Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying 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 Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits 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 an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
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 merely an effort to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. 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 recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
