Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept 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 caused to the UK’s economy. 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 only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel 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 a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
