Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. 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 his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
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 central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
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 now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among 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 for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
