Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase 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 producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly 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 across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
