🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.

During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.

The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates

In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.

Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.

Pressure Building on the EU

However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas

Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.

David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in 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.

Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.

The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts

However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.

It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.

1. First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
3. Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.

An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations

This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.

However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past

All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open 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.

But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.

Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder

The risk is clear. 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 are to be found.

It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.