Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, 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, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & 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 simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported 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 the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
