Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led 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.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us 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 possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, 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 the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
