Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. 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.
