Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses 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 in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly 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, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding 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 Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves 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 prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
