Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding 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, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind 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 part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
