Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, 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 2019 national vote. 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, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data 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 party 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 starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner 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 Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
