Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 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 above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, 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 previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and 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 for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one 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 part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
