Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can move 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, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & 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 effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
