Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for 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: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. 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.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments 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 & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
