Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
