Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited 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 Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out 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 for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
