Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this 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 above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now 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 Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers 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 & The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
