🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.

During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman 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 & Settled Issues

In the years since, 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 Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on the EU

However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.

The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.

Starmer'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 views as key accomplishments of his government.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.

1. First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.

An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.

However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018

This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.

But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.

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

The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder

The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, 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 just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.