Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, 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". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly 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 so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, 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 every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes 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 demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
