Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare 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 re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
