🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.

As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. 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 in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.

The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates

Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on the EU

Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.

Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.

Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas

The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.

David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, 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, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. 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 securing a new electoral mandate.

Starmer's Fundamental Doubts

Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.

It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
2. Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
3. Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.

An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.

But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past

This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.

Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.

Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory

The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.

It would be wise of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.