Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership 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 unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick 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 an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse 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 Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. 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 have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
