Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, 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 minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported 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 Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways 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.
