Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed 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 in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes 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 the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
