Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, 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, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit 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 sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
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 himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
