Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses 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 left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured 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 part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
