Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in 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 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
