🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.

In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.

The Evolution of Stance & Settled Issues

Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on the EU

However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.

Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas

Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.

The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.

Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues 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, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.

The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts

However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.

Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.

1. Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.

An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations

This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.

But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018

All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind 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 among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.

Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder

The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.

It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.