Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period 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 working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
