Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. 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". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious 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 a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage 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 sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral 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 regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
