Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet 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 grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge 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 key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
