Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
