Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. 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, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining 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 three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
