Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause 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 addresses 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 in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised 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 target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
