Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction 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 rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
