Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, 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 in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool 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.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, 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 maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
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 clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
