Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
