Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. 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.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – 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 of Stance & Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize 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, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending 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 negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of 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 and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, 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 have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect that a short phrase 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 explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
