Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y 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 Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which 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 a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations 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 ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out 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 recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
