Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, 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 UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, 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 have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
