Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, 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.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit 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. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, 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 so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion 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 pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement 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 among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
