Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech 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, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
