Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions 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 left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding 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 voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, 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, 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 rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led 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.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
