Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
