Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, 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 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 key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
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 may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways 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.
