Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause 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: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade 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, despite survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
