Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. 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.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, 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, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced 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.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
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 Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
