Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, 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". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and 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 to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric 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 now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
