Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches 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 in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled 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 was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths 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 an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” 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 stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
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 EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
