Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this 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 within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman 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 in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining 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 joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and 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 are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
