Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
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 Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, 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, reportedly has left Britain with an 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 the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of 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 have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
