Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory 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 big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
