🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.

As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.

During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this 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. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.

The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates

In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into 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, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on the EU

However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.

And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.

Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals

The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.

David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism

Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.

Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.

1. Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
2. Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
3. Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.

An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations

This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.

But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018

This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.

But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among 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 to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder

The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.

It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.