Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates 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 producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor 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 his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits 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 an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
