🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.

When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.

During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary 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 Settled Issues

Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.

Pressure Building on the EU

However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.

And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.

Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas

Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.

The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.

Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.

Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism

However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.

Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.

1. Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.

An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations

This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past

All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.

But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.

Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory

The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, 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 remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.