Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 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 Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, 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 in talks has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said 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, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority 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 in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
