🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.

As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, 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 darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.

The Evolution in Position and Settled 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 Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates many of them 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 party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.

Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.

Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas

The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.

David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.

Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism

Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.

It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.

1. First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.

An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past

This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.

Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.

Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder

The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.

It would be wise of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.