Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed 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 the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
