Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU 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 remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation 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 and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines 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, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, 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.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, 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 note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
