Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists 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 securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
