Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled 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 been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, 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 relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back 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 possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
