🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering 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 speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.

In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.

The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues

In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.

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

Pressure Building on the EU

Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with 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 ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals

The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.

David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding 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 a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

While the Europe minister, 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 declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.

Starmer's Fundamental Doubts

Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.

1. First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
2. Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.

A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.

However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past

All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.

But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.

Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory

The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.

It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.