Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates 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 having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues 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 following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
