🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.

As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.

During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script 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 over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.

The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates

In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade 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, despite 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 be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot 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 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 now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.

And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.

Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas

The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.

The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.

While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts

Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.

It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
3. Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.

An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations

This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.

But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past

All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.

But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.

Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory

The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.

It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.