Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text 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 over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to 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 sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area 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, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.