Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script 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 key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now 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 Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating 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 a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on 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 on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase 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 explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
