Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During 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 Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap 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 caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
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 ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
