Keir Starmalade, anyone? Will marmalade really have to be rebranded in UK?

The story is, in Fleet Street terminology, a marmalade dropper. The name marmalade is being dropped.
But is it?
What has been reported?
“Starmer’s breakfast reset, or why you won’t be able to call it just marmalade any more,” shouted the Daily Mail on Saturday morning. Its online title went further asking: “What would Paddington think!” The story provided the title with an excuse to run a reader poll asking: “Did Starmer always intend to steer Britain back towards the EU?”
The Times called it a “bitter end for marmalade”, while the BBC, which broke the story, was slightly more sober, reporting that “marmalades may need to be relabelled under post-Brexit food deal”.
The Conservative former home secretary Priti Patel accused Labour of “attacking the great British marmalade”, saying the prime minister was “so desperate to fit in with his EU pals and unpick Brexit, he’s now looking to rename British marmalade to align with the EU”.
So, what has actually happened?
As part of a planned food deal with the EU, the BBC reports, the UK is considering aligning with the bloc’s naming rules that allow all conserves to be marketed as marmalades – as long as the type of fruit is specified. For example, citrus-based conserves being labelled “citrus marmalade”.
Another example of EU red tape?
That really depends on how far back you want to go.
The UK is being asked to align with regulations in force within the bloc. That much is certainly true. It is part of the entirely standard practice of ensuring common values and norms between two entities when they agree a trade deal.
But any divergence arguably only exists in the first place because of British idiosyncrasy. In the 1970s, following UK lobbying, the EU agreed to allow only the conserve made from oranges to be named marmalade.
This caused a problem in some countries on the continent, where that word – or its cousins – refers to a whole range of conserves. In German, the word for jam is “marmelade”, in Italian it is “marmellata”.
In 2004, the EU relaxed its rules to allow fruit-based spreads being sold in farmers’ markets in Germany and Austria to be referred to as marmalades.
Following Brexit – with the need to keep the British sweet having gone – the rules were relaxed further to allow all conserves to be marketed as marmalade, as they naturally would be in many European languages.
Nevertheless, we’re being banned from calling orange marmalade “orange marmalade”?
No. An exemption has been drafted that would allow the citrus fruit used to make the conserve to be specified in the name. In other words, “orange marmalade” would be fine. A government source pointed out that marmalade on UK supermarket shelves is already usually labelled as “orange marmalade” or “Seville orange marmalade”, which they suggested was in compliance with the EU rules.
Either way, this is all part of a Labour plot to “unpick Brexit”?
As Patel might reasonably be expected to know, the rules on naming conserves were already due to come into force in the UK as part of the “Windsor agreement” struck by the Conservative government – and backed by Labour in parliament – in 2023. This proposal would simply see them extended from Northern Ireland to the rest of the country.
What has the government said?
A government spokesperson said: “British marmalade is not changing. There is no requirement for retailers or producers to relabel orange marmalade as ‘citrus marmalade’, and jars on UK shelves will remain exactly as they are today.
“Many British manufacturers already meet international labelling standards voluntarily so their products can be sold overseas – this deal simply supports that trade by cutting unnecessary red tape with our largest market.
“Crucially, the agreement supports exporters while fully preserving the UK’s ability to shape food rules in the national interest.”