🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed 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 the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.

The Shift in Position & Settled Debates

In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.

Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.

A Lid That Rattles on Europe

Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick 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 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 negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas

The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.

David Lammy muses openly 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, last week 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 remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.

The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism

Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.

An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.

But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018

All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, 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, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.

Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory

The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.

It would be wise of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.