Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted 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, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for 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 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
