Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation 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.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
