Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric 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 now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries 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, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms 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 Moscow, is viewed 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 bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, 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 have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
