Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, 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 would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out 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 key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion 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 a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority 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 major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
