🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates rose in 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. All he had said was: "We are not excluding 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 issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.

The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues

In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on the EU

However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut 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 with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.

Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller 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 low decimal points.

Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas

The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.

David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.

While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.

The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts

However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.

An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018

All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.

Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.

Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory

The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.

It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.