Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
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 declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost 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 effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed 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 regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
