Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, 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 the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid 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 Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
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, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
