🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.

In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.

The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates

Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on Europe

However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.

Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with 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 the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.

Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.

David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.

Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.

The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism

Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.

Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.

1. First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
3. Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.

An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations

This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018

All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured 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 the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.

Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder

The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.

It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.