🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.

In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.

The Shift in Position and Settled Issues

Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on Europe

Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.

Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.

Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals

The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.

David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.

The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts

However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.

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

1. First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
2. Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.

An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations

This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past

This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.

But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.

Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder

The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.

It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.