Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining 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, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept 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 the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations 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, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort 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.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal 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.
