Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses 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 an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & 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 effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union 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 occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
