Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script 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 was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, 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 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach 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 the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels 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 designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note 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 want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
