Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in 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 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
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 attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect 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 himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
