Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – 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 & Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years 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 seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of 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 move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on 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 letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. 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 are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
