Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
