🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.

During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.

The Shift in Position and Settled Debates

In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.

Similar to Corbyn, his strategy 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 the EU

However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.

Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals

The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.

The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.

Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Fundamental Doubts

Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
3. Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.

A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations

This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.

But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018

This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.

But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.

Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory

The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.

It would be prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.