Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over 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 most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister 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 Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down 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 government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet 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, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
