Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. 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". But context is everything.
During 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 Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains 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, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
