Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” 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 pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them 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 Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage 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 is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
