Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches 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 of 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 leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
