🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed 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 always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments 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 the leadership he later succeeded.

The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates

In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.

Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number 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 Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.

And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.

Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals

The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.

David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.

Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.

The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts

However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.

It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.

1. Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
2. Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.

A Bizarre Document & Strategic Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.

But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past

All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.

Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.

Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory

The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.

It would be prudent of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.