Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about 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 supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement 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 cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address 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 of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within 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 cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
