austerity, and Brexit — a “wrong path” that had left the country “run for vested interests, not in the public interest.” He argued that Brexit had not delivered control but had instead eroded it, leaving the UK weaker economically and less able to manage its borders. The speech was met with sustained applause, but the real test will come on 12 October, when the Commons debates a motion on whether the UK should seek to rejoin the EU. The vote is non-binding, but the whips are treating it as a barometer of parliamentary appetite.
Red lines and the long game
Complicating the picture is the position of Louise Haigh, the first secretary of state and Burnham’s de facto deputy. On Radio 4’s Today programme, Haigh acknowledged that “the current settlement [with the EU] is not working for Britain” and confirmed that Hamish Falconer, a junior minister in her team, would lead negotiations on a veterinary agreement and an energy partnership later this year. Both deals are framed as pragmatic steps to lower consumer prices and ease friction at the border. But when pressed on whether a commitment to rejoin could appear in the next manifesto, Haigh was careful. “Labour’s red lines will remain in place for the duration of this parliament,” she said. The implication is clear: the heavy lifting is being deferred to the next electoral cycle.
That timeline frustrates campaigners. Naomi Smith, chief executive of Best for Britain, argued that the government should “signal to the EU – today – that the UK is ready to apply for membership.” She pointed to polling showing a consistent majority in favour of rejoining, and to what she described as an “economic case etched in stone.” For now, however, the government’s strategy appears to be one of incrementalism: secure the food and energy deals, demonstrate tangible benefits, and build a permission structure for a bolder offer in the next manifesto.
Why it Matters
Britain’s relationship with Europe has been the fault line of its politics for a generation. Burnham’s willingness to entertain a customs union — and to cite a Conservative elder statesman to justify it — marks a potential inflection point. If the government can translate rhetorical openness into a negotiating mandate without fracturing its coalition or handing Reform a cultural weapon, it could begin to repair the economic damage of the past eight years. But the window is narrow. The longer the prime minister waits to define “how,” the more the vacuum will be filled by those who profit from ambiguity.
