Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement 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 for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
