Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested 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, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, 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 have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
