Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, 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 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 low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
