Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade 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 a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While 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.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most 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 for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
