Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- 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.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, 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 Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
