Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, 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 EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified 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 his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & 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 are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
