🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed 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 of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.

The Shift in Position & Settled Issues

In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.

Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on Europe

However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.

Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas

The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.

The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.

The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts

Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.

It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.

1. First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join 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 demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
3. Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.

An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations

This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.

But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018

This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one 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 letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.

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

The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Memory

The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.

It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.