Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. 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.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, 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 low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt 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” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
