Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes 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 for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
