Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. 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.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, 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 note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
