Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, 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 Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
