Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase 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 wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, 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 UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground 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 for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
