🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.

As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. 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 like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.

The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates

Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on Europe

Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.

And yet, 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 micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.

Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas

Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.

The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.

While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts

However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.

A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations

This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018

This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, 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 Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.

Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Obvious Danger & A Wise Reminder

The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.

It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.