🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "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 always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies 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 risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.

The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates

Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.

Pressure Building on the EU

However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.

And yet, 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 minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.

Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas

The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.

The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.

While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.

Starmer's Fundamental Doubts

Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.

It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.

1. First, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.

An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations

This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.

However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past

This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.

Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.

Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory

The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.

It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.