Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining 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, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, 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 note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
