Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
