Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over 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 championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. 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.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion 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 a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, 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 future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career 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 adopt them as their own.
