Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge 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 survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn 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 tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on 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 keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
