Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary 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 of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees 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. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
