Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests 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. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy 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 resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. 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 are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
