Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
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". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
