Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly 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 so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about 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, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
