Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed 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 of 2018, departing 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 key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an 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. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain 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.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space 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 for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
