Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known 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 stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
