Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed 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 in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker 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, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number 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 Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government 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
This situation brings us back 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 remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of 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 to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
