🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.

When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.

In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, 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 shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.

The Shift in Position & Settled Debates

In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.

A Lid That Rattles on the EU

Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.

And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas

Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.

David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.

While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism

However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.

It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.

1. First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
3. Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.

A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations

This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.

But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018

All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.

Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.

Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory

The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, 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 that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.