Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, 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, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue 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, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on 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.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU 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 Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, 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 impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
