Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare 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, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, 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 would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
