Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause 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.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out 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 suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about 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 customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition 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 because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
