Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing 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, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
