🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.

As the commotion died down, 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, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, 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 a leader he would later replace.

The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates

Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.

Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on the EU

However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.

Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.

Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas

The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.

David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Fundamental Doubts

However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.

1. First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.

An Alarming Document & Strategic Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.

But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018

This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.

But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.

Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder

The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.

It would be prudent of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.