Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
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 is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators 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 some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact 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 allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
