Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to 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 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, 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, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on 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 remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly 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, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
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 endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
