Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses 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 always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with 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 the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing 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 has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area 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, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
