Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, 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 of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party 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 again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling 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 “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
