Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "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 inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
