Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. 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.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining 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, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to 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 “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
