Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. 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 Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly 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 ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, 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 the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement 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.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
