🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.

In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.

The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates

Since then, 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 EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.

Pressure Building on Europe

Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.

Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.

Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.

David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.

While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Fundamental Doubts

However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.

It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.

1. First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
2. Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
3. Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.

An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations

This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018

All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.

But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.

Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder

The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.

It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.