Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – 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 in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. 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 have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & 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 most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
