Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
