Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses 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 in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise 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 risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge 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 target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits 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.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, 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 next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
