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 exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. 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 the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
In the years since, 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 Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses 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 between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
