Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches 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 the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, 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 the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
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 reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
Elara Vance is a luxury travel expert with over a decade of experience exploring exclusive destinations worldwide.
Arthur Perry
Arthur Perry