Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, 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 was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to 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 new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject 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 prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
