🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.

As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, 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, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.

The Evolution of Stance & Settled Issues

Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.

A Lid That Rattles on the EU

Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.

The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.

Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.

The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism

However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.

It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.

1. First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
3. Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.

An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations

This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.

But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018

This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.

Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.

Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory

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 the party's supporters are to be found.

It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.