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 exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious 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 later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments 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, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU 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.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
