Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words 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, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported 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 stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
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 of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
