Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises 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 target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join 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 and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, 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 maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
