Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move 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, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed 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.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race 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 & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent 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 should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
