Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "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 inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to 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 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear 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 most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
