Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, 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 the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative 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, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
