Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge 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 seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building 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 boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” 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 Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
