Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary 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 later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU 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 only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal 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 fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
