🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.

During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.

The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates

In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.

Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data 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. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.

Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.

Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.

David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, 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 UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.

The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts

However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.

It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.

1. Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
3. Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.

A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.

However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past

All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.

Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.

Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder

The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.

It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.