🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.

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: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.

During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.

The Evolution 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 in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on Europe

However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.

And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.

Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.

David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining 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 the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism

Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.

Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
3. Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.

An Alarming Document & Strategic Calculations

This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.

But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018

This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.

But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.

Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder

The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.

It would be prudent of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.