Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, 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". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, 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, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
