Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear 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 Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
