Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, 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 deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. 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 only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU 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, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers 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 a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
