Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller 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 & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested 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, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition 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 on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
