Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move 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, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion 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 exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” 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 stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
