Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches 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 of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember 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 prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
