Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out 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 issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning 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 go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
