🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.

In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet 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 a leader he later succeeded.

The Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates

Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.

Pressure Building on the EU

However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor 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 the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.

David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts

However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
2. Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.

A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations

This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.

But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past

All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.

Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.

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

The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory

The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.

It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.