Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. 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.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start 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 Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps 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 recall 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 prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
